Australian Federal Election 2013
It's almost voting time! The Federal Election is about to kick off. I know, you're probably surprised that you hadn't heard about it because the media have been pretty quiet, not to mention calm and rational.
I won't use the OP to put in any of my opinions (plenty of time for that in the comments), but I will say that I hope people take the time to carefully consider their vote and make sure they're voting for the party that they think best reflects their own personal requirements. Look at their policies carefully and make sure you understand them. Don't think just because you (or your family and friends) have always voted one way in the past that you need to vote that way in the future. Please keep the debate interesting, polite, and evidence-based. Useful resources: - List of parties registered for the federal election - Comic about how preferential works, explaining how you can't "waste your vote" - ABC's Votecompass Please see the previous thread for context of continued discussions. It was locked just because it had grown a little giant and was causing the occasional slow page load (also this has a more appropriate subject :) |
09:24am 02/09/13 Permalink
Can you please put an emphasis on evidence based? What dumbed up the last thread was people making big sweeping claims and then even when requested posting no evidence to back it up. This just creates silly circular arguments that serve no purpose.
Also, how about banning newsdotcomdotau links just for this thread. They are just trash that stifle discussion also. |
09:32am 02/09/13 Permalink
+1 for banning newsdotcomdotau links.. do it forum wide though.
|
09:43am 02/09/13 Permalink
I'm gonna treat the fine line of news.com.au being banned...
http://img513.imageshack.us/img513/2402/wl5x.jpg ;) |
09:43am 02/09/13 Permalink
Also, how about banning newsdotcomdotau links just for this thread. They are just trash that stifle discussion also.It's pretty tempting but in the interests of free and unfettered discussion I'd rather not - instead I guess you can just judge the quality of the person's arguments by whether or not the only evidence they can supply is a newscomau link :) (Also it'd be hard to block that and not the other sites that republish content, like Courier Mail and the other ones) |
09:43am 02/09/13 Permalink
09:50am 02/09/13 Permalink
I was super unhappy about a populist such as Rudd making PM.
I'll be far more unhappy if a *dishonest* populist such as Abbot makes PM, with carbon dioxide being invisible as a reason not to do anything about it (along with radiation and oxygen I suppose...), mine stoppages supposedly being caused by the "carbon tax" even when BHP denies it, not to mention his complete lack of professional experience in anything except being an opinion piece writer and a politician. Rudd set the precedent in this country, Abbott took it to an entirely worse level. |
10:02am 02/09/13 Permalink
I just cannot believe this guy is going to be the next leader of our country. I couldn't care either way for most other representatives of the party, but this particular guy - he's a religious jackass who thinks it's okay to force his way of life on to others through law, despite being morally reprehensible.
|
10:07am 02/09/13 Permalink
Haha, I just saw that you bolded evidence based. What I meant was in how the thread was moderated :)
|
10:09am 02/09/13 Permalink
I'm voting for Palmer because he knows how to run a multi-billion dollar business and build a boat that for sure wont sink this time, whereas Abbott wants to buy boats that have a tendency to sink.
Also because he knows how to twerk, Krudd cannot twerk. |
10:28am 02/09/13 Permalink
i'd like to see tone's daughters twerk it, i'd consider voting for that
|
10:31am 02/09/13 Permalink
Saw yesterday in the paper TAB odds: Coalition 1.05
ALP 9.20 God I hope Kevin loses his own seat. The guys a pratt. |
10:41am 02/09/13 Permalink
Some Lib digital goals: http://www.malcolmturnbull.com.au/media/coalitions-policy-for-e-government-and-the-digital-economy
I've wanted this for a while, just disappointed somebody beat me to getting all the credit for coming up with it: Trial an opt-in ‘digital pigeonhole’ from 2014 for the growing number of Australians who want to go ‘paperless’ – a free, secure digital inbox for communication from all levels of Government; Moving house should not cut me off from attempts at communication in this era. |
10:44am 02/09/13 Permalink
I honestly like Liberal's policies, at least most of them besides the troublesome ones like NBN, university cuts and the very bizarre paid parental scheme. The biggest problem I have with this election is that its now just a "lesser of two evils" situation, instead of what we've previously had where one party was a clear winner with their policies and stances.
In my opinion, Tony will be Australia's George W. Bush. He is a buffoon that doesn't know when to close his mouth and can't work outside of a script (seriously, who just nods silently at a reporter?). If someone else was leading the party I think you'd get a more positive vibe, but sadly Tony just brings that down by a large margin. This is why I think it may be a close one, and though we won't see a minor government it definitely won't be as large of a swing as people are expecting. I also want to reiterate my post in the last thread, in that if someone chooses to vote either Liberal or Labor, they shouldn't be struck down as a stereotypical "bogan" or "money hungry" person. The point of voting is to express your opinion on which party you want to lead Australia, and some policies will look better to other people. If the NBN is such a big swing to some, then so be it, but don't go saying they are "porn hungry" or moronic nerds just because they want faster Internet. That is the whole point of voting for policies that you want. |
10:49am 02/09/13 Permalink
I'm voting for Palmer because... Are you? I mean are you legitimately voting for Palmer? By that I mean is he in your electorate? Australias politcal system is broken. Even though it's taboo to do so, I would wager that if you went and asked ten random people on the street "Who will you be voting for in this federal election?", they will answer either "Abbott", "Rudd", or "The greens". Note that I say Abbott and Rudd and not Labour or Liberal - because they are the face of those parties, and yet still people will think they're voting for a single individual rather than for the party. Which they still aren't. We've come up with a system where you could end up putting up for election the most rednecked a******, and he'll get voted in because of what party he's a member of. Individually the other guy could have a solution to world peace, but all most people care about is "I'm voting for Rudd/Abbott!". NO! Voting for or against that guy isn't voting for the leader of the party! All you're doing is helping to elect the same idiots who, in ten years time, you're going to be asking: "Who the hell put this idiot in power?" The answer to that question comes directly from this. Five years ago people will have said "I'm voting for Howard"... and somewhere tucked away in Northern Sydney, 65,000 people decided, on the basis of "I'm voting for Howard", for the rest of Australia to put in to parliament Tony Abbott. This is how we've ended up with people like Stephen Conroy in the Senate, and, worse, Richard Alston before him. Do us all a favour and go and actually look up the individual opinions of your specific local MP. Better yet, go check out their voting record! You might find that they vary greatly from the leader you think you're voting for - as much as they're allowed to when they're made to tow the party line, that is. Or, alternatively, you might find the the opposition representative for you area, in actual fact, disagrees with that policy held by a leader you so hate. Sadly, most voters won't do this. Australia's next leader - not Rudd or Abbott, but the one who comes after them - is sadly going to be determined based on how many people like Rudd or Abbott better. I wish there were something that could be done people voting this way. |
10:59am 02/09/13 Permalink
http://www.belowtheline.org.au/ and http://senate.io/
are pretty useful if you're interested in voting below the line. Also good for seeing where preferences head to if you vote for a minor party in the senate. |
11:00am 02/09/13 Permalink
Heh, Palmer himself is actually in my electorate, at least.
|
11:07am 02/09/13 Permalink
Hah, I was just looking at who the full list of people was for my electorate, and figured I'd further investigate this 'Rise up Australia' party. The simplest way to do this was to first look at where their preferences went.
1. Rise Up Australia. 2. Family First. At this point I stopped reading. |
11:15am 02/09/13 Permalink
as much as they're allowed to when they're made to tow the party line, that is. toe |
11:22am 02/09/13 Permalink
Heh, Palmer himself is actually in my electorate, at least. he's so fat how could he not be |
11:26am 02/09/13 Permalink
Hah, I was just looking at who the full list of people was for my electorate, and figured I'd further investigate this 'Rise up Australia' party. The simplest way to do this was to first look at where their preferences went.Yeh, preferences can be a pretty good guide, although I was weirded out by the Wikileaks party preferences. It looks like there's a bit of controversy and crisis there though, with Assange claiming the preferences were error, and now Crikey is claiming [registration required] to have some leaked internal email from the party (ironing is delicious) that is not the case. Haven't really kept up with WLP though so not really sure what is going on. |
11:41am 02/09/13 Permalink
and evidence-based. Trog do you even politics? There is a reason people don't support the things they say with research papers. There's a reason for the lack of any sort of board of social scientists or psychologists in the federal level of any country. Nobody gives a f*** about evidence or evidence based practice. Hell, the next leader of our country -does not believe in man made climate change-. You expect people posting in an online forum to back up all of their claims? good luck moderating that pal :p |
11:42am 02/09/13 Permalink
If you are referring to the senate preference tickets, it is subject to some seriously cynical political strategy.
Antony green gives is a decent treatment here Something about preference harvesting. Anywho it means that the fringe parties crack some pretty f***ed preference deals. |
12:12pm 02/09/13 Permalink
I'm at a loss, one week to go and I thinking of voter for Clive Palmer just out of protest.
|
12:28pm 02/09/13 Permalink
I was super unhappy about a populist such as Rudd making PM.I'll be far more unhappy if a *dishonest* populist such as Abbot makes PM ....Rudd set the precedent in this country, Abbott took it to an entirely worse level. John Hewson was the last leader who tried to run a positive and policy based campaign, and that didn't work out well. Ever since then all campaigns have been populist crap seasoned with outright lies and aggressive attacks on the other side. |
12:44pm 02/09/13 Permalink
and for the first time voters, or anyone for that matter, the Virgin Voters site may give you some information to help.
http://www.virginvoters.com.au/ |
01:08pm 02/09/13 Permalink
See now this is just stupid. It is offering facts, yes, but its just doing it in the weirdest and most out there way possible. Dramatic music, flashy effects and negative views is just pure slandering. Why not just offer them in a sensible way so you don't make your party look like children who've had their toy taken away from them?
|
01:19pm 02/09/13 Permalink
SheerObesity, how did you get that? I know the people involved in that conversation... It was brought to my attention by a mutual friend. That screenshot was taken and given to me after the 4 comments were posted, i didn't see anymore comments after that. Hah, I was just looking at who the full list of people was for my electorate, and figured I'd further investigate this 'Rise up Australia' party. The simplest way to do this was to first look at where their preferences went. You are in my electorate aren't you? This "Rise Up Australia" party have been going pretty hard here, but they seem awfully dodgy and extremist. From their website The party was started by Danny Nalliah and operates under the tagline "Keep Australia Australian". It's ironic because Danny Nalliah is Tamil Sri Lankan and most of the candidates are Sri Lankan too. Aims of the party include opposition to multiculturalism, preserving Australia's "Judeo-Christian heritage" and cuts to Australia’s "Muslim intake", as well as the protection of freedom of speech, and freedom of religion. |
01:22pm 02/09/13 Permalink
Seems a little disingenuous to compare two three year cycles to one 12 year cycle. some study that says life is better under labor, posted by eorl
|
01:27pm 02/09/13 Permalink
Hope your voting for this mob Trog
bullet-train-for-australia party They got a huge range of policies, I’m Tim Böhm the president of the Bullet Train for Australia Party, our party is a single issue party devoted to getting High Speed Rail for Australia. Oh wait they've only got one |
01:29pm 02/09/13 Permalink
and for the first time voters, or anyone for that matter, the Virgin Voters site may give you some information to help Virgin voters just need to keep one thing in mind - most if not all political parties will do whatever, say whatever it takes to pop your cherry. |
01:36pm 02/09/13 Permalink
^High maintenance costs (huge even for typical high speed rail) + low population + extreme distances means this will never, ever be profitable and will be hugely costly just for the starting infrastructure.
As someone involved with QR, I can tell you the amount of things that would go wrong with an Au high speed rail network is painful to even think about. |
01:37pm 02/09/13 Permalink
01:41pm 02/09/13 Permalink
Australia, you don't know how good you've got it
In Australia the stimulus helped avoid a recession and saved up to 200,000 jobs. And new research shows that stimulus may have also actually reduced government debt over time. Evidence from the crisis suggests that, when the economy is weak, the long-run tax revenue benefits of keeping businesses afloat and people in work can be greater than the short-run expenditure on stimulus measures. That means that a well-targeted fiscal stimulus might actually reduce public debt in the long run. Proponents of austerity ignore the fact that national debt is only one side of a country's balance sheet. We have to look at assets - investments - as well as liabilities. Cutting back on high-return investments just to reduce the deficit is misguided. If we are concerned with long-run prosperity, then focusing on debt alone is particularly foolish because the higher growth resulting from these public investments will generate more tax revenue and help to improve the long-term fiscal position. http://m.canberratimes.com.au/comment/australia-you-dont-know-how-good-youve-got-it-20130901-2sytb.html https://fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/1231571_474949145935476_877637894_n.jpg |
02:08pm 02/09/13 Permalink
I found the ad on the side pretty fitting for the Pirate Party page.
http://i44.tinypic.com/hwn9mu.jpg |
02:17pm 02/09/13 Permalink
It's ironic because Danny Nalliah is Tamil Sri Lankan and most of the candidates are Sri Lankan too. The RUA State candidates look like white old farmers apart from Danny. I just took the ABC votecompass questionnaire because this time I honestly don't know who to vote for. Seems pretty accurate: http://i.imgur.com/bxF3E1t.png |
02:22pm 02/09/13 Permalink
libs "the budget data will be released with enough time that the people can make an informed choice"
this week, from the libs "our budget data will be released with all the details at the end of the week" question is (from me) how much time is needed to know, and make an informed choice, and are they hiding something big hence why we've not heard |
02:43pm 02/09/13 Permalink
You are in my electorate aren't you? McEwan - I'm in Craigieburn. libs "the budget data will be released with enough time that the people can make an informed choice" YSK that the Libs have said that while they'll release certain info on Wednesday, they have also said they won't release the backing information and breakdown. In other words, they are only preparing to release SOME information, but not supporting evidence and fact-checking, of their plans. I've been a former Liberal supporter, and this to me just reeks. |
02:48pm 02/09/13 Permalink
Simple enough, they're releasing their cost-cutting plans after the advertising blackout is in effect, to prevent retaliation. Oldest trick in the book.
|
02:49pm 02/09/13 Permalink
It's not just to prevent retaliation, it means that if it has massive, gaping holes in it; if it completely cuts some program that would be seen as hugely desirable; if it introduces funding for something completely objectionable - they can't point it out.
"$20b additional funding for education", News.com.au will report; "For which $18b is for private, religious schools", Labour can't retaliate with. |
03:00pm 02/09/13 Permalink
Not by ads, But if you think they won't be hosing down press conferences with that s*** you'd be wrong.
|
03:01pm 02/09/13 Permalink
Tony Abbott's promises don't seem to be numerically possible: http://www.theage.com.au/business/why-taxes-would-rise-under-abbott-20130901-2sytp.html
|
03:15pm 02/09/13 Permalink
ooooh, i should vote early before infi convinces me to change my vote too!
|
03:16pm 02/09/13 Permalink
ooooh, i should vote early before infi convinces me to change my vote too! gate 38 and brissy airport also, cnr of rode and gympie |
03:18pm 02/09/13 Permalink
Pirate party for me, the only party that officially supports Beyond Zero Emissions Australia: http://pirateparty.org.au/wiki/Policies/Energy
I've glazed over the rest of their policies and haven't been hit with a 'bats***crazy' policy as of yet. |
03:20pm 02/09/13 Permalink
Pirate party for me, the only party that officially supports Beyond Zero Emissions Australia: http://pirateparty.org.au/wiki/Policies/EnergyI've glazed over the rest of their policies and haven't been hit with a 'bats***crazy' policy as of yet. Will we still be allowed to breathe? |
03:23pm 02/09/13 Permalink
Pirate party for me, the only party that officially supports Beyond Zero Emissions Australia: http://pirateparty.org.au/wiki/Policies/EnergyThey seem suspiciously lolbertarian to me and I can't find anything about public healthcare on their policy page. |
03:25pm 02/09/13 Permalink
gate 38 and brissy airport or turbo drive, coorparoo |
03:45pm 02/09/13 Permalink
04:17pm 02/09/13 Permalink
Yeah he is also quietly keeping the increase of smoking taxes, while having a go at Labor for raising them.
|
04:21pm 02/09/13 Permalink
The levy on savings accounts is proposed at 0.05 per cent.
While the stated goal is dubious in that introducing the levy replaces the deposit guarantee from the GFC that we never needed, no-one will need to sell the rolls royce to cover it I'm sure. |
04:28pm 02/09/13 Permalink
The levy on savings accounts is proposed at 0.05 per cent. While the stated goal is dubious in that introducing the levy replaces the deposit guarantee from the GFC that we never needed, no-one will need to sell the rolls royce to cover it I'm sure. Its the vibe of the thing man. Savings are already taxed and I don't like the idea of the gubment sticking its hands in my account for any amount. This money is mine, f*** off. I don't have a million bucks, but I want to, and if I get a mill giving them 500 out of that (every year?) after paying so much other tax along the way would piss me off no end. Getting rid of this stupid levy was one of my 'oh well there's some good things to come out of d***chin becoming PM' and now its GONE. Edit: math is hard hurr durr |
04:41pm 02/09/13 Permalink
It'd be amusing if the banks passed on the levy to customers. They're making billions a quarter, why won't they stop being greedy and absorb it?
I'll lose $5 a month from it, no big deal |
04:45pm 02/09/13 Permalink
It'd be amusing if the banks passed on the levy to customers. They're making billions a quarter, why won't they stop being greedy and absorb it?I'll lose $5 a month from it, no big deal You have ~100k in Vash cash? Aren't you a bum?! Anyway, of course it will be passed on lol. "Absorbing it" is smoke and mirrors to hide who actually pays. Probably cover it in credit card fees. Edit: turns out its 0.05 up to 250k accounts, so max is like $125 per year?. Just wind of it wiped billions off the market though lol. |
04:48pm 02/09/13 Permalink
I've been working full time since i was 17, now 29, so ive had plenty of time to save.
I wish we had more media regulation so people would see Abbott for what he really is |
04:58pm 02/09/13 Permalink
Will we still be allowed to breathe? Nope you must die a horrible death. Also just think powering the entire of Australia from base-load renewable power, if you don't know what solar thermal with storage you really should read beyond zero emissions plan. They seem suspiciously lolbertarian to me and I can't find anything about public healthcare on their policy page. I guess they haven't developed it yet, also in what way are they "lolbertarian"? Also this might be worth the watch, a mate filmed it. |
04:59pm 02/09/13 Permalink
Sorry, I got them mixed up with the Wikileaks party. I only ctrl-f'ed through their wiki looking for healthcare and didn't find anything.
After actually reading through some of their stuff I think this is the party for me. Why can't we have a major party like this? :( edit: seems no-one from that party is running in my electorate :( edit: but I can still vote for them in the senate or something so yay I guess. |
05:03pm 02/09/13 Permalink
Edit: turns out its 0.05 up to 250k accounts, so max is like $125 per year?. Just wind of it wiped billions off the market though lol.as well it should! Remember when it was happening in Cyprus and we were all thinking "haha, thank goodness for the awesome strong Australian banks, such a ludicrous measure would never take place in Australia!" infi, rally your Liberal pals and start putting pressure on them for that one! Also, in Indooroopilly just now I saw some old f*** in a blue ute drive past a chick in a burqa and give her the finger as he drove around the corner. Who do I vote for to kick low life f***wits like this out of the country? I am embarrassed. Unfortunately by the time I realised what he was doing he was too far away for me to get his license plate. |
05:10pm 02/09/13 Permalink
Ah fair call, yeah wiki-leaks comes second or third for preferences for me. The Labor/Lib go right at the bottom, f them both imo.
|
05:11pm 02/09/13 Permalink
Yeah he is also quietly keeping the increase of smoking taxes, while having a go at Labor for raising them. Haha really? Good lord. |
05:11pm 02/09/13 Permalink
Hay bro, I know we taxed your money when you earned it, and yeah I know we are taxing your money when you spend it. But you know what bro, we could do with a little more, so we are gunna tax it when you save it too.
O and for you strugglers earning $35,000 and trying your darned best to retire on what little you will have ... yeah we gunna tax that s*** too. Thanks guys. |
05:14pm 02/09/13 Permalink
Honest question - so does this mean that there is almost no difference between Labor and the LNP now except that the LNP's leader is literally a piece of s*** rather than just a bit of a douche like Labor's?
|
05:21pm 02/09/13 Permalink
Yep we are a heavily taxed country. but give me that, over this situation that happened in the U.S :
So glad to be Australian. And if those Coalition infi type loons had their way, private health would be a necessity, if you lost your job or found yourself in a bad way, from situations out of your control, f*** it, you deserve it! |
05:22pm 02/09/13 Permalink
Maybe Google can make them some non-profit hospitals out of non-profit Google fiber.
|
05:26pm 02/09/13 Permalink
Pretty much. Also, NBN. |
05:26pm 02/09/13 Permalink
Honest question - so does this mean that there is almost no difference between Labor and the LNP now except that the LNP's leader is literally a piece of s*** rather than just a bit of a douche like Labor's? How the f*** could you forget about carbon tax and the stopping of boats?! |
05:29pm 02/09/13 Permalink
Yes the NBN.
I have a feeling that the LNP will at some point abandon their plan and adopt Labor's but claim they can build it for less than the amount that they made up it would cost originally (90 billion dollars or something wasn't it?) Their current plan is just too stupid to be true. Surely anyone with even a high-school education would think it's a bad idea. edit: didn't Rudd claim at some point he was going to ditch the carbon tax? edit2: and aren't they both stopping the boats now? Just the LNP plan is a bit more over the top and stupid? |
05:30pm 02/09/13 Permalink
Well they came up with buying the boats policy. They've just gone full crazy at this point.
|
05:31pm 02/09/13 Permalink
edit: didn't Rudd claim at some point he was going to ditch the carbon tax? Carbon tax is transitioning to an ETS. Also you forgot nice 6 month holidays for rich white ladies when they sprog. It is astonishing that a clusterf*** of policy bad enough to make infi cringe on QGL is going to be voted in. |
05:35pm 02/09/13 Permalink
I like what the pirate party has to say... hmmm...
|
05:38pm 02/09/13 Permalink
Honest question - so does this mean that there is almost no difference between Labor and the LNP now except that the LNP's leader is literally a piece of s*** rather than just a bit of a douche like Labor's? NBN, buying boats, abolishing the carbon tax and million dollar babies. Only differences now and three of those are beyond ridiculous, just plain stupid. |
05:41pm 02/09/13 Permalink
It'd be amusing if the banks passed on the levy to customers. Of course they will, that's why Labor is taking the tax off the banks instead of directly from consumers. They know that any anger will be directed at banks and not Labor. I wish we had more media regulation so people would see Abbott for what he really is You want more media regulation because the media isn't reporting bad things about Tony Abbot? wow lol. I think you should vote for the Australian Communist Party. Maybe Google can make them some non-profit hospitals out of non-profit Google fiber. Hey! Google is a humanity company, they aren't interested in making profits! They are just interested in bettering humanity. |
05:53pm 02/09/13 Permalink
The anger towards banks would be justified. Billions a quarter *profit* ? Get outta here. Lower your fees, c****.
The media is there to report facts, not opinions. And thats what majority of our journalism is becoming. Mostly opinion, driven by rich Murdoch types, their own agenda being forced upon the Australian public, manipulating the truth, hiding facts when it suits them. I never said google wasn't interested in making profit. I'm saying that isn't their only motivation. They're no Apple / Microsoft. They have many programs that benefit people without profit being the pure motivator. |
05:58pm 02/09/13 Permalink
Honest question - so does this mean that there is almost no difference between Labor and the LNP now except that the LNP's leader is literally a piece of s*** rather than just a bit of a douche like Labor's? my brain is a little sore, fpot making sense, and i agree with it |
06:09pm 02/09/13 Permalink
I never said google wasn't interested in making profit. I'm saying that isn't their only motivation. They're no Apple / Microsoft. They have many programs that benefit people without profit being the pure motivator. So do Apple and Microsoft. You said that Google fiber wasn't motivated by profit and that is why Google are sooo innovative. If you think a company with a market cap over $200b is in it for something other than profit you're seriously mis-guided. Google uses many of the same tax avoidance tactics that Apple and Microsoft do. If they paid their fair share of tax there wouldn't be as bigger need for their so called charity. Categorizing companies into good and evil is beyond moronic. Companies make a profit, sometimes people get hurt in the process sometimes they don't it's really that simple. Speaking of people frothing, I don't really get the issue with buying of the boats. Spending a few billion on camps in PNG to get out of our UN Convention obligations strikes me as the froth worthy bit. |
06:13pm 02/09/13 Permalink
and since both of their foreign polices = suck america's d*** by any means necessary, personally I think another donkey vote is eminent, go straya!
|
06:17pm 02/09/13 Permalink
06:18pm 02/09/13 Permalink
Of course they will, that's why Labor is taking the tax off the banks instead of directly from consumers. They know that any anger will be directed at banks and not Labor. You meant to say "Government" not "Labor", both parties are implementing this stupid idea. |
06:18pm 02/09/13 Permalink
06:20pm 02/09/13 Permalink
Apple is the most valuable company in the world, or was? They do nothing charitable of the sort. Their pure motivator is profit. Look at the margins on their devices. There's nothing special about them compared to the competition.
|
06:21pm 02/09/13 Permalink
Honest question - so does this mean that there is almost no difference between Labor and the LNP now except that the LNP's leader is literally a piece of s*** rather than just a bit of a douche like Labor's pretty much, i'd be worried about abbott's budget information that he isn't announcing until no one can see it oh and a terrible nbn plan from the same mob |
06:21pm 02/09/13 Permalink
This post has been removed.
Reason: random gibberish |
06:23pm 02/09/13 Permalink
looks like tim is taking apple a different direction. this is good.
Steve jobs was indeed a d*** |
06:26pm 02/09/13 Permalink
Yes he was but notions of good and evil and motivation in the corporate world, are frankly quaint.
Google bought Motorola and Motorola made landmines which means that almost certainly Google has a patient somewhere in its library for landmines. Motivation isn't profit. teehee. |
06:30pm 02/09/13 Permalink
Only example I can think of for true altriusm is Bill Gates? His motivation is now completely altruistic, so a portion of cash rolling through the MS juggernaut (he still owns heaps of MS right?) is going to a genuinely good place.
Spending a few billion on camps in PNG to get out of our UN Convention obligations strikes me as the froth worthy bit. The whole stop the boats thing (both sides) gives me a bobbly vein over my temple to be honest. |
06:36pm 02/09/13 Permalink
This is based off almost literally nothing but some comments on SA I read indicated the there was a lot of self-interest involved in the Gates Foundation charity work. I meant to try and find out more but didn't bother because frankly I am quite willing to take the ignorance is bliss option for this kind of thing.
|
06:38pm 02/09/13 Permalink
Yeh I read a bit of that, kind of depressing if its just a front to gather more capital and (directly contrasting his statements) ensure passage of wealth.
We know for a fact that good work is being done though, kind of hard to claim you are vaccinating X number of people and instead roll around on a giant pile of coke and hookers. |
06:49pm 02/09/13 Permalink
Gates has been open about it - he's very clearly stated that the foundation needs to operate as a self-sustaining business. That there's no point it just blowing through $400m which can't be replenished and then programs have to stop.
|
07:14pm 02/09/13 Permalink
Making news in the USA: Murdoch tells us how to vote
|
07:26pm 02/09/13 Permalink
Gates has been open about it - he's very clearly stated that the foundation needs to operate as a self-sustaining business. That there's no point it just blowing through $400m which can't be replenished and then programs have to stop.yeh, the investment arm operates independently of the charitable works arm. |
07:28pm 02/09/13 Permalink
Pah! He gets a good feeling out of it at the least, therefore he is getting something out of it, making it not altruistic. haha |
07:38pm 02/09/13 Permalink
Yes he was but notions of good and evil and motivation in the corporate world, are frankly quaint.Google bought Motorola and Motorola made landmines which means that almost certainly Google has a patient somewhere in its library for landmines.Motivation isn't profit. teehee. Patent I see you did well at school under Howard. https://fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-frc3/1209389_475041742592883_226387505_n.jpghttps://fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-frc1/1002189_475029325927458_959451852_n.jpg |
08:03pm 02/09/13 Permalink
You could have just said you meant patient. You are still kind of right if you think about it (especially if google opened non-profit hospitals).
|
08:12pm 02/09/13 Permalink
Liberal digital economic policy launched today. Haven't had time to read in detail but the author seemed cautiously optimistic on Twitter.
|
08:16pm 02/09/13 Permalink
http://www.news.com.au/breaking-news/national/rudd-flags-single-mum-welfare-cut-reversal/story-e6frfku9-1226709015370
Too little too late. The Messiahs powers have deserted him. He'd better not try and walk on water. |
08:33pm 02/09/13 Permalink
This post has been removed.
Reason: Off-Topic |
09:10pm 02/09/13 Permalink
+1 for banning newsdotcomdotau links.. do it forum wide though. Hitlers Germany is that way buddy. Man up can't ban the big bad world mate |
09:38pm 02/09/13 Permalink
10:21pm 02/09/13 Permalink
Hitlers Germany is that way buddy. Man up can't ban the big bad world matehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man |
10:34pm 02/09/13 Permalink
Wow Rudd gave a big smackdown to the Religious opposition to Gay Marriage.
Times are changing, I think Abbott is going to have to bend on this issue. |
10:38pm 02/09/13 Permalink
Yeah that was a brilliant move by Rudd in that he outlined the contradictions that the bible has and points to marriage equality as not the end of the world. This is actually really good, shame most newspapers won't run anything from it because it paints him too well.
|
10:43pm 02/09/13 Permalink
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man How is this straw man fallacy? I think it's http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_absurdum which is a valid form of argument. |
10:44pm 02/09/13 Permalink
Yeah that was a brilliant move by Rudd in that he outlined the contradictions that the bible has and points to marriage equality as not the end of the world. This is actually really good, shame most newspapers won't run anything from it because it paints him too well. Indeed, but lets deal with the facts of the bible; Leviticus {11:10} And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which [is] in the waters, they [shall be] an abomination unto you Means you can't eat prawns, shellfish etc. Leviticus {18:22} Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it [is] abomination. Meaning Homosexuality Exodus {21:7} And if a man sell his daughter to be a maidservant, she shall not go out as the menservants do. Meaning slavery of daughters. Leviticus {11:7} And the swine, though he divide the hoof, and be clovenfooted, yet he cheweth not the cud; he [is] unclean to you. {11:8} Of their flesh shall ye not eat, and their carcase shall ye not touch; they [are] unclean to you. Meaning don't eat or touch anything to do with pigs. Of course then there are the classics like being stoned for planting different crops. Being burnt at the stake for wearing garments made of two different threads RELIGION SHOULD NEVER EVER BE INCLUDED IN POLITICS |
11:24pm 02/09/13 Permalink
This is going to be the big story tomorrow.
|
12:53am 03/09/13 Permalink
This is actually really good, shame most newspapers won't run anything from it because it paints him too well. WTF IS GOING ON HERE http://i.imgur.com/uem9SFp.png |
06:55am 03/09/13 Permalink
This is going to be the big story tomorrow. This should hopefully, FINALLY put to rest this idea that he changed his mind due to get votes. I don't think anyone could be that passionate about something if it was a lie. Good on you Rudd!! Proud to be vote ALP in this election after Q&A last night, he was great. Yet, no Abbott to be seen. |
06:58am 03/09/13 Permalink
This should hopefully, FINALLY put to rest this idea that he changed his mind due to get votes. I don't get this argument. Free thinkers will take his position on marriage equality as part of the whole of the ALP offerings (Unless they're gay of course). Aside from gay people or their very close friends, the issue is not a deal breaker - its a part of the melange of policy to consider. Hardline Christians - who are legion - are as Pastor Porkchop says choosing sides based on the issue alone. Surely its cost him more votes than it gained? Rudd's stance is a lonely one imo. I think he's just a little bit more engaged with the modern world and progressive social thinking. |
07:04am 03/09/13 Permalink
I don't get this argument.Free thinkers will take his position on marriage equality as part of the whole of the ALP offerings (Unless they're gay of course). Aside from gay people or their very close friends, the issue is not a deal breaker - its a part of the melange of policy to consider.Hardline Christians - who are legion - are as Pastor Porkchop says choosing sides based on the issue alone. Surely its cost him more votes than it gained? Rudd's stance is a lonely one imo.I think he's just a little bit more engaged with the modern world and progressive social thinking. Exactly! One of the guys I worked with yesterday said "Your life isn't going to change regardless of who gets in" and I was like, you're f*****g joking right? I'm voting ALP for 3 reasons, 1) Same Sex Marriage, 2) Non-Gimped NBN and 3) I despise Abbott. I know plenty of people, good people, who support same sex marriage, but won't vote for the ALP because they believe it's going to f*** our economy even more, and only the LNP can fix it. Personally (and obviously I'm biased), I think 3 years of a bit more of a f***ed economy (even though I disagree that the ALP will f*** things up) is worth getting rid of Abbott and allowing same sex marriage. Lasting freakin' social change man! Bring it the f*** on. Then we can start to talk about the really important things like Euthanasia! |
07:16am 03/09/13 Permalink
http://www.vice.com/en_au/read/here-comes-a-victory-of-s*** I love VICE. I'll be voting Secular Party most likely. Them or the Greens. |
07:30am 03/09/13 Permalink
Apple is the most valuable company in the world, or was? They do nothing charitable of the sort. they do so, they give us products that "just work" |
08:27am 03/09/13 Permalink
The look on old matey pastor's face...awkward. You could almost smell the fire and brimstone boiling.
Good on you Kruddler. Everything else aside, at least he has the guts to say what he really believes on this issue, regardless of whether it costs him votes. I thought he handled that question with dignity and poise. Light years ahead of Abbottabaddie on social issues and reform. |
08:28am 03/09/13 Permalink
Wow Kevin was so passionate about gay marriage last night! Reminds me of when he was passionate for then against then for an ETS.
I expect he will change his mind soon enough. Good old Kevin Chameleon does it again. Glad you liked being fed that baloney Zapo. Also remember how in 2007 he was an economic conservative, then in 2009 he was a democratic socialist, now in 2013 he's an economic nationalist. How can you honestly believed a word the guy says.... |
08:38am 03/09/13 Permalink
pretty sure infi is a paid up (or fully donating) member of the LNP fan club,
after all, since clive left there has been a hole that needs to be filled |
09:05am 03/09/13 Permalink
Wow Kevin was so passionate about gay marriage last night! Reminds me of when he was passionate for then against then for an ETS.I expect he will change his mind soon enough. Good old Kevin Chameleon does it again. Glad you liked being fed that baloney Zapo.Also remember how in 2007 he was an economic conservative, then in 2009 he was a democratic socialist, now in 2013 he's an economic nationalist. How can you honestly believed a word the guy says.... If you don't believe what he says, then fine, it's unlikely anyone is going to be able to reason with you and change your view. That being said, it doesn't change the fact that he is the only PM to support same sex marriage. So I'll take whatever small mercy I can thanks. |
09:06am 03/09/13 Permalink
09:08am 03/09/13 Permalink
infi, no matter the party, they all change, due to education or a change in thought.
or to get votes |
09:13am 03/09/13 Permalink
See now this is just stupid. It is offering facts, yes, but its just doing it in the weirdest and most out there way possible. Dramatic music, flashy effects and negative views is just pure slandering. Why not just offer them in a sensible way so you don't make your party look like children who've had their toy taken away from them? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Z5iywm1T2k http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c1zsY2H-HPs |
09:34am 03/09/13 Permalink
Re Syria - Both David Cameron and Obama referred to the Syrian government and rebel groups as "baddies". Both sides are committing violent attrocities on Syrians and as such would fit the normal usage of the term "baddies". it is a succinct and accurate term. Only Kevin Rudd could further seek to complicate the situation via his "programmatic specificity".
|
09:47am 03/09/13 Permalink
infi, no matter the party, they all change, due to education or a change in thought.or to get votesSo the important thing to look at is not what they're saying or how passionately they're saying it - it's what they've said in the past vs what they've done in the past. |
09:50am 03/09/13 Permalink
Did I say something untrue? I have no idea, you took a tangent about marriage equality and ranted about a whole lot of other s***. Do you agree with what he said or not?! It seems to me like your own party is letting you down in both policy and social vision so all you have left is to scream F*** YOU LABOR as a response to every topic until you are red in the face. |
09:51am 03/09/13 Permalink
So the important thing to look at is not what they're saying or how passionately they're saying it - it's what they've said in the past vs what they've done in the past. Tony Abbott has been quoted a long time ago as saying climate change is "absolute crap". Now he has recanted that position and I recall seeing him as recently as this Sunday on Insiders say that he fully accepts that man made climate change exists (*cough*) and that the Australian government needs to take action against climate change. I don't see any of our social progressives here giving him bouqets over that statement - it seems they dismiss it. I have no idea, you took a tangent about marriage equality and ranted about a whole lot of other s***. Do you agree with what he said or not?! My point is that Kevin would lock his own grandmother up in the dunny to draw her pension. He has no scruples, he would say or do anything required to win votes. I doubt he gave one s*** about gay marriage until the focus groups said he get 3% extra in 18-25 voter group. That is reason why I made those references above to his record positions on the ETS and his recorded positions on economic preference. He just says whatever is the hot buzzword for the week. |
09:54am 03/09/13 Permalink
Can't quite grasp why, as an elected MP in the sitting party in office, it has taken him this long to make a statement about the issue.
Last I knew, Marriage Equality was still an issue in 2007, and pre-Julia 2010. Why now? It's not something that should be politicised. It's also not something that should be voted on (conscience or otherwise). It's something that should just be DONE. Finished. |
10:01am 03/09/13 Permalink
I'm watching Q&A now - a show which I ordinarily never watch but was eager to see a Pastor get reamed, and I have just one question:
Who the hell is the wanker of a moderator? Could he be any more biased and anti-Labour/pro-Liberal? |
10:03am 03/09/13 Permalink
The thing that I don't get about Kevin's speech, is why does it even matter if homosexuality is a choice? There's still no argument against people who do it which doesn't cite invisible magic creatures with absolutely no evidence to back them up - if we accept those arguments, then we'd have to also accept arguments from the guy who says that he's in contact with aliens, we'd have to accept what islamic imams say that we should do about cutting our facial hair, we'd have to accept that we need to immediately build a 5 trillion dollar asteroid defence system because some guy who has psychic powers knows that one is coming in 2019, etc, there's no way to explain away the special pleading on arguments citing sources equally lacking in evidence.
pretty sure infi is a paid up (or fully donating) member of the LNP fan club, He's actually quite a high ranking member of the Qld liberal party afaik. Which has turned me off the liberals for a good while, who I've previously voted for, knowing that they set their standards so low as to take that level of frothing incoherent partisan idiocy. |
10:04am 03/09/13 Permalink
Ugh, so I just got to the question on marriage equality, but sadly he seems to believe the bulls*** that you're "born" gay. Anyone who's done even any basic level of psychology understands it's nurture, not nature, and to write someone off as being gay because they were "born that way" just shows a fundamental lack of understanding of human interpersonal development and world view.
Either way doesn't make it any more right or wrong, but to try to say it's an affliction someone's born with - and for this to come from a politician, showing a massive failure to understand such a basic concept, is rather disturbing. No doubt, however, Tony Abbotts view would be even more warped and degenerate. |
10:11am 03/09/13 Permalink
Who the hell is the wanker of a moderator? Could he be any more biased and anti-Labour/pro-Liberal? Tony Jones? Tony Jones is the freakin' boss, he's not anti ALP, I find he to be quite balanced, but he's there to push for answers to the questions being asked instead of accepting the usual BS spin in politics. I think he does a great job. As Rudd was the only person on the panel it may have seen like he wasn't balanced, but I assure you in the many many episodes I watch he is, and does a great job. |
10:12am 03/09/13 Permalink
Ugh, so I just got to the question on marriage equality, but sadly he seems to believe the bulls*** that you're "born" gay. Anyone who's done even any basic level of psychology understands it's nurture, not nature, and to write someone off as being gay because they were "born that way" just shows a fundamental lack of understanding of human interpersonal development and world view. I don't think the science is totally clear, but I thought I read something that said sexuality was determined by the age of 3? I think the point he was trying to make was that it's clearly not a DECISION. People don't wake up and say "Geez, I think I'm going to be a ragin' homo". It's not a conscious choice. Given that then ...blah blah, rest of his speech. |
10:15am 03/09/13 Permalink
As Nerfy says, who cares? Are we free to make our own choices and do what we want when it's not harming anyone else?
Can't quite grasp why, as an elected MP in the sitting party in office, it has taken him this long to make a statement about the issue.Indeed. The fact that both major parties equivocate so much on the issue should rule them out entirely if you care about it. |
10:22am 03/09/13 Permalink
As Nerfy says, who cares? Are we free to make our own choices and do what we want when it's not harming anyone else? quite right, but why does Rudd get all this street cred for having a sudden epiphany on the eve of an election, when Abbott already had a similar reversal of attitude in relation to climate change, yet is still branded a climate change denier? |
10:26am 03/09/13 Permalink
I don't think the science is totally clear, but I thought I read something that said sexuality was determined by the age of 3? I think the point he was trying to make was that it's clearly not a DECISION. People don't wake up and say "Geez, I think I'm going to be a ragin' homo". It's not a conscious choice. Given that then ...blah blah, rest of his speech. Yes, but that is the very definition of the difference between nature (what you're *born* with) and nurture (how your environment shapes who you become). It's like claiming a child is born Christian - no, they're not, they're just fed bulls*** and placed in a magical fairy world and made to believe because they're not presented with alternatives before they're taught to rationalise. Autism is Nature, Cystic Fibrosis is nature. Sexuality is most certainly not, and is no more a 'choice' than whether or not someone has sociopathic tendencies. Has anyone thought to ask Tony Abbott if he was born a sociopath or chose to be one? :) Because that's basically the equivalent to someone being 'born' gay versus 'choosing' to be gay - versus the reality of that's just the way they've been raised to appreciate and accept elements of the world. |
10:27am 03/09/13 Permalink
quite right, but why does Rudd get all this street cred for having a sudden epiphany on the eve of an election, when Abbott already had a similar reversal of attitude in relation to climate change, yet is still branded a climate change denier? Rudd actually changed his view several months ago, and made it clear publicly prior to being leader of the ALP again. You're obviously so cynical you can't see that it was a legitimate change, so why even continue to argue? After last night if you still doubt his sincerity then you're unlikely to EVER change your view. Raven, I understand what you're saying about nature VS nurture, I think it 'may' be a bit of both, but I don't know - I also thought the 'science' was still out on this one? My point is though it's not really relevant to what Rudd was saying. His point was it's not a choice, so why would you legislate difference and treat people differently for something they have no control over? PS - before someone says "sociopaths have no control over their actions too, so why do we legistlate against violence and murder. Well, you're a f***tard for making that point. |
10:33am 03/09/13 Permalink
Raven, I understand what you're saying about nature VS nurture, I think it 'may' be a bit of both, but I don't know - I also thought the 'science' was still out on this one? My point is though it's not really relevant to what Rudd was saying. His point was it's not a choice, so why would you legislate difference and treat people differently for something they have no control over? The science is out on this one in the same way there's still scientific disagreement on whether or not climate change is influenced by the actions of man. In other words: 'Science' isn't immune to political, religious and financial agendas. |
10:38am 03/09/13 Permalink
I'm not disagreeing with you because I don't want to believe you, I'm just curious to see some evidence, I'm completely open to it either way - I just didn't think there was something conclusive. Do you have anything to point to I could read?
|
10:39am 03/09/13 Permalink
PS - before someone says "sociopaths have no control over their actions too, so why do we legistlate against violence and murder. Well, you're a f***tard for making that point. On this by the way, while sociopaths might be unable to control how they internalise it, they certainly can control what they externalise. The externalisation is what we legislate on, we don't have thought crimes in Australia. You can be alllll the racist you want, just don't say it - etc. Doesn't apply if you're Christian though, they get an exemption. |
10:43am 03/09/13 Permalink
quite right, but why does Rudd get all this street cred for having a sudden epiphany on the eve of an election, when Abbott already had a similar reversal of attitude in relation to climate change, yet is still branded a climate change denier? Can you link to what you're talking about? Policy announcements would be needed to take Abbott seriously on that when he's made such promises in the past, then bent over backwards to and encouraged the anti-science crowd (promising to fire the climate scientists currently employed by government to communicate the issue to the public, mockingly referring to attempts at dealing with carbon as dealing with something 'invisible' (like radiation and oxygen and wifi and silly "science" things I guess), aligning himself strongly with the anti-science crowd such as Rinehart and the papers publishing the works of nonsense-spewers like Andrew Bolt, even challenging Turnbull over leadership on the issue. he science is out on this one in the same way there's still scientific disagreement on whether or not climate change is influenced by the actions of man. There is less scientific disagreement on that than most anything in science. Much less than there is on evolution, and any sane person can recognise how appalling the position of the creationists is and the quality disparity in the 'scientists' who they cling onto. |
10:46am 03/09/13 Permalink
I'm not disagreeing with you because I don't want to believe you, I'm just curious to see some evidence, I'm completely open to it either way - I just didn't think there was something conclusive. Do you have anything to point to I could read? Evidence? No. This would be the result of massive genetic testing - which, frankly, would be pretty fricking easy to find considering the number of people afflicted with this horrible, horrible illness that's destroying society. Seriously, if it were genetic or nature, there would be a gene, and it would so bloody commonly identifiable that with current technology, you'd likely find it inside a week of testing. I can't prove it doesn't exist in the same way I can't prove god doesn't exist. Edit: Furthermore, if a gene for it could be found, you can guarantee the Christian community would be all over that in an instant. They would be practically legislation for the testing of unborn foetuses and for those showing the gene to be abort.... oh. last edited by Raven at 10:51:50 03/Sep/13 |
10:47am 03/09/13 Permalink
Found the Abbott talk - http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-09-01/tony-abbott-joins-insiders/4927470 , he seems to still be pushing what Turnbull said was rubbish, and playing up the anti science talk, and the false 'tax' (which is refunded) talk.
|
10:56am 03/09/13 Permalink
At the end of the day, why someone is gay isn't really important (unless your afraid of catching homoitis)... What is important is how people who are homosexuals are treated and recognised.
What we do know is homosexuality isn't a disease you can catch and that we hae no reason to be affraid of someone because they are a homosexual, Personally I believe that the GLBT community is compromised of a mix of people who are born the way they are, people who choose to be the way they are, and people who have been nurtured or conditioned to be who they are. How Kevin Rudd came to his conscious christian decision to accept homosexuality is a mute point for me, I was proud as hell when he made his statement on live television last night, whether he gets elected or not, that moment right then and there was a step in the right direction for us as a country. Not just for the GLBT community, but for the over all community, you had a public figure in one of the highest positions in this country tell the whole nation that the bible doesn't need to be followed so closely... That alone was amazing. |
11:05am 03/09/13 Permalink
Rofl Rudd is so desperate now for votes, he's just chopping and changing every 2 seconds on pretty much everything. Their must be panic at Labor HQ. I picture it like a scene from the movie "downfall"(about the last days of the Third Reich) where they are throwing papers out of the window to burn
My point is that Kevin would lock his own grandmother up in the dunny to draw her pension. LMFAO. |
11:18am 03/09/13 Permalink
If your looking for praise on how witty your Rudd bashing is, I suggest you go post it on any number of anti-labor news articles posted on newsdotcomdotau
|
11:20am 03/09/13 Permalink
I have trouble reconciling apparent genuine concern with climate change and the pamphlet's Direct Action plan.
Yes the carbon tax (and the ETS) make lots of s*** more expensive, that's the entire f*****g point. Malcolm is a true believer in climate change, he supported an ETS before the Coalition's business-first mindset f***ed him over brutally. Direct action is not a solution because it does nothing to make cheap, dirty fuels properly signal their true cost to consumers and business. Tony's plan does not reconcile with a true committment that means the hard yards for citizens currently gorging on cheap fossil fuels. Making fossil fuels more expensive is a hard sell, but its the sort of thing you do if you think this is a serious and urgent problem. Tony's solution seems to be that we can have cheap fossil fuels and reduce broadscale emissions in a short time frame which is 100% complete f*****g bulls***, there is no easy path out of this one. Meanwhile, Kevin's conversion cost him votes and he is offering a conscience vote on the issue - something no other PM in the country's history has. |
11:25am 03/09/13 Permalink
Hopefully the senate blocks all of Tony's dumb moves.
|
11:33am 03/09/13 Permalink
The thing about the ETS is that it refunds most of the money for the time being, so it's more about making the carbon heavy options more expensive than the alternatives, but without the consumer necessarily losing out yet. I thought that it was pretty clever, not that I expect perfect rebalancing. That being said, I don't think (from a personal experience guess, have no idea about the numbers) that consumers respond rationally to different pricing options, or even know of them.
|
11:42am 03/09/13 Permalink
I won't suggest someone to vote for but I will suggest that if you do not like all this over the top election advertising and think it is a waste of money then don't put a major party first.
Your first preference is how they divide up the election spoils. So by voting 1st for a major party you are sending your tax dollars their way. Your 1st preference is worth approximately $2.50 this time around. It's worth a lot more to the little guys and with them it is much less likely to end up interrupting your media. If you vote for a candidate that doesn't get 4% of the vote, then no one gets your $2.50 (I think) |
11:47am 03/09/13 Permalink
Just found out on of the independent candidates in my area (McMillan) has this as one of his policies:
He suggests anyone arriving by boat should be flown home and the boats kept here so they can’t be re-used. Because the one thing you want when you are running away from a place that is dangerous for you, is to go back there. |
11:50am 03/09/13 Permalink
Indeed, so absolutely do vote for the small parties, but don't just vote for some random small party just out of protest. Really, really think about what party has policies you can most support.
If you absolutely feel you have to contribute to the Labour vs Liberal war, then do so, but do it after all your other preferences. For me, I'll have at least half a dozen candidates selected before I even get to ALP/LIB in the senate, including SPA and DEM. |
12:04pm 03/09/13 Permalink
when Abbott already had a similar reversal of attitude in relation to climate change, yet is still branded a climate change denier?I guess it is a bit of a hangover from the time he was, you know, a climate change denier. Now that whoever tells him what to say said stop being one calls of it will probably die off. The thing is though that not being a climate change denier isn't a thing that should be praised. It is a bare minimum requirement to not being insane. |
12:11pm 03/09/13 Permalink
The level of butthurtness is growing from die hard Labor supporters as the election gets closer. You will just have to accept that people want a competent government and leader. suck it up.
I am planning on going to pre-polling today, i simply can't wait to vote for the Liberal Party. |
01:20pm 03/09/13 Permalink
Direct action is not a solution because it does nothing to make cheap, dirty fuels properly signal their true cost to consumers and business. Tony's plan does not reconcile with a true committment that means the hard yards for citizens currently gorging on cheap fossil fuels. The man himself has just admitted that direct action might not even achieve the policy outcome of 5% reduction by 2020, and if it doesn't the difference will get thrown in the too hard basket: http://www.theage.com.au/federal-politics/federal-election-2013/tony-abbott-willing-to-break-emissions-pledge-over-funding-hole-20130902-2t0fh.html He suggests anyone arriving by boat should be flown home and the boats kept here so they can’t be re-used.Because the one thing you want when you are running away from a place that is dangerous for you, is to go back there. Heh, to me it's more amusing that the policy seems built on the assumption there's a shortage of leaky fishing boats in Indonesia. |
01:28pm 03/09/13 Permalink
Nerfy, Global Warming is finished in Australia.
just Let it go. |
01:58pm 03/09/13 Permalink
The conspiracy nuts convincing the uninformed populace that the science is in dispute doesn't make it stop happening. The problem is still there.
|
02:04pm 03/09/13 Permalink
Two party system, did I ever tell you what the definition of insanity is?
|
02:54pm 03/09/13 Permalink
Palmer United Party is polling equal with the Greens at 8%
Ahead of the Katter Party Nielsen Poll Labor at 31% primary vote WOW ! |
03:23pm 03/09/13 Permalink
He needs to be abit more subtle with his trolling to get a reply for that one.
And on another note:
|
03:25pm 03/09/13 Permalink
The man himself has just admitted that direct action might not even achieve the policy outcome of 5% reduction by 2020, and if it doesn't the difference will get thrown in the too hard basket: http://www.theage.com.au/federal-politics/federal-election-2013/tony-abbott-willing-to-break-emissions-pledge-over-funding-hole-20130902-2t0fh.htmlAnd so it begins with the historical "scrap all the stuff I pledged" Liberal plan. This gives me a slight confidence that they may just go Labor's NBN if it proves to be too far locked in/not worth scrapping. |
03:35pm 03/09/13 Permalink
Apparently protests outside of newscorp over the propaganda for their ex-employee tony abbott.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BTM9UKiCEAEHWp1.jpg:large |
04:21pm 03/09/13 Permalink
yes it's a newsdotcomdotau article but so be it. Simplest layout i've seen showing the differences for each major party.
http://www.news.com.au/national-news/federal-election/federal-election-promises-cuts-and-what-they-mean-for-you/story-fnho52qo-1226709750378 |
04:27pm 03/09/13 Permalink
04:31pm 03/09/13 Permalink
Here comes a victory of s***.ahahah, the first paragraph made me laugh: Rest assured, if the polls hold and Tony Abbott wins this election, he will be carried to a Victory of S*** on the shoulders of dingbats and dogf*****s in electorates with frustratingly low suicide rates. |
04:34pm 03/09/13 Permalink
Apparently protests outside of newscorp over the propaganda for their ex-employee tony abbott.https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BTM9UKiCEAEHWp1.jpg:large Wow the level of butthurt is off the rails. They are actually protesting a newspaper because they have been reporting about how bad our government is. That's the most pathetic thing i have ever seen. No protests in 2007 though. IT'S ALL A "MURDOCH" CONSPIRACY I TELLS YA. It's ok everyone, 3 more days until Labor is out and all the "OMG MURDOCH MEDIA" herp derpers go back to their caves. http://i.imgur.com/I3brQal.jpg:large A little nastoligia for you all. AFTER backing John Howard and the Coalition at every federal election since 1998, The Daily Telegraph will tomorrow recommend a vote for Kevin Rudd and Labor. http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/daily-telegraph-backs-rudd/story-e6freuy9-1111114939113 Was that biased? |
04:43pm 03/09/13 Permalink
Im a election / politics etc noob as i DGAF and have always donkey voted.
I do enjoy watching the political ads though. Not sure why, probably because they are about the only ads that pay out something during their ad. Anyway, watching the palmer party ads and the dude seems to have some fancy ideas that sounded awesome to a noob like me. So while it wont change the way i vote, are his ideas really ground breaking as labor / liberal ads seem to be about the standard s*** like jobs, boat people, carbon tax etc. |
04:45pm 03/09/13 Permalink
if you DGAF you should informally vote instead of donkey voting.
|
04:51pm 03/09/13 Permalink
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/daily-telegraph-backs-rudd/story-e6freuy9-1111114939113Was that biased? Yes it was, and it's really s***. It was in his (Murdoch's) favour for some reason IIRC to stop supporting Johnny and the sword fell. I was less politically aware at the time so it didn't hit my radar especially. Anyway, after a few years of Rudd implementing policies that he doesn't agree with, he's switched sides and using his media empire to swing another election. This time they pulled out all the stops after Ruddy made a race of it reclaiming the throne from Gillard. They flew in a US ballbreaker to assert 'editorial leadership'. Now the election pendulum swung back and Coalition victory (AKA the death of the NBN) is nice and safe, the silly headlines have died off and Rudd's Q&A performance last night actually got a fair go on news.com.au ... because it likely no longer matters. If you're really and truly OK with all this because its in your team's favour this time then you're a f*****g imbecile. |
05:04pm 03/09/13 Permalink
This gives me a slight confidence that they may just go Labor's NBN if it proves to be too far locked in/not worth scrapping.The NBN doesn't stand a chance under a Murdoch government. Sorry I meant Abbott, an Abbott Government. |
05:14pm 03/09/13 Permalink
i keep waiting for someone to admit that posting thousands of posts about australian politics was an elaborate troll and then everyone else says the same thing and we all have a good laugh about people unironically posting about australian politics but it isn't happening
if you don't make your own box and write hitler than cross it and go home you are voting wrong |
05:36pm 03/09/13 Permalink
Apparently protests outside of newscorp over the propaganda for their ex-employee tony abbott.https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BTM9UKiCEAEHWp1.jpg:large It looks like there might be a discount rent-a-crowd rate available if you pick Yes at "Grumpy old men in hats OK? [Y/N]" on the application form. |
05:40pm 03/09/13 Permalink
This is just some of the stupidity we have to look forward to in the next few years.
''[Asylum seekers are] a hot topic here because our traffic is overcrowded,'' Fiona Scott, the Liberal candidate for the seat of Lindsay told the ABC's Four Corners program. |
06:05pm 03/09/13 Permalink
I love how that is you wound the clock back 10-15 years, all us nerds wanted was going to LANs, downloading pron and playing some CS.
Now that we are all middle aged men games take a backseat role on this forum and politics takes centre stage. |
06:20pm 03/09/13 Permalink
ABC's Vote Compass has seen the gap between Tony Abbott and Kevin Rudd grow by a half point out of a score of 10 across every demographic. What's even worse, the gap between Kevin and Tony is largest in his home state of Queensland where Abbott lead's Rudd by a full point.
These results correlate with every poll conducted by ever major polling outlet in Australia AND every major betting house in Australia. But I am pretty sure it is just still News.com.au media bias, completely owner driven and in no way a reflection of voter sentiments. ;) |
06:26pm 03/09/13 Permalink
But I am pretty sure it is just still News.com.au media bias, completely owner driven and in no way a reflection of voter sentiments. ;) You're confused, lol The idea is that Murdoch's endless media assault is driving opinion - which should in fact be supported by polling. |
06:38pm 03/09/13 Permalink
ABC's Vote Compass has seen the gap between Tony Abbott and Kevin Rudd grow by a half point out of a score of 10 across every demographic. What's even worse, the gap between Kevin and Tony is largest in his home state of Queensland where Abbott lead's Rudd by a full point.wow, that smug little winky face at the end just made it extra hilarious. |
06:43pm 03/09/13 Permalink
them feels when nobody comments on the videos I posted. Now I know what it's like to be Hurricane Jim :(
|
06:48pm 03/09/13 Permalink
So are you seriously suggesting that the scathing editorial from both the Murdoch and Fairfax press are what will cause Labor to lose?
I am waiting for HurricaneJim's twice daily copy pasting from that Labor Facebook group he follows. |
06:49pm 03/09/13 Permalink
No, and no-one in the thread has even hinted at suggesting that you dolt.
|
06:50pm 03/09/13 Permalink
The idea is that Murdoch's endless media assault is driving opinion - which should in fact be supported by polling. Hrng I just read that above so I think some are suggesting it by the very fact it was. 2 posts above. Pjano, political videos are a dime a dozen. Say something witty, funny, or a great discovered quote. Preferably all at the same time. |
06:53pm 03/09/13 Permalink
Anyone else thought it was hilarious that Abbot was proud of his 4/10 score in trust?
Holy f***, our choices are between two tards we don't even trust. What a s*** state of affairs. |
07:03pm 03/09/13 Permalink
What kind of scores do you honestly expect politicians to attract? They're politicians.
|
07:10pm 03/09/13 Permalink
Hrng I just read that above so I think some are suggesting it by the very fact it was. 2 posts above.Hoggy was suggesting that a bias media has the potential to drive opinion, not that the bias media is the sole reason for Labor losing. Dude, you are failing to comprehend simple sentences. Are you feeling okay? |
07:13pm 03/09/13 Permalink
So this left-wing outrage about Murdoch newspapers and bias is all because it DOESN't have the potential to influence voters?
|
07:16pm 03/09/13 Permalink
Keep providing the LOLS. Election this weekend and i can't wait to wipe that smug look off the milky bar kids face.
|
07:24pm 03/09/13 Permalink
So this left-wing outrage about Murdoch newspapers and bias is all because it DOESN't have the potential to influence voters?I think it might have something to do with them using their vast media empire to push their particular political agenda into the faces of the unwashed masses whose critical thinking skills are on par with, say, forum users who use circular reasoning and arguments to try to avoid acknowledging obvious facts about their religiously held political beliefs |
07:27pm 03/09/13 Permalink
I was hoping that we had reached the point between primordial sludge and starchilds where an obvious media bias by such a powerful entity would be an everyone outrage rather than just a left-wing outrage. I guess not.
|
07:34pm 03/09/13 Permalink
I'm alway suprising;
'Vote Liberal bribe': Sydney company referred to AEC Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/federal-election-2013/vote-liberal-bribe-sydney-company-referred-to-aec-20130903-2t2b5.html#ixzz2dowm0klK |
07:35pm 03/09/13 Permalink
The NBN doesn't stand a chance under a Murdoch government. Sorry I meant Abbott, an Abbott Government. I wish you were wrong... |
07:40pm 03/09/13 Permalink
I think it might have something to do with them using their vast media empire to push their particular political agenda into the faces of the unwashed masses So the Murdoch media (but not the Fairfax media who also have published critical editorial against Rudd and Labor) is able to influence public opinion and push a particular political agenda BUT NOT affect the outcome of the election? Am I getting close yet? I am calling BS. In terms of access to readers and viewers newspapers are one cog in the machine. Newspapers compete against radio, TV and social media - and most importantly word of mouth. Yet it's Murdoch's newspapers which are the evil entities. What about Murdoch to his Twitter account critical of Rudd? Is this media bias too? And why is it not media bias if Fairfax criticises, and why was it not media bias in 2007 when News Corp backed Rudd. Why are these double standards acceptable at other times but not when Abbott is about to be elected? It seems like more whining from the Abbott-hating Brigade indignant that so many respected institutions could all be conspiring to elect this "religious nut". |
07:43pm 03/09/13 Permalink
If by close you mean close to moving the goalposts in the correct position so that your latest question
So the Murdoch media (but not the Fairfax media who also have published critical editorial against Rudd and Labor) is able to influence public opinion and push a particular political agenda BUT NOT affect the outcome of the election?In any way matches your first So are you seriously suggesting that the scathing editorial from both the Murdoch and Fairfax press are what will cause Labor to lose?I'd say, no. |
07:51pm 03/09/13 Permalink
The NBN doesn't stand a chance under a Murdoch government.Sorry I meant Abbott, an Abbott Government. I guess by this standard the 07-10 government was a Murdoch government too |
08:07pm 03/09/13 Permalink
I don't understand that Murdoch hatred.
Your anger should be directed at the performance of the ALP. They have sacked two sitting Prime Ministers and you don't think there is something wrong with the Party ? Voted for Rudd got Gillard Voted for Gillard got Rudd That is Humiliating for our Democracy. That was Your Government that they defiled, twice. Labor deserves the savaging it has received. Blame Murdoch ? Blame Labor ! |
08:43pm 03/09/13 Permalink
Just when the Murdoch press is being vilified they finally put it all together and show Labor > LNP
Federal Election promises, cuts and what they mean for you Read more: http://www.news.com.au/national-news/federal-election/federal-election-promises-cuts-and-what-they-mean-for-you/story-fnho52qo-1226709750378#ixzz2dpQ0blrU |
09:32pm 03/09/13 Permalink
I'm alway suprising;'Vote Liberal bribe': Sydney company referred to AECRead more: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/federal-election-2013/vote-liberal-bribe-sydney-company-referred-to-aec-20130903-2t2b5.html#ixzz2dowm0klK It just goes to show how much businesses are suffering that they need to bribe people to vote Liberals so they stop being choked to death. |
09:40pm 03/09/13 Permalink
What kind of scores do you honestly expect politicians to attract? They're politicians. That's the problem! Why can't politicians be trustworthy? It just goes to show how much businesses are suffering that they need to bribe people to vote Liberals so they stop being choked to death.Hahahaha, if you have money to bribe then you're not choking to death. |
10:02pm 03/09/13 Permalink
Why do you think they ousted their leader? Simply from the polls. They were performing excellent. The people didnt like them for whatever reason, and the media played on this. The party's leadership changes had zero effect on my vote, i only look at policy, their attitude, how progressive they are towards making Australia more modern and able to be a strong country into the future. Labor is that party for me. |
10:30pm 03/09/13 Permalink
Im sure many Germans felt the same way about the Nazi Party.
Hitler made sure he couldn't be sacked too. |
10:43pm 03/09/13 Permalink
Im sure many Germans felt the same way about the Nazi Party. Hitler was never elected he was appointed by Hindenburg after a hung Reichstag. Hitler never made sure he couldn't be sacked, it was Hindenburg (again) who issued the Verordnung des Reichspräsidenten zum Schutz von Volk und Staat (Decree of the Reich President for the Protection of People and State). It was only the Reich President who could issue such a decree. Of course the Nazis took advantage of it (possibly even starting the Reichstag fire) and the rest is history. Thank you Faceman for proving that your facts are only opinions based on no real research. |
11:11pm 03/09/13 Permalink
haha, i read that policy article on news.com.au, and the only things that affect me are 'if you use the internet',and 'if you have private healthcare' (not that any of this currently applies to me as I am living out of the country, and the changes to private health are family related anyway)
lucky for me i've voted already at the consulate before viewing this article anyway, hahah |
11:36pm 03/09/13 Permalink
So on one hand we have abott who thinks the Syria crisis is baddies against baddies and on the other hand krud is both a staunch supporter of gay marriage AND has a massif boner for jews?
Voting for Uncle Sam is looking good right about now! |
12:10am 04/09/13 Permalink
I didn't say Hitler was elected.
I said Hitler made sure he couldn't be sacked. The Nazi Party promised a lot to downbeaten Germans but their own incompetence and a megalomaniac leader sent the party spiralling out of control. Bit like Labor under Rudd. |
12:47am 04/09/13 Permalink
on the other hand krud is both a staunch supporter of gay marriage That you try to list this as a negative just shows that your religious indoctrination has done you a disservice towards yourself and others. :( |
03:10am 04/09/13 Permalink
Turnbull's Digital Economy policy document was a good read in the end.
Seems well thought out with a decent amount of evidence to back the position. In fact, if the data referenced by the 2013 NDES update is correct, the key impediment to From the case study toward the end the document. The general premise that either NBN and teleworking and all the rest or no NBN and no teleworking, seems to be a bit of a false dichotomy, which I must say I agree with. |
08:00am 04/09/13 Permalink
So on one hand we have abott who thinks the Syria crisis is baddies against baddies and on the other hand krud is both a staunch supporter of gay marriage AND has a massif boner for jews? Dude, let it go. You live in Australia now. |
08:13am 04/09/13 Permalink
Dude, let it go. You live in Australia now.yeah and cucumbers are green in colour, what's your point. (not that I really care for your point, hence the lack of a question mark). |
08:34am 04/09/13 Permalink
yeah and cucumbers are green in colour, what's your point. (not that I really care for your point, hence the lack of a question mark).the point is when you use the word "jews" in a sentence like that you unfortunately look like a bit of a stereotypical racist douchebag. Don't worry though, you'll fit right in with the rest of them. |
09:05am 04/09/13 Permalink
Nation building is a terrible idea and we should do nothing but spend more money on middle class welfare.
http://www.afr.com/p/technology/nbn_makes_households_year_better_3bINVyDMasl4AOuEYlPOWK
|
09:30am 04/09/13 Permalink
The study finds the $3800, which is in today’s dollars, would come about largely because people would stay at home more rather than go out to work, shop or even see a doctor.Don't economists usually say that in order to strengthen the economy, you actually WANT people to go out spending money? There was an article the other day about how the stimulus saved us because it kept people spending. They need to stop doing all this bulls*** and just say it's a forward looking infrastructure project and who f*****g knows what is going to happen with it. |
09:56am 04/09/13 Permalink
I think that they were saying that spending would continue, but inefficient spending (e.g. on transport when unnecessary with online shopping) might be reduced, presumably then moved into something else since now people are "saving" it.
I don't see the NBN necessarily changing much about online shopping, unless they come up with high bandwidth showcases or something (which, maybe with HTML5 could be possible, but eh). |
10:01am 04/09/13 Permalink
Don't economists usually say that in order to strengthen the economy, you actually WANT people to go out spending money? There was an article the other day about how the stimulus saved us because it kept people spending. People will spend that money on other areas, productivity boosts are directly related to increases in living standards. |
10:02am 04/09/13 Permalink
So on one hand we have abott who thinks the Syria crisis is baddies against baddies and on the other hand krud is both a staunch supporter of gay marriage AND has a massif boner for jews? Sigh. Every forum needs a true -- ... for ours, seems like you're it. I'm trying to figure out whether that religion thing you hide behind is something you do so to try to make you feel better for hating people the way you do, or whether the hatred comes from the religion thing. |
10:09am 04/09/13 Permalink
So the CEO of fairfax has been on TV this morning talking about how Kevin Rudd ruined the Labor party and how dysfunctional he was. Why is there no "OMG FAIRFAX MEDIA OMG" biased screaming and conspiracy theories echoing around the country? Just goes to show this whole "OMG MURDOCH MEDIA OMG" bulls*** is just stupid.
Even Kevin Rudds response to it was along the lines of "oh it's just his opinion its ok" |
10:12am 04/09/13 Permalink
I'm trying to figure out whether that religion thing you hide behind is something you do so to try to make you feel better for hating people the way you do, or whether the hatred comes from the religion thing. Jehovah's witnesses don't avoid blood transfusions using their religion as an excuse, their religion causes them to do so. |
10:14am 04/09/13 Permalink
Fairfax and News Corp are directly comparable because they both have 63% of the media market.
|
10:18am 04/09/13 Permalink
Even Kevin Rudds response to it was along the lines of "oh it's just his opinion its ok" Exactly, it's labelled as opinion not f*****g a front page splash. This is the difference. |
10:33am 04/09/13 Permalink
Yeah I dunno about expecting much change in online shopping, unless Coles/Woolworths/etc really change their game, but a great deal more telecommuting with the high bandwidth seems realistic'ish.
|
11:02am 04/09/13 Permalink
It's kinda difficult to order chicken from amazon.com. I'm fairly confident local suppliers have that market all tied up.
|
11:39am 04/09/13 Permalink
Exactly, it's labelled as opinion not f*****g a front page splash. This is the difference. So there can't be opinion on the front page of a newspaper? I can't believe the amount of people across the internet who are frothing at the mouth with "OMG MURDOCH MEDIA OMG" they actually think that the Liberals are going to the win election, not because Labor are a completely incompetent government but because a couple of newspapers have ran negative stories about Labor.(That's right, newspapers that is a last century declining media form) They act as if people can't make up their own minds and that if they see a front page like the ones posted they will be automatically brainwashed into voting a certain way. It's hilariously retarded. The level of butthurt is probably the worst i'v ever seen in my life. |
12:56pm 04/09/13 Permalink
Corbett has been a member of the Liberal Party for a while. Hardly expect him to spruik anyone else.
|
01:13pm 04/09/13 Permalink
Looks like someone got out of the wrong side of the bed today.
|
02:14pm 04/09/13 Permalink
The numbers are looking a lot closer now - http://election.crikey.com.au/cash-tracker/ - I guess we'll probably see the numbers change again tomorrow when the LNP release their final costings.
|
02:21pm 04/09/13 Permalink
it wouldn't surprise me if there's a record number of informal votes this election.
|
02:59pm 04/09/13 Permalink
Lol @ that graph Furgle posted that claims Labor is going to single handedly save the planet by introducing a tax. ROFL.
I just got back from pre-polling. It absolutely packed with people who simply can't wait to vote for the Liberals. We are hearing the whispers of freedom. It feels like christmas! The numbers are looking a lot closer now - http://election.crikey.com.au/cash-tracker/ - I guess we'll probably see the numbers change again tomorrow when the LNP release their final costings. Their so called "cash-tracker" has already been debunked as completely inaccurate and false. |
03:39pm 04/09/13 Permalink
Their so called "cash-tracker" has already been debunked as completely inaccurate and false.Care to take a break from frothing over everything to post a link? |
03:46pm 04/09/13 Permalink
Care to take a break from frothing over everything to post a link? Its basically he says so, over and over until people stop talking about it. Meanwhile in reality as Coalition cost cuts etc come in the tracker updates appropriately. |
03:50pm 04/09/13 Permalink
SheerObesity, did you honestly think that graph was 100% literal? Refer to "Gay marriage with love & rainbows and s***"
since you're too stupid to understand it, I'll help you. They meant that Labor's tax will contribute to saving the planet, and encourage other countries to join in on taxing carbon to promote the use of renewables. |
03:51pm 04/09/13 Permalink
Their so called "cash-tracker" has already been debunked as completely inaccurate and false. Where is that debunking? Link? Proof? Happy to be corrected, but I'm not going to believe you because you say so. |
04:51pm 04/09/13 Permalink
Best news for science research in this country today. Chances are fairly good that Sophie Mirabella will be ousted from her seat. Here's hoping we get a better science minister.
|
05:33pm 04/09/13 Permalink
Do shadow ministers usually get their same roles in government?
The coalition was reportedly going to privatise the CSIRO not long back, which to me reeks of the general "the free market solves everything and everything is about monetary profit!" spiel that people like infi seem to have got trapped in (which, as various science speakers have pointed out, has never been how anything worthwhile in science has been discovered, where electricity to satellites to the internet have all been government funded tinkering without a known near term profitable product in mind). |
06:37pm 04/09/13 Permalink
Where is that debunking? Link? Proof? Happy to be corrected, but I'm not going to believe you because you say so. Refer back to the other thread on the second page i think. A lot of us showed that their figures are completely inaccurate. They left spending off of Labors tally and left cuts off of the Liberals tally, also they wrote the wrong costs for some of them. |
06:42pm 04/09/13 Permalink
Do shadow ministers usually get their same roles in government? no The coalition was reportedly going to privatise the CSIRO not long back, which to me reeks of the general "the free market solves everything and everything is about monetary profit!" spiel that people like infi seem to have got trapped in (which, as various science speakers have pointed out, has never been how anything worthwhile in science has been discovered, where electricity to satellites to the internet have all been government funded tinkering without a known near term profitable product in mind). we wouldn't have discovered fire if not for government. in fact no science ever occurred before governments existed. |
06:46pm 04/09/13 Permalink
Thanks for proving my point.
(And, for the record, quantitative science as a technique is only about 300 years old, which has only flourished under government funded arrangements, ironic that you'd disparage the results on a computer over the internet on the world wide web using electricity and satellites - 5 government funded inventions given to the market to refine) |
06:50pm 04/09/13 Permalink
I saw a new ad on TV tonight. Now labor are saying if Tony wins then 12000 people will magically lose their jobs (instead of 4000 in the original ad). We can trust labor though because we know how good they are with numbers...
(And, for the record, quantitative science as a technique is only about 300 years old, which has only flourished under government funded arrangements, ironic that you'd disparage the results on a computer over the internet on the world wide web using electricity and satellites - 5 government funded inventions given to the market to refine) absolute rubbish, quantitative science as a technique has been around for at least 8000 years |
07:03pm 04/09/13 Permalink
Where is that debunking? Link? Proof? Happy to be corrected, but I'm not going to believe you because you say so. I wouldn't go so far as to say debunked, but if you read the actual break down rather than the big shiny numbers at the top you'll see for labour: 2 Aug Other undetailed savings measures -$1b I'd say giving them a 1b dollar leg up like that calls into question the accuracy of their numbers, and the vast majority of those figures are not easily traced down. |
07:09pm 04/09/13 Permalink
Refer back to the other thread on the second page i think. A lot of us showed that their figures are completely inaccurate. They left spending off of Labors tally and left cuts off of the Liberals tally, also they wrote the wrong costs for some of them.Just checked and no there was nothing. Checked the 3rd page too. The LNPs numbers come to 9.6b in unaccounted new spending not 10.45b.There is a 9.8245 at the top. Did you mean it came to 9.8? |
08:25pm 04/09/13 Permalink
Ah yeah my mistake, one of the savings need to be moved to a cost sorry. Still a decent gap note that Labors is a good deal closer.
The point is that a list of expenses and savings isn't very hard to add up (The irony of me f*****g up isn't wasted, but in my defense their layout is stupid seriously group the cost and savings separately). Labors is mysteriously much closer to the mark, at -4.29 including 1b of mystery savings. Not all the numbers in the final figure are being shown is the point. |
08:45pm 04/09/13 Permalink
Ah yeah my mistake, One of the savings need to be moved to a cost sorry. still a decent gap Note that labors is a good deal closer. The point is that a list of expenses and savings isn't very hard to add up. Labors is mysteriously much closer to the mark, at -4.29 including 1b of mystery savings.Not all the numbers in the final figure are being shown is the point. So they're still $10 billion short of balancing the budget?? Assuming they announce no new policies between now and Saturday. *Begin doomsday music* SO where's the $10 billion coming from! I'm super super keen for tomorrow when hopefully it's all revealed!! |
08:49pm 04/09/13 Permalink
SO where's the $10 billion coming from Just hack off another 10,000 Commonwealth public servants. Remember, very few commonwealth public servants are involved in direct service delivery. |
08:52pm 04/09/13 Permalink
Well if the money is in the bank, what does it matter where it came from when we are doing just a raw count of the numbers? What I mean is, despite the suspiciously vague description of 'other undetailed savings measures', is the money actually there or not?
|
08:57pm 04/09/13 Permalink
I saw a new ad on TV tonight. Now labor are saying if Tony wins then 12000 people will magically lose their jobs (instead of 4000 in the original ad). We can trust labor though because we know how good they are with numbers...absolute rubbish, quantitative science as a technique has been around for at least 8000 years Just like they said the coalition had a $10 billion dollar black hole that only lasted about 4 hours before it was debunked. Hilarious stuff. Labor love flinging crap. Lucky for us, the Coalition is going to win. Only 2 more days before we are free from the lying incompetent Labor government and Kevin Kardashian. |
09:00pm 04/09/13 Permalink
Whats it matter now anyway guys. You have the next three years to hope that someone gets their s*** together because it sure as f*** wont be abbott
|
09:30pm 04/09/13 Permalink
Well if the money is in the bank, what does it matter where it came from when we are doing just a raw count of the numbers? What I mean is, despite the suspiciously vague description of 'other undetailed savings measures', is the money actually there or not? That's what I'm driving at, these figures are all based on future estimates, as we saw with the MRRT, projections and reality can vary wildly. I would treat that cash tracker with extreme caution. Anything not directly citing a party figure, which other outlets have agreed is accurate is an estimate subject to "massage". As I was saying the Undetailed savings measures set my bulls*** detector off big time, and when their figures don't add up neatly on such a simple piece of arithmetic, its all a bit un-trustworthy. |
09:48pm 04/09/13 Permalink
Ugh, so I just got to the question on marriage equality, but sadly he seems to believe the bulls*** that you're "born" gay. Anyone who's done even any basic level of psychology understands it's nurture, not nature, and to write someone off as being gay because they were "born that way" just shows a fundamental lack of understanding of human interpersonal development and world view. To be honest it seems like you're the one with the lack of psychological understanding, you really should do some research before being so dismissive, which is probably more counterproductive that you realise. If homosexuality were discovered to be at least part-biological based, there would likely be more progressive acceptance throughout the entire world and the denial of civil liberties would be that much harder to justify. |
03:42am 05/09/13 Permalink
Coalition to release full costings as ad blackout begins
of course they are |
06:14am 05/09/13 Permalink
Coalition to release full costings as ad blackout begins The reality is that the vast majority of people have already made their mind up, and that, for many people, is probably due to all the leadership crap - which is perfectly understandable. It is a little disappointing though because there have been some serious reforms over the last 3-6 years, the ALP shot themselves in the foot. The fact that so many people have made their mind up before the costings are released illustrates that perfectly. Still, lets look at the bright side. 1) It's going to be a tough 3 years for an economic perspective. 2) Tony Abbott can't hide anymore, he will be PM, so his ineloquence when dealing with the media and foreign dignitaries is going to be there for everyone to see. 3) I suspect they're going to have to ditch their targets for carbon emission reduction as it will be too costly - they've already set this up though so I don't know how much of an issue it would be for LNP voters. 4) It's harder being in government than in opposition. 5) Maybe he will allow a conscience vote on SSM anyway? He has certainly opened the floor up to that possibility. |
07:12am 05/09/13 Permalink
pretty much everything that goes wrong, they will just blame on the previous government.
i bet infi is rubbing his hands with glee looking forward to all the prospective help outs he can line up with a more "business friendly" government (maybe that should read "infi family friendy") |
07:32am 05/09/13 Permalink
pretty much everything that goes wrong, they will just blame on the previous government. They can do that for the first term, they can't do it for the second though. |
07:38am 05/09/13 Permalink
Ugh, so I just got to the question on marriage equality, but sadly he seems to believe the bulls*** that you're "born" gay. Anyone who's done even any basic level of psychology understands it's nurture, not nature, and to write someone off as being gay because they were "born that way" just shows a fundamental lack of understanding of human interpersonal development and world view. It's one of those technically incorrect answers. But it's a damn easier than trying to explain epigenetics or multigene traits. It still says there's a lack of control over sexuality and that it is a perfectly normal trait. |
07:40am 05/09/13 Permalink
I am rubbing my hands with glee over
A) all the money I am finally winning in sportsbet. (shorten to be next leader at 2.10?) B) finally getting a good government that doesn't change PMs every couple of years, and knows how to count to ten. |
08:12am 05/09/13 Permalink
and knows how to count to ten. Not if it gets in the way of their ideological opposition to free markets magically solving everything, or threatens Gina's or Murdoch's businesses, then you can be sure that 10 is some invisible number that only silly eggheads count to. |
08:24am 05/09/13 Permalink
finally getting a good government that doesn't change PMs every couple of years, and knows how to count to ten. The LNP know how to count to ten, they will just drop all their other commitments to get there, such as hitting the carbon reduction targets. It's about priorities, in an alternate world I would have been curious to see what the LNP did when the GFC hit, if they would have undertaken austerity measures, or not. |
08:34am 05/09/13 Permalink
I am rubbing my hands with glee over A) all the money I am finally winning in sportsbet. (shorten to be next leader at 2.10?)B) finally getting a good government that doesn't change PMs every couple of years, and knows how to count to ten.Can I save this for later when Liberal announce they are just going to continue with a number of Labor policies because "looking closely" showed that the costings weren't as bad? |
09:44am 05/09/13 Permalink
Haha, did anyone catch that Clive Palmer interview this morning where he calls Murdoch's ex-wife a Chinese spy?
Dude is bats*** insane. |
10:04am 05/09/13 Permalink
I caught the one on Ten news yesterday where said all polls are owned and controlled by murdoch.
|
10:09am 05/09/13 Permalink
Haha, did anyone catch that Clive Palmer interview this morning where he calls Murdoch's ex-wife a Chinese spy?Dude is bats*** insane. I did, someone linked it on facebook. It was glorious television. :D |
10:12am 05/09/13 Permalink
Only 2 more days before we are free from the lying incompetent Labor government And we get a lying incompetent Liberal government instead. Its like the tagline from Aliens vs Predator, "Whoever wins, we lose". |
10:13am 05/09/13 Permalink
Palmer is nearly everything I fear to ever become except filthy rich.
|
10:48am 05/09/13 Permalink
rofl the "OMG MURDOCH MEDIA OMG" hysteria is growing so much. His wife is now even a "chinese spy" Funniest part was when Karl said "Why don't you talk about it instead of ranting about the murdochs!" perfect.
This is just hilarious. I can't believe how butthurt people are because their preferred party isn't going to win the election. It kind of reminds me of white surpremecist groups how they are always ranting about "DA JEWS" and how the jews apparently control all the government and the media and the banks, but it in this case its "DA MURDOCH MEDIAZ OMG" Time to get out the tinfoil hats people, Rupert Murdoch is probably reading our minds with lazer beams. And we get a lying incompetent Liberal government instead. Its like the tagline from Aliens vs Predator, "Whoever wins, we lose". Except the Liberals have been proven to be competent in the past and haven't told a lie or anything that could be considered a lie for nearly a decade. |
10:50am 05/09/13 Permalink
Nah, there's no doubt that the murdoch empire is pretty rubbish, but Clive is like you Door in seeing conspiracy theories in everything including climate science. You two would get on well I think, just throw faceman into the mix.
|
10:53am 05/09/13 Permalink
That was awesome, Clive is such a lunatic :)
|
11:01am 05/09/13 Permalink
Haha, did anyone catch that Clive Palmer interview this morning where he calls Murdoch's ex-wife a Chinese spy?Dude is bats*** insane. she must be a spy because she knows kung fu http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/phone-hacking/8648141/Rupert-Murdoch-attacked-during-phone-hacking-hearing.html |
11:04am 05/09/13 Permalink
Nerfy
Global Warming... Let it go. Its finished. |
12:01pm 05/09/13 Permalink
Hottest year on record and still a climate change denier?
I am impressed by your faith. |
12:10pm 05/09/13 Permalink
I'm wondering if Tony can really one up himself while in control of Australia? I mean, he has already used some of his best ammo like nodding silently at reporters or the guy with the "not bad looking daughters" so will he have any left over?
|
01:25pm 05/09/13 Permalink
The hilarity of him bungling everything can only possibly be matched by reading the excuses that will be posted here by his loyal followers. They will be boring for a while. They'll just claim all his mistakes are Labor's fault at first but after a while they will have to line up those old worn out mental gymnastic hoops and jump through them for us again.
|
01:31pm 05/09/13 Permalink
The hilarity of him bungling everything can only possibly be matched by reading the excuses that will be posted here by his loyal followers. It's ironic because you just described Labor and the response to Labors f*** ups here. No doubt the die hard Labor supporters here will try to pick a fault with everything and won't actually acknowledge when the Liberals fix Labors mess up. |
01:40pm 05/09/13 Permalink
It's a pretty standard MO for any government.
|
01:45pm 05/09/13 Permalink
I am rubbing my hands with glee over A) all the money I am finally winning in sportsbet. (shorten to be next leader at 2.10?)B) finally getting a good government that doesn't change PMs every couple of years, and knows how to count to ten.heh I was reading a completely unrelated article and it casually mentioned a leadership challenge in the Liberal party. I can't remember this at all, so either it just left my brain immediately when it happened or I completely missed it, but the Liberal leadership spill of 2009 was a thing. Especially funny considering Abbott only ended up winning by one vote! Given how many people I've seen say things like "oh yeh I'd vote Liberals if it wasn't for Abbot", I wonder how long it might take until the next one? Because it will be PRETTY, PRETTY FUNNY if it happens in the next few years if the Liberals win :) |
02:13pm 05/09/13 Permalink
Look on the bright side...
http://www.thevine.com.au/life/news/why-an-abbott-election-victory-would-be-good-20130905-264996/
|
02:15pm 05/09/13 Permalink
looking forward to abbott's first brainfart as PM reported in the world media
|
02:18pm 05/09/13 Permalink
Did anyone watch Kitchen Cabinet with Tony Abbott last night? It was quite interesting.
http://www.abc.net.au/iview/#/view/42132 Rudd is on tonight at 8:00. |
02:24pm 05/09/13 Permalink
I wonder how long it might take until the next one? Because it will be PRETTY, PRETTY FUNNY if it happens in the next few years if the Liberals win :) we now have 2 precedents for it. Both by this Labor government. Didn't work out for them too well, so I wouldn't recommend it. |
02:29pm 05/09/13 Permalink
The precedent was McMahon vs Gorton.
|
03:15pm 05/09/13 Permalink
Kitchen Cabinet is sometimes funny, the one with Christopher Pyne and Amanda Vanstone was hilarious.
|
03:27pm 05/09/13 Permalink
So the Coalitions costings have been released, where is all the doom and gloom ruddy was talking about? Don't tell me he was fibbing again?
|
03:44pm 05/09/13 Permalink
Here are some of the main points of what Joe Hockey and Andrew Robb announced:
This was taken from the ABC news, I'm sure a more detailed analysis will be available later. |
04:06pm 05/09/13 Permalink
Roads built on the back of the worlds poorest.
The Liberals make the English tories look like left wingers. F*** public transport, build roads. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BTYLmIjCUAATozO.jpg:large |
04:15pm 05/09/13 Permalink
In macro format...
http://i.imgur.com/WTvQpkU.jpg Actual story: http://www.smh.com.au/comment/australia-you-dont-know-how-good-youve-got-it-20130901-2sytb.html |
04:16pm 05/09/13 Permalink
Infrastructure projects to be paid for by $4.5 billion cut to foreign aid. How about we cut the f*****g insane PPL scheme and keep the foreign aid where it is??? |
04:18pm 05/09/13 Permalink
How about we cut the f*****g insane PPL scheme and keep the foreign aid where it is???Because PPL is a Real Solution designed for Real Australians. Gotta move this country forward and Eliminate The Waste. |
04:43pm 05/09/13 Permalink
So the Coalitions costings have been released, where is all the doom and gloom ruddy was talking about? I did see Whyalla wipe-out right there on my tv. Shockin' me right out of my brain. |
04:45pm 05/09/13 Permalink
The Coalition has announced an opt-out internet filter on 'adult content'...
http://www.zdnet.com/au/australian-opposition-vows-to-implement-internet-filter-by-default-7000020270/ |
04:45pm 05/09/13 Permalink
The Coalition has announced an opt-out internet filter on 'adult content'...The comedy is beginning already. |
04:47pm 05/09/13 Permalink
Hottest year on record and still a climate change denier?I am impressed by your faith. hottest year on what record? |
04:48pm 05/09/13 Permalink
This post has been removed.
Reason: Disruptive |
04:49pm 05/09/13 Permalink
Really dirty move to "announce" the internet filter after the advertising blackout.
S*** version of NBN, now with a filter! |
05:13pm 05/09/13 Permalink
This post has been removed.
Reason: Disruptive |
05:20pm 05/09/13 Permalink
This post has been removed.
Reason: Disruptive |
05:26pm 05/09/13 Permalink
Politicisation of research too...
|
05:26pm 05/09/13 Permalink
This post has been removed.
Reason: Disruptive |
05:47pm 05/09/13 Permalink
This post has been removed.
Reason: Disruptive |
05:55pm 05/09/13 Permalink
Okay.
Seeing as though you have a scientific background, I'd love to hear your views on climate change and what your thoughts are on the current government action or inaction to combat against it. |
05:59pm 05/09/13 Permalink
The monk's reign has began with the internet filter, didn't this already get s***canned once?
Haha scientician |
06:08pm 05/09/13 Permalink
06:16pm 05/09/13 Permalink
Wow, the lengths some people will go to advertise Kevin haha!
|
06:20pm 05/09/13 Permalink
Is the joke that whatever The Dire is has KEV spelt out acrostically below it?
|
06:20pm 05/09/13 Permalink
Okay.Seeing as though you have a scientific background, I'd love to hear your views on climate change and what your thoughts are on the current government action or inaction to combat against it. It is an interesting topic. Lots of people making money out of it without looking at any real facts. It's far from my area of interest but I have read some work in the field. If we look at CO2 levels over the past 15 years they have gone up by about 10% but the global air temperature has remained stagnant. The global ocean temperature is also steady. Fruit and vegetable will likely taste worse in the future since the plants will adapt. If the permafrost thaws out then we might see a ~10-15 degree rise in global temperatures. The biggest contributors to climate change are natural wetlands, ruminants, termites and paddy fields (we're talking around 5*10^14 g CH4 / year). Microbial respiration is the biggest release of CO2 into the atmosphere. Nobody has any idea what it will be like by 2020. The Kyoto Protocol has been an epic fail. What exactly do you want to know about? edit: need to drive home now, will be afk for a while |
06:35pm 05/09/13 Permalink
the global air temperature has remained stagnant. The global ocean temperature is also steady. Wat? http://www.skepticalscience.com/images/ocean_heat_content.gif he biggest contributors to climate change are natural wetlands, ruminants, termites and paddy fields (we're talking around 5*10^14 g CH4 / year). "While methane is a more potent greenhouse gas than CO2, there is over 200 times more CO2 in the atmosphere. Hence the amount of warming methane contributes is 28% of the warming CO2 contributes." http://www.skepticalscience.com/methane-and-global-warming.htm http://www.skepticalscience.com/human-co2-smaller-than-natural-emissions-intermediate.htm People can fact check when you bulls*** on the Internet, I advise against it... |
06:48pm 05/09/13 Permalink
Two articles this afternoon I liked
http://theconversation.com/guess-who-defines-waste-in-arc-funded-research-17880 The second I may like because of my inherent bias. I do like though regardless of whether you agree or disagree with Greens policy, at least you have the opportunity to make an informed choice. http://www.theguardian.com/business/grogonomics/2013/sep/05/greens-credit-upfront-costings Or scream rabid ignorant hyperboles if that's what you choose |
06:52pm 05/09/13 Permalink
06:56pm 05/09/13 Permalink
06:59pm 05/09/13 Permalink
"While methane is a more potent greenhouse gas than CO2, there is over 200 times more CO2 in the atmosphere. Hence the amount of warming methane contributes is 28% of the warming CO2 contributes."http://www.skepticalscience.com/methane-and-global-warming.htmhttp://www.skepticalscience.com/human-co2-smaller-than-natural-emissions-intermediate.htmPeople can fact check when you bulls*** on the Internet, I advise against it... ROFL, did you really just reference a website called "sceptical science" ? While we're on this topic, would anybody like to hear my theory about how we could use below sea level evaporation basins such as Lake Eyre and the ocean's tides to power large hydroturbines? |
07:41pm 05/09/13 Permalink
ROFL, did you really just reference a website called "sceptical science" ? Yes, and if you truly had any knowledge of the climate debate you'd know that it's where scientists are pointing people with misconceptions like yours. http://www.skepticalscience.com/endorsements.shtml http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skeptical_Science#Reception_and_motivation |
07:43pm 05/09/13 Permalink
There is nothing wrong with the skeptical science site. If there is would you kindly point out what is wrong and include the correct information with citations please? Seems to me you are just dismissing it as false with little or no basis, which is confirmation bias. Basically, it means you have your mind already made up about something, and when new things are presented that might shake up your decision, you just ignore it for some reason. I never really understood why people do it.
|
07:47pm 05/09/13 Permalink
When a person's beliefs are challenged, and proven wrong, instant rejection even with concrete evidence seems to be the norm.
It takes a brave person to change their view, and to say they were wrong. it shouldn't be that way. I think it could be because they lose credibility and the ego is hit from that, so they try everything to avoid being put in that situation, convincing themselves their position is the correct one |
07:56pm 05/09/13 Permalink
There is nothing wrong with the skeptical science site. If there is would you kindly point out what is wrong and include the correct information with citations please? Seems to me you are just dismissing it as false with little or no basis, which is confirmation bias. Ah, but I didn't dismiss it as false at all. Nor did I present any sort of bias whatsoever. I only look at peer-reviewed primary literature, not something that an astrophysicist writes up in his spare time. If you bothered to read the comment section of those articles, you would notice that they're out of date. |
08:09pm 05/09/13 Permalink
Sure that's what you meant.
And you still haven't been able to explain how it's wrong. |
08:11pm 05/09/13 Permalink
you still haven't been able to explain how it's wrong. Sure, "While methane is a more potent greenhouse gas than CO2, there is over 200 times more CO2 in the atmosphere. Hence the amount of warming methane contributes is 28% of the warming CO2 contributes." For a start this quote isn't referenced with any supporting data. Secondly it talks about the amount of CO2 and methane currently in the system, but does not talk about how much is being produced, and what are the effects of CH4 vs. CO2. I'll bbl |
08:17pm 05/09/13 Permalink
Yes you did. You said 'ROFL, did you really just reference a website called "sceptical science" ?'. Are you saying that when someone asks you to read something that isn't peer-reviewed primary literature that you give them a sarcastic d***ish reply? Because I have a sneaking suspicion that you were insinuating it was a crackpot site ala naturalnews and that the stuff on there was wrong.
And yeah you haven't explained how any of it was wrong or posted the new correct up to date information. Come on professor we were counting on you! |
08:18pm 05/09/13 Permalink
Yes hurricanejim that video just suggested that tapping into broadband was akin to harnessing one of the four basic forces (electro-magnetism)
mmmm balance. |
08:43pm 05/09/13 Permalink
Well I just watched Kevin Rudd on Kitchen Cabinet. I have to say after watching both episodes I find both candidates (not necessarily their policies) more endearing as people.
I've realised Tony's stilted way of communicating on television seems to be how he always is. I've also recognised what a multi-talented and dare I say it "deep" individual Kevin Rudd is. Shows like this are worth watching because they humanise people we usually only see represented in the media in a critical way. |
08:46pm 05/09/13 Permalink
Yes you did. You said 'ROFL, did you really just reference a website called "sceptical science" ?' I find it amusing that there is even a website called that, sounds like something a QUT graduate would write. |
09:00pm 05/09/13 Permalink
http://www.smh.com.au/business/the-economy/hockey-closes-campaign-with-a-joke-20130905-2t7ab.html
Silly liberal voters believe the Coalition can magically get the economy to pre 2008 levels. Howard's period was a golden age that was not caused by government influence. |
09:12pm 05/09/13 Permalink
onto the event coming next weekend:
voters have short memories, and in case you've forgotten - most people are easily distracted. Myself included.. We're all very busy people who lead busy lives. More so with the newer generation of voters - though thankfully, they expect more. IMO - this is what labour/liberal fear - and why we had a hung parliament in the last election. Liberal has prepped for this. They cannot allow this to happen again. I'm going to have popcorn at the ready on Saturday. I'd like to spare a thought or two regarding Clive Palmer's group: Clive Palmer's ( he's still an old Liberal ) bulls*** will find itself representing 'the people' in parliament just as the Greens did. He's the 'not the circus that is current Aussie politics' vote for Australians who are long disenfranchised with Labour/Liberal, and hoping things will get back to where were were years ago when we were the 'lucky country'. Liberals are excellent word smiths - next time you walk into a 'Telstra store' - ask the manager of the shop is actually a real Telstra Corp store. NONE are. Pause for a moment and think about how our information is coming to us, and if it really is 'information' either way - you boys and girls are going to vote with your feet. I just like to watch.. *edit* bloody linux |
09:15pm 05/09/13 Permalink
The only thing you need to know about Cliver (Plamer United Party) is that the parties first preference is Family First.
|
09:36pm 05/09/13 Permalink
This next-level retarded thread is worth it for fresh koopz material.
entertaining++ |
09:36pm 05/09/13 Permalink
Hey Nerfy what do you know about Sceptical Science ?
http://web.archive.org/web/20071213172906/www.skepticalscience.com/page.php?p=3 Cook is a Cartoonist not a Climate Scientist. You may as well be getting your Global Warming information from a Taxidriver |
11:14pm 05/09/13 Permalink
Hey dude sweet video. Btw, thanks for posting that vague bulls*** about methane. Really hit the spot! My favourite bit was probably when you ignored the ocean thing.
|
11:17pm 05/09/13 Permalink
thanks for posting that vague bulls*** about methane. Really hit the spot! My favourite bit was probably when you ignored the ocean thing. and thank you for not coming up with any interesting debate or discussion, as usual |
11:26pm 05/09/13 Permalink
Funny story, shortly after I posted that Dota 2 Kevo picture, my personal website started getting vast amounts of hack attempts, the likes of which I've never seen before. I've just blocked about 1000 IPs that have been continually smashing the site for the last couple hours and there are still more coming in. COINCIDENCE? You decide.
|
11:30pm 05/09/13 Permalink
It has to be Rupert Murdoch FOR SURE.
All dissidents of our Dear Leader shall be subject to severe consequences, just ask the guy who owns "dontbeaf*****gidiot.com" |
12:38am 06/09/13 Permalink
Hey Nerfy what do you know about Sceptical Science ? He's also an evangelical christian, but none of those things are arguments against his answers, particularly when people in the industry have verified and recommended them. |
03:40am 06/09/13 Permalink
sorry about the big brother tardis, but this is funny
|
03:45am 06/09/13 Permalink
i watched all of the leaders do their spiels for bb, they were all terrible except for christine from the greens.
|
05:04am 06/09/13 Permalink
wow, sweaty joe was a bit nervous about all his announcements eh?
|
05:15am 06/09/13 Permalink
So is the internet filter back or not ? Hockey on the project first off tried to say it was totally different, then had to say he knew nothing about it after it was pointed out he had previous opposed any sort of filter. Yeah, he had a busy day and he was sick... It's not like they had over 5 years to discuss this stuff ...
Silly liberal voters believe the Coalition can magically get the economy to pre 2008 levels. Actually the economy has continued to grown, just not at the same rates. People blame carbon tax for massive power price rises. Reality is there have been more increases due to infrstructure/network costs and retail price increases rather than the carbon tax. So when your next power bill comes in it's not going to be even close to 2008 levels, it should go down ... maybe ... the cost of the energy is less than a third of the price we pay. And the household whatever it was package (that I wasn't getting anyway) will be gone. End of the day neither of the big parties are doing a good job. An oppositions job is not to blindly oppose, particularly in a minority government, they should be constructively working towards good solutions (f*** knows how labor got NDIS through a minority government). But LNP refuses to even try and work that way ... at all. If they win a minority government, Tony will waste hundreds of millions of dollars forcing us back to the polls. But it'll be a landslide so that shouldn't be an issue. p.s. make sure you check out the group voting tickets for your state before putting 1 above the line. For example putting 1 with senator online (online issues etc etc) is actually putting the LNP broadband plan before the ALP one (if that is your one issue). p.p.s. your 1 in the house of reps is worth $2.something ... imo give it to a smaller party or independant unless you actually think the major party is doing the right things. |
07:59am 06/09/13 Permalink
Post election?
Libs win, Labour demoralised (refer QLD election) Katter, palmer, greens, and some indies win senate seats. 12 month honeymoon period then fractures start appearing. Libs have to back pedal on some cuts, increase or introduce some new taxes. Tony looking shakey. Malcolm forms a group for a spill. New leader in 18 months to 2 years. You heard it here first folks! |
08:39am 06/09/13 Permalink
It appears that there is some mistakes around internet filters and the LNP
Turnbulls statement that it was a poorly worded document. The actual policy can be found here (page 7) |
08:48am 06/09/13 Permalink
Yeah, except that was after Turnbull defended the old version yesterday afternoon on radio... http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-09-06/labor-seizes-on-coalition-filter-backflip/4939818
|
08:53am 06/09/13 Permalink
Post election? haha you really think Libs would sink that low? |
09:07am 06/09/13 Permalink
It appears that there is some mistakes around internet filters and the LNPTurnbulls statement that it was a poorly worded document.The actual policy can be found here (page 7)Key thing here is that Tony never knew about it (a load of bollocks for a leader not to know), Turnbull defended it vehemently but then "accidentally misread it" and apparently the policy was "mis-worded". I'm sorry, but there is no way to defend this even if you are big supporter of the party. They messed up, tried to bury it, didn't work and now are calling out saying it was mis-worded. How can you trust a party that spent so long getting their policies documented that they accidentally skipped over one, even though the Communications Minister knew exactly what he was defending. Does this not show that Coalition have a draw full of excuses when it comes to being called out, and that they are happy to slip in a dirty policy to push their agenda? Come on now, don't be that stupid. |
09:18am 06/09/13 Permalink
Care to make a wager? Done. Your right hand. So I never have to read your dribble again. |
09:49am 06/09/13 Permalink
*sigh*
The Federal Coalition has unveiled its new energy and resources document, promising to focus on restoring coal-fired power stations to profitability, boost exploration for oil and gas, and to produce another “white paper” on energy. Other proposals in the document prepared by Opposition energy spokesman Ian Macfarlane include an investigation into the use of thorium as a potential energy source of the future, and support mechanisms for the use of LNG as a transport fuel. “Australians have a choice between a Coalition government that will give industry policy certainty and stability or a Labor government putting investment, jobs and economic growth at risk with erratic policies and taxation burdens on Australia’s most important industry. “ However, the only reference to the country’s $20 billion renewable industry is the repeat of a promise made last December to hold yet another investigation into the health impacts of wind farms, and confirmation of a previously leaked commitment to require “real time” monitoring of wind turbine noise – a move that wind energy groups say would involve “crippling” costs. “Some members of public have serious concerns over the potential impacts of wind farms on the health of people living in their vicinity,” the document says. “The lack of reliable and demonstrably independent evidence on the subject of wind farms both adds to those concerns and allows vested interests on either side of the debate to promulgate questionable information to support their respective cases. “We will implement a program to establish real-time monitoring of wind farm noise emissions to be made publicly available on the internet.” The renewables industry has previously said that real-time monitoring would impose unbearable costs on the wind industry, and would be almost useless because of the inability to separate other noise in real-time. Despite the fact that there have been 19 separate studies into wind farm health, including one by the National Health and Medical Research Council, the Coalition said it would establish either an independent NHMRC research program or an independent expert panel to examine and determine any actual or potential health effects of wind farms. A previous study by the NHMRC in 2010 found that “there are no direct pathological effects from wind farms and that any potential impact on humans can be minimised by following existing planning guidelines.” A Senate inquiry into wind farm health fell largely along party lines, although it said it was unable to establish a direct link between ill health and the noise generated by wind farms. The Coalition has said that the inquiry would be made in response to demands from anti-wind Senators John Madigan and Nick Xenophon, who may hold the balance of power in a new Senate. “This panel will be modelled on the Independent Expert Scientific Committee on Coal Seam Gas and Large Coal Mining Development,” it says. The announcement came as the Coalition released its costings, including an announcement that it will strip $185 million from the “connecting renewables” program, saying it would be “suspended until committed demand is identified.” That could be because it also plans to dilute the renewable energy target after yet another review next year. A further $150 million has been redirected from the Australian Renewable Energy Agency to fund the million roofs program, while $40 is saved because the “geothermal and tidal towns” program is also axed.. The new energy white paper will address issues of “energy security” and transparency that the Coalition says had not been addressed in the previous document. It would also investigate the role of alternative transport fuel sources, including but not limited to biofuels, LNG, CNG and LPG, and another white paper would look at how the government would support Australia’s “world leading” expertise in petroleum and mining services industries. The document says the Coalition would look into formalising the sale of uranium to India, and would also examine the potential use of thorium as an energy source, noting that Australia possesses an estimated 18.7 per cent (489,000t) of the world’s identified resources. “The primary source of thorium in Australia and globally is the mineral monazite. Thorium can be used as an alternative source of fuel for energy generation and possesses an energy content that can be utilised almost in its entirety,” it says. Thorium is often touted as a future energy source, although most experts say it is decades away from deployment. Among other initiatives, the Coalition says it will provide $100 million in incentives to boost mineral and petroleum exploration, and would convene an “urgent meeting” of state governments, gas explorers and producers and gas consumers to set in place “a workable gas supply strategy for the East Coast gas market to the year 2020. “. This follows widespread warnings of a sharp jump in gas prices as the LNG terminal in Queensland begin exports, and of a potential gas shortage in some areas such as NSW. The Coalition document noted that electricity generators across Australia have faced “huge losses” in value thanks to the carbon tax. It said these losses meant higher costs for consumers and taxpayers, although it didn’t explain how. “The O’Farrell government has made it clear that its black coal-fired power stations will suffer a loss in value of at least $5 billion because of the carbon tax,” it said. “This is a cost that will be paid by New South Wales taxpayers already struggling with rising cost of living pressures.” Leigh Ewbank from Friends of the Earth’s Yes 2 Renewables initiative says the anti-wind farm stance of some Coalition members is out of touch with mainstream views. “All available public polling shows strong public support for wind farms,” says Ewbank. “The Coalition desperately needs to make a wind energy friendly policy announcement to reaffirm its commitment to Australia’s most affordable renewable energy source.” Meanwhile, the Coalition also says it will cut foreign aid by $4.5 billion over the forward estimates. Much of this money will be spent on building roads such as Melbourne’s East West link ($1.5bn), Sydney’s WestConnex ($1.5bn) and the Brisbane Gateway Motorway upgrade ($1bn). |
09:52am 06/09/13 Permalink
However, the only reference to the country’s $20 billion renewable industry is the repeat of a promise made last December to hold yet another investigation into the health impacts of wind farms, and confirmation of a previously leaked commitment to require “real time” monitoring of wind turbine noise – a move that wind energy groups say would involve “crippling” costs. ......................... F*****g sinister. |
09:59am 06/09/13 Permalink
haha you really think Libs would sink that low? You are a poor student of history. They would and have. What is it with kids today, the Liberal Party was not invented by John Howard. His reign was exemplary for a number of reasons and there is nothing to suggest that Tony Abbott will have as easy a time holding onto power. The nature of Parliamentary democracy is that the position of Prime Minister is at the will of the party. The notion of the Prime Ministership as a sacred position appointed by the people every 3 years is a striking symptom of the presidential-style decay of the electoral environment in Australia. ^ Oh and we can expect the above reasoning to be used by the Coalition when Tony inevitably falls. |
10:09am 06/09/13 Permalink
.........................F*****g sinister. It's cool buddy, we'll just keep burning coal. That has no side effects for anyone. |
10:12am 06/09/13 Permalink
Care to make a wager? On which bits? Can you offer a book on each component and I'll consider the odds. |
10:18am 06/09/13 Permalink
Yeah so what ever the outcome, The policy as it stands is no internet filter, 48 hours of mis-communication is bad but, the policy prior to the f*** up is no filter, after the f*** up is no filter.
You guys attack this but I assume you are willing to forgive Swan for example not being able to quote CPI off the top of his head during the worst financial crisis since the great depression, which to me seems like a much worse lack of knowledge. Moreover, how can you trust a party that espoused the moronic idea for over six years in the face of overwhelming evidence, that any such scheme was not able to be implemented. |
10:33am 06/09/13 Permalink
They were defending the filter yesterday, and had the plan typed up, then said that it was never their plan - that's a bit different than not being able to quote a number off the top of their head.
|
10:39am 06/09/13 Permalink
Pete, you're allowed to vote/support for your preferred party but still be outraged by one of their policies.
|
10:41am 06/09/13 Permalink
You guys attack this but I assume you are willing to forgive Swan for example not being able to quote CPI off the top of his head during the worst financial crisis since the great depression, which to me seems like a much worse lack of knowledge. It was a f*** up but we seem to have done ok through the worst financial crisis since the great depression, so he get some slack. It will be very interesting how well the Coalition's kind of schizophrenic slash-and-spend policy platform will perform in comparison. How many worthy programs are being slashed for the amazingly generous paid parental leave scheme? BTW, is that women only? Moreover, how can you trust a party that espoused the moronic idea for over six years in the face of overwhelming evidence, that any such scheme was not able to be implemented. Because it was dropped, will of the people broseph. It was never a good idea, but the same Government came up with the NBN. Do we have any numbers on the comparative popularity of the NBN policies? |
10:42am 06/09/13 Permalink
The man primarily responsible for the economy not knowing key indices of the economies performance is not a minor f***up.
Some draft policy document accidentally being espoused is also a major f*** up but I think drawing an implication of deep conspiracy from that is a bit of a bonehead move. |
10:44am 06/09/13 Permalink
not being able to quote CPI off the top of his head during the worst financial crisis since the great depression |
10:44am 06/09/13 Permalink
Pete, you're allowed to vote/support for your preferred party but still be outraged by one of their policies. Yeah and if mandatory filtering was a policy of theirs I would be utterly outraged. |
10:50am 06/09/13 Permalink
Pre-poll vote at lunch time I think. Heads = Giant Douche, Tails = Turd Sandwich
|
11:01am 06/09/13 Permalink
BTW, is that women only? It sure is! Men get 2 weeks I believe |
11:06am 06/09/13 Permalink
Post election? I don't understand your logic. If Tony Abbot and his team can't manage the budget, how is Turnbull going to? Turnbull is in Tony Abbots team................... I don't know why people froth about Malcolm being leader, do they actually think all of the Liberals policies will change? Because they won't. People live under this delusion that all of the Liberals policies were thought up by Tony Abbot, this isn't the case. |
11:13am 06/09/13 Permalink
Holy crap, only page 7 and someone mentioned Adolf Hitler! impressive.
|
11:13am 06/09/13 Permalink
The man primarily responsible for the economy not knowing key indices of the economies performance is not a minor f***up. I didn't say it was a minor f***up, I said it was a f***up. That said but we seemed to navigate the "the worst financial crisis since the great depression" just fine without Swanny being able to quote CPI off the top of his head. I don't understand your logic. If Tony Abbot and his team can't manage the budget, how is Turnbull going to? Turnbull is in Tony Abbots team...................I don't know why people froth about Malcolm being leader, do they actually think all of the Liberals policies will change? Because they won't. People live under this delusion that all of the Liberals policies were thought up by Tony Abbot, this isn't the case. You don't understand Australian politics very well for someone who seems to be so keen on it. It doesn't matter if Malcolm is any better at managing the economy, the question in 18 months will be over whether installing Malcolm is expected to improve polls. Tony's approval rating will never be high and Malcolm will always poll better. See my post about the presidential nature of Australian politics in the 21st century fr more education on the matter. This will only happen if Labor polls well in a couple year's time, but I don't see that happening. If Kev loses there will be a free election in 2016 for the Coalition as the ALP has some internal s*** to work through to be sure. The rise of the Greens is a sign of this, the left is a little blurry at the moment. The only way Tony can f*** it up is if he goes too far with industrial relations / workplace reforms or the economy collapses into a deep recession within the first year. A recession is unlikely as the fundamentals are still quite solid, but the ALP will always be the rallying cry of working middle class and blue collar workers who feel that the pendulum has swung too far to the employer and business. |
11:33am 06/09/13 Permalink
Yes I would invite you to read my two sentences together and apply your own reasoning.
|
11:37am 06/09/13 Permalink
Yes I would invite you to read my two sentences together and apply your own reasoning. I'm not someone who thinks its a deep policy conspiracy, so I don't get your point. It does show that there is unreleased draft policy 2 days out, which is a little awks. AFAIK nobody has mentioned a filter until last night. |
11:42am 06/09/13 Permalink
Dunno about y'all, but I cannot wait for Sunday when all this s*** is over and done, and everyone can go back to being friends.
Stand up, be counted. Go vote for whoever you want and feel good about it. Australia rocks! |
11:44am 06/09/13 Permalink
The reasoning is that they f***ed up on the road to the right policy, therefore I forgive them the f*** up.
|
11:47am 06/09/13 Permalink
The Vice-Chancellor of the University of Sydney has told staff he was ''distressed'' to see the work of a renowned philosophy academic from the university unfairly ridiculed by the Coalition as an example of ''ridiculous'' and wasteful government spending. The Coalition announced on Thursday it would audit and redirect funds from the Australian Research Council (ARC) in an attempt to curb government ''waste'', with opposition treasury spokesman Joe Hockey singling out certain projects during a press conference. Among the projects highlighted by the Coalition is "The God of Hegel's Post-Kantian idealism", a research project being led by Professor Paul Redding from the university's Department of Philosophy. Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/federal-election-2013/academic-ridiculed-by-coalition-says-sydney-university-vicechancellor-20130905-2t86l.html#ixzz2e4esdr8j Saucey I assume the response from the right leaning contingent on here will be something along the lines of "we agree, what a waste of money researching philosophy". You all seem so desperate to point out the economic aspects, but what about the impact on culture, education, contributions to global environmental solutions etc etc? |
12:10pm 06/09/13 Permalink
Dunno about y'all, but I cannot wait for Sunday when all this s*** is over and done, and everyone can go back to being friends.Stand up, be counted. Go vote for whoever you want and feel good about it. Australia rocks! Hear, hear |
12:11pm 06/09/13 Permalink
i'm going to vote for everyone to have a good time.
|
12:19pm 06/09/13 Permalink
I cant wait for tomorrow night.
I love watching the Politicians squirm and b**** about why they lost. Sadly I suspect we will have a winner well before 8pm. Election coverage: ABC From 6.00pm, ABC1 and ABC News 24 will simulcast live from the ABC Election Centre in Sydney until there is a clear result. Join Kerry O’Brien with analysis from Annabel Crabb, Antony Green, Tony Jones, The Hon Stephen Smith MP (Labor) and Senator Arthur Sinodinos (Liberal). Channel 9 Joining Oakes on the panel is Peter Costello, seen as one of the most successful Treasurers Australia has known. Further assessment of the polling results will be provided by Amanda Vanstone. Rounding out the panel is Lachlan Harris, a former key adviser to Kevin Rudd who was instrumental in bringing the ALP to power in 2007. Channel 7 National Secretary of the Australian Workers’ Union Paul Howes and former Victorian Premier Jeff Kennett will provide commentary as key members of the election panel, along with The Hon Christopher Pyne MP (Liberal Party), The Hon Bob Katter MP (Katter’s Australian Party), The Hon Bronwyn Bishop (Liberal Party), former Federal MP Alexander Downer, and Senator the Hon Don Farrell MP (ALP). Channel 7 looks like the most entertaining group but Antony Green is the man. ABC will have the best coverage. http://www.tvtonight.com.au/2013/09/election-night-2013-your-guide.html |
12:26pm 06/09/13 Permalink
Aww, no Latham on any of the channels this year. He would have been great fun. :(
|
12:29pm 06/09/13 Permalink
Gotta agree that Channel 7 is looking to have the most fun and cringe worthy coverage...
However i'll be watching it on Aunty 24 cause i can' t stand Television advertisements. |
12:52pm 06/09/13 Permalink
The reasoning is that they f***ed up on the road to the right policy, therefore I forgive them the f*** up. I'm not sure that government spending money on filtering software is the right policy. Why should they enter the market at all, opt-in or not? There's lots of private offerings. |
12:58pm 06/09/13 Permalink
FS, did you write that or is that from somewhere? Either way, cite references please. Sorry it's from a Guardian article. Tried to edit it straight after but it kept wanting me to log in again. I then had to go and do some actual work. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/05/coalition-energy-document-focuses-almost-entirely-on-fossil-fuels |
01:20pm 06/09/13 Permalink
01:51pm 06/09/13 Permalink
All they need to top off Channel 7's coverage is Palmer himself. Boy that would be one awesome election show. Think we'll be sticking with ABC though, seems to be the most interesting serious wise. Election party time!
|
02:24pm 06/09/13 Permalink
I don't understand your logic. If Tony Abbot and his team can't manage the budget, how is Turnbull going to? Turnbull is in Tony Abbots team What Hoggy said, besides since when has logic made a difference in politics? Channel crazymorton Saturday night - World War Z |
02:30pm 06/09/13 Permalink
Channel crazymorton Saturday night - World War Z i'll be watching that channel too. |
02:35pm 06/09/13 Permalink
Sorry it's from a Guardian article. Tried to edit it straight after but it kept wanting me to log in again. I then had to go and do some actual work. edit is broken and has been for a long time, you have to log in to triumph.ausgamers or somewhere similar. |
03:26pm 06/09/13 Permalink
So can any liberal voter here actually state why voting for Liberal is a better idea than Labor?
Let's use good ole facts with evidence. Leadership stability isn't a good enough reason so lets just eliminate that for the moment |
04:10pm 06/09/13 Permalink
So can any liberal voter here actually state why voting for Liberal is a better idea than Labor? Somehow I don''t think you're undecided. |
04:34pm 06/09/13 Permalink
I'm just trying to grasp how liberal voters think they're capable going by what we've seen come from them so far.
|
04:37pm 06/09/13 Permalink
x10 infin.
Its clear vash isa die hard Labor/Greens supporter. Just asking those questions for the hell of it. Most people know by now why Liberal is a better option and it's going to be reflected tomorrow at the polls. http://livenews.abc.net.au/Event/Election_campaign_September_6/87541019This makes no sense. How can an American be considered a hometown hero, let alone why should Aussies support said "hero"? Because he was born here and was a citizen until the 80's. His family, especially his mother and father werer heavily involved in public life. |
04:50pm 06/09/13 Permalink
http://livenews.abc.net.au/Event/Election_campaign_September_6/87541019
Tony Abbott has described media mogul Rupert Murdoch as an Australian "hometown hero".This makes no sense. How can an American be considered a hometown hero, let alone why should Aussies support said "hero"? Edit: Oh look, another policy just appearing before the polls but showing the coming storm. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-09-06/rudd-says-coalition-policy-threatens-child-care-sector/4940994 The document flags a ministerial review of the Early Years Quality Fund (EYQF) - a pool of money that selected centres can draw on for wage increases.Goodbye care centre funds. |
04:50pm 06/09/13 Permalink
Infi/Sheerobesity, interesting you couldn't find a reason why they're a better option.
Look at all the cuts, and the bare minimum gain to the budget bottom line. It's amusing the Coalition are revealing this when 3 million have already voted. |
04:57pm 06/09/13 Permalink
Infi/Sheerobesity, interesting you couldn't find a reason why they're a better option. I don't have the convince voters, they have already figured it out and that's why Labor will be dumped. it's over. The document flags a ministerial review of the Early Years Quality Fund (EYQF) - a pool of money that selected centres can draw on for wage increases. Another s*** Labor policy that the Coalition has to clean up. I guess you didn't know that the child care worker payrises only go to centres on union enterprise agreements and not all centres are eligible for the funding. Another ALP Union rort. |
04:59pm 06/09/13 Permalink
Well actually it's kind of just beginning. In that last monster thread and this thread none of the froth brigade have been able to articulate why the LNP is the superior choice to Labor. All that's been posted is empty rhetoric and all caps froth posts. From my own reading, LNP are more or less the same as Labor except a little bit worse. Far worse in some cases like the NBN.
So now we get to see how the LNP can really f*** up. That's the bad bit - it's going to have an actual tangible negative effect on some peoples' lives. The good will be watching how embarrassingly you guys conduct yourselves. If your cute little reaction to last night's policy bungle is any indication, we are going to have some funny stuff to read. |
05:33pm 06/09/13 Permalink
Agreed fpot.
meanwhile, i'm having facebook debates with "frothing" liberal types.. heh.. i love that worth. frothing. |
05:37pm 06/09/13 Permalink
05:44pm 06/09/13 Permalink
Well a mate of mine at work who is one of those frothing at the mouth Liberal types admitted today that he voted Labor. I nearly fell over given the bulls*** I've been hearing from him for so long now.
I guess if he can see the light then there is hope for others. |
06:06pm 06/09/13 Permalink
A 6% swing against Labor and an electoral wipeout does indeed suggest that a number of voters have seen the light.
|
06:18pm 06/09/13 Permalink
the light that murdoch & co have convinced them of.
Honestly, tell me what is wrong with Labor? The voters have seen the light? tell me more of this light |
06:24pm 06/09/13 Permalink
Ron Burgundy knows what's what!
|
06:24pm 06/09/13 Permalink
Dunno about y'all, but I cannot wait for Sunday when all this s*** is over and done, and everyone can go back to being friends. im not going to be friends with any deads**** that vote for tony's mob. (except for maybe tiny, but he doesnt know what hes doing) |
06:26pm 06/09/13 Permalink
So can any liberal voter here actually state why voting for Liberal is a better idea than Labor? Facts and evidence tend to be wasted on you though vash. You went curiously silent when I pointed out Google in all probability bought patents for landmines when it bought Motorola. To be absolutely clear both major parties lost my vote on the strength of their respective refugee policies. I just enjoy pointing out to d******* labor supports who act like fonts of reason, that they tend to do exactly what Liberal supporters do, and that is tow the party line. Like Hurricane Jim's video about the NBN suggesting that is implementation is something akin to discovery of electro-magnatism. Or that only the Labor NBN will allow for robust digital economy. Not a single one of the NBN supporters has said a single thing on the actual policy document released by Turnbull which Trog posted, not a one. I quietly note that eorl in the child care thing didn't post a link to a news report about the announcement but rather Rudds response to the announcement (which is clearly going to be a fair and balanced characterization of the policy) That Infi/SheerObesity tow the party line to the exclusion of reason is so obvious it doesn't bear repeating, but you labor people can't have your cake and eat it to. If peddling misinformation and demonizing over moronic hypotheticals is bad for the LNP it is equally bad for Labor, and if you go to the fact check site on the ABC as best I can see both parties are far less then genuine in a lot of the s*** they say. |
06:30pm 06/09/13 Permalink
Well a mate of mine at work who is one of those frothing at the mouth Liberal types admitted today that he voted Labor. I nearly fell over given the bulls*** I've been hearing from him for so long now. I lost friends over how passionately anti rudd I was in 07. Now suspecting that I might vote for his party this election despite not being entirely happy with it, if only to sap at an over-abundance of power for the coalition, and because faceman and infi have near single-handedly made me hate the idea of ever voting for the liberals. Not a single one of the NBN supporters has said a single thing on the actual policy document released by Turnbull which Trog posted, not a one. I did, on page 1... http://www.ausgamers.com/forums/general/thread.php/3348319?p=1#post3348357 Not sure if I'm an NBN supporter exactly though, just haven't found anybody who bothers to look at the numbers and give an opinion on what they think I did right/wrong in working out that the NBN looks to be far better value for money if doing the whole street at once. |
06:36pm 06/09/13 Permalink
Simple Pornopete, Google is play ing Apple's game. Sue anyone in sight, and Motorola is a defense mechanism.
In defence of Labor: The Gillard governement was the most productive government in history in terms of acts per day. Achievements include the NDIS, carbon tax, the (admittedly crippled) mining tax, and the lowest increase in the cost of living in decades. http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2013/jun/28/australia-productive-prime-minister And this is with a hung parliment. Gillard may have been the best PM we ever had. A shame propaganda has convinced people otherwise. With the NBN, all that needs to be said is this: http://youtu.be/bdgYaXD-Qz0 |
06:37pm 06/09/13 Permalink
http://images.scribblelive.com/2013/9/5/f75a56aa-e8fa-43d0-9a7d-e46600ceb834_500.jpg Didn't we get enough facebook likes to get rid of the Kony fellow? |
06:37pm 06/09/13 Permalink
Simple Pornopete, Google is play ing Apple's game. Sue anyone in sight, and Motorola is a defense mechanism. Seems difficult to reconcile with company that has something other than profits as a motivation.
Producing epic amounts of legislation is no measure of governmental prowess. To be fair Gillard grew on me as time went by. But if your measure of a governments prowess is the amount of legislation they produce I think you need to have a rethink, because its not a measure that can be validly applied to the LNP. They will measure success by the opposite outcome, and if people can work to the opposite end of a scale as a KPI something is f***ed up with your measure. *edit* apologies Nerf though to be fair you were talking about the digital inbox thing *edit2* Yeah Vash that was the video HurricaneJim posted which likens the NBN to the discovery of electricity. If you honestly believe that you are a f*****g moron. |
06:44pm 06/09/13 Permalink
We've already gone through the hoops with the Liberal/Labor NBN, and the fact that you pull that as a "haha you silly Labor voters don't bother reading Liberal policies" is just absurd.
We've already said that it will be slower before the need to upgrade becomes apparent. We've already said that "buying" the copper from Telstra is just absurd. We've already said the prices will blowout to more than the Labor NBN because of the fact that you need to maintain those boxes, and to maintain the copper lines. Liberal's NBN is a lot more sound than their previous attempts, but it doesn't fully go there. Yes we will "eventually" get the Labor's NBN, but for how much more? |
06:53pm 06/09/13 Permalink
Vash knows why they are a better option and why people are turning their backs on Labor, he just likes to pretend he has no idea. Willfully ignorant.
He would rather spend his time whipping out lines like "Everyone on the First Fleet were refugees" and "Google does things for humanity, not profit" than to actually read the 100's of posts about Labors constant stuff ups, dysfunction and chaos, That Infi/SheerObesity tow the party line to the exclusion of reason is so obvious it doesn't bear repeating, but you labor people can't have your cake and eat it to. I only deal in facts. Everything i say is backed up with evidence, it's got nothing to do with "party line" the same can't be said about die hard Labor supporters who spout and parrot crap about fake billion dollar blackholes and cutss with no evidence to support the claims. |
06:54pm 06/09/13 Permalink
07:06pm 06/09/13 Permalink
We've already gone through the hoops with the Liberal/Labor NBN, and the fact that you pull that as a "haha you silly Labor voters don't bother reading Liberal policies" is just absurd. Your arguments all assume the digital economy requires nothing less than the Labor NBN. You haven't addressed the assertion that the Digital economy can get ahead in its absence at all in any of the discussion you have directed my way. For example I suggested regarding remote medical work, uptake isn't determined by current technology limitations, hence the NBN is unlikely to have any real bearing on them being adopted. You have yet to respond that with anything other than a fiat insistence that NBN therefore teledoctors. That the NBN is an essential prerequisite is an issue directly addressed in policy document. The Liberal NBN is a result of political cowardice. The "eventual need" for a massive government fiber optic network is the issue that you simply refuse to engage with, and I would argue based on the concerns raised in that policy document the whole policy is inconsistent while NBN construction is still in it. But the fact that you didn't seize on it after its release suggests to me you haven't read it. I only deal in facts. Everything i say is backed up with evidence, it's got nothing to do with "party line" the same can't be said about die hard Labor supporters who spout and parrot crap about fake billion dollar blackholes and cutss with no evidence to support the claims. No they aren't you said that the crikey cash tracker was debunked. I was the one who suggested that their figures didn't really stand up to closer scrutiny and I said it warranted treating the figures with caution, not that they were totally debunked. |
07:11pm 06/09/13 Permalink
For example I suggested regarding remote medical work, uptake isn't determined by current technology limitations, hence the NBN is unlikely to have any real bearing on them being adopted. You have yet to respond that with anything other than a fiat insistence that NBN therefore teledoctors. Right now I'm sitting here in my home office trying to work productively, but its raining here in Cairns so the internet is unreliable. And you want the elderly and infirm to trust their medical monitoring to this? How will continuing to use the copper network help with this profound reliability issue? |
07:25pm 06/09/13 Permalink
Right now I'm sitting here in my home office trying to work productively, but its raining here in Cairns so the internet is unreliable. Obviously the only solution to this is to equip every man, woman and child with a fiber optic connection regardless of cost. |
07:30pm 06/09/13 Permalink
Obviously the only solution to this is to equip every man, woman and child with a fiber optic connection regardless of cost. for such an unimportant service that is an extravagent expense!!!!! |
07:42pm 06/09/13 Permalink
for such an unimportant service that is an extravagent expense!!!!! Yes that currently wholly inadequately catered for service. |
07:48pm 06/09/13 Permalink
Holy f*****g strawman! And you want the elderly and infirm to trust their medical monitoring to this? How will continuing to use the copper network help with this profound reliability issue? |
07:49pm 06/09/13 Permalink
Yes that currently wholly inadequately catered for service. lulz, provided you live close to an exchange and your pits dont get rained out |
07:50pm 06/09/13 Permalink
Ok if the quoting is too cryptic lets get literal.
I find the medical arguments for the NBN seriously unpersuasive. In cities where reliability isn't an issue uptake or even a policy switch with hospitals hasn't occurred with current technology despite it being able to be achieved. to recall paves example the hospital required him to come for a face to face to tell him that nothing was wrong. I don't understand how a phone call or email (capable with currently technology) wouldn't have sufficed. The barriers to medical endorsement of remote access I would argue are largely non-technological, therefore spending $2 or $2,000,000,000 is going to have roughly the same effect. The strongest argument I can see for the NBN is that Netflix is currently unavailable in Australia, due to bandwidth limitations, Netflix taking up some massive amount of the overall available bandwidth in the US. Something like Netflix is the innovation area that requires the NBN. There is nothing wrong with that but NBN for humanity is an absurd position to take and I can't see why anyone wouldn't be able to see that. With ford f*****g off in a few years, the risk of government subsidizing private industry ought to be clear for all, but apparently not. If you want to characterize the NBN as investment it is a 100% legitimate question to ask what are the risks associated with the return. It is not a valid response to that to say "humanity requires it" |
08:02pm 06/09/13 Permalink
who knows what is possible with a properly implemented decent speed internet connection for all australians.
probably some magical s*** that hasnt even been thought of yet. but no f*** that, let stick with a 1980's internet solution because it mite cost something. lets stay on the bottom of the world pile for something as unimportant as the internet, which is probably just a fad that will die out in the next few years anyway. |
08:07pm 06/09/13 Permalink
Yeah so "some magical s*** that hasn't been thought" of isn't exactly the "facts and evidence" Vash was so insistent on.
So what you are saying is that the returns on the price tag are unknown, or at least difficult to quantify. At this point it would probably be wise to stop talking in terms of investment. |
08:11pm 06/09/13 Permalink
A 6% swing against Labor and an electoral wipeout does indeed suggest that a number of voters have seen the light. I wonder if that's really true or you're just telling yourself. A lot of people who vote do just vote against whoever is in power because they just plain old don't like them. Not because they think the other party has better policies. Well actually it's kind of just beginning. In that last monster thread and this thread none of the froth brigade have been able to articulate why the LNP is the superior choice to Labor. All that's been posted is empty rhetoric and all caps froth posts. From my own reading, LNP are more or less the same as Labor except a little bit worse. Far worse in some cases like the NBN.So now we get to see how the LNP can really f*** up. That's the bad bit - it's going to have an actual tangible negative effect on some peoples' lives. The good will be watching how embarrassingly you guys conduct yourselves. If your cute little reaction to last night's policy bungle is any indication, we are going to have some funny stuff to read. If LNP get in, I expect things to go south very fast. You'll have the LNP supporters saying Liberals had Labors s*** when they got in so what do you expect, but remember Labor got us through GFC and haven't done that bad. A deficit isn't a bad thing, it can help grow economies. Especially when the government invests in infrastructure like NBN and stuff Labor has been doing. Only two people I know will be voting Liberals for sure. Everyone else is going to be voting Labor or a minor party like Greens/Secular or Sex. |
08:11pm 06/09/13 Permalink
This post has been removed.
Reason: Disruptive |
08:15pm 06/09/13 Permalink
This post has been removed.
Reason: Disruptive |
08:17pm 06/09/13 Permalink
This post has been removed.
Reason: Disruptive |
08:18pm 06/09/13 Permalink
This post has been removed.
Reason: Disruptive |
08:19pm 06/09/13 Permalink
This post has been removed.
Reason: Disruptive |
08:20pm 06/09/13 Permalink
This post has been removed.
Reason: Off-Topic |
08:21pm 06/09/13 Permalink
I find the medical arguments for the NBN seriously unpersuasive. In cities where reliability isn't an issue uptake or even a policy switch with hospitals hasn't occurred with current technology despite it being able to be achieved. In which cities is internet reliability not an issue for > 90% of the population? You are way overstating the reliability of consumer internet, probably because yours is pretty good, or you don't like the idea that any stinking ALP idea possibly has any merit whatsoever. |
08:38pm 06/09/13 Permalink
I understand where you're coming from Pete, in that it's skeptical to believe that the NBN will "fix" everything because that just isn't the case. However, a nationally implemented network is what we need, because just like how everyone was trying to move over to electricity or copper, evolution needs to happen in order to improve upon technology and life in general.
Having this national infrastructure would benefit everyone in Australia, you seriously can't deny that. It may not come eventually, but it does need to happen in order to lay down that path. Honestly I like what Liberal are doing because they've accepted that they need to do this and it is what Australia needs to further push the boundaries. My problem is the way that they are going about it, in that in the end it WILL cost more than just laying down the fibre optic wiring initially. We may be "okay" at the moment with copper wiring, but it doesn't last forever sadly. It has its defects and with it its limitations. We can't rely on old technology because the world of technology is always moving ahead and we need to keep up with it. Sure they may discover something much, much faster in 10-15 years but saying "lets just wait for that, no point in upgrading now" is prolonging the inevitable. In terms of medical uptake not being dictated by the NBN, but instead external factors is true. Some people may just prefer physical contact instead of flashing themselves in front of a webcam. But, and this is a big one, having that option is the key to pushing ahead technology and making the adoption rate more successful. Take for example the Xbox One. People have lamented and thrown massive fits of rage that Microsoft would dare make the Kinect a mandatory part of the Xbox One experience, instead asking that Microsoft simply leave it by the wayside and forget about it. Personally, I see this as a smart move by Microsoft (that and I don't really care about the whole "NSA spying on me in my PJs" deal) in that it ensures developers a 100% attach rate, and so they know that people have and will use the Kinect if there are options in the game. This can be directly related to the NBN, in that HAVING this infrastructure will ensure that the technology of the current and future will be able to function in Australia, and while some may not adopt the new offerings like online medical doctors or faster pr0n downloads it is still there as a core part of Australia. It needs to happen because our current technology is growing old, and it needs to be upgraded to continue being competitive in the world. |
08:42pm 06/09/13 Permalink
I don't think I am hogfather.
If you're talking about the kind of monitoring that could prevent an emergency there are factors that are always going to be outside the governments control, that would make relying on the internet a bad idea. What if the modem is unreliable, what if the machine itself is faulty, in the case of wireless what if the layout of the house means that a bedroom doesn't get covered by an access point properly. It's a s***** argument. Just accept it, the NBN being a good idea doesn't stand or fall with it. |
08:47pm 06/09/13 Permalink
This post has been removed.
Reason: Off-Topic |
09:01pm 06/09/13 Permalink
It's a s***** argument. Just accept it, the NBN being a good idea doesn't stand or fall with it. Nope. Its part of why the NBN is a good idea. There's lots of other reasons but I have 0 time for you on this issue. The fatc that the rain cost me 40-60% productivity tonight is meaningless no doubt, even though that's hundreds of dollars that won't show up in this year's GDP. I have no doubt that my case is not unusual in any respect. You don't want to discuss it honestly, you want to bag anything related to the ALP. Your shrill, fundamentally stupid shrieking about 'every man woman and child at any cost' gave away your game there, son. Like a typical QGL Liberal party troll you'll take this dismissal as some sort of warped victory, but I honestly just don't give a f***, you're not worth my time. Anyone see this? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=grqp-JQMFuM Sorry for no embed, looks like youtube is not showing legacy embed code. Fix the forums and alllow youtube iframes already. From the description: Get this: the TV networks are refusing to put GetUp members' ad on the air. Channel 7 refused outright on the grounds that it was "distasteful", while Channel Ten and Channel Nine have told us directly that they won't continue running the ad because it criticises Rupert Murdoch. This is why Murdoch isn't a normal foreigner with an opinion, d***chins. |
09:20pm 06/09/13 Permalink
Yeah but Eorl the issue is that I don't have to buy an XBOX one.
Tax money being used for the NBN means I don't get a choice except by voting. That developers might be able to find a use for universal broadband is not a particularly strong argument. Various things like teledoctors or teleworking are being held up currently by policy more so than technology. I don't accept that only a government constructed network will get the job done. I would suggest that had Telstra's privatization been handled with even a little forethought things would be different now. But I don't see that as a justification to go crazy building networks with out considering what private industry would have done given a real shot at the matter. Even in the current environment several large backbone networks were built, with a remotely level playing field who knows what might happen. The way I see it the primary barrier to other networks over taking Telstra is the insane advantage Telstra has enjoyed to now. Its the same in the UK with BT and BT Openreach, being their solution in structural separation. |
09:21pm 06/09/13 Permalink
Having this national infrastructure would benefit everyone in Australia, you seriously can't deny that.There is no evidence whatsoever to support this statement. It is completely reasonable to deny that. The only way to know that if that statement is true is to build it and see if everyone benefits. (Note: I am not saying that is a good reason to not build it.) |
09:24pm 06/09/13 Permalink
Your shrill, fundamentally stupid shrieking about 'every man woman and child at any cost' gave away your game there, son. Like a typical QGL Liberal party troll you'll take this dismissal as some sort of warped victory My shrill response was a light hearted attempt to point out that your assertion of medical monitoring via the NBN is a silly idea and a poor argument for dropping a few billion dollars on internet technology. The elderly and infirm aren't exactly dropping like flies because of the current care arrangements. |
09:27pm 06/09/13 Permalink
There is no evidence whatsoever to support this statement. It is completely reasonable to deny that. The only way to know that if that statement is true is to build it and see if everyone benefits. (Note: I am not saying that is a good reason to not build it.)That is true, and I'll admit that was a bit hyperbolic saying it would benefit everyone without us knowing if this is the case, but from what we have seen with people who do have access to the NBN is that its generally a good thing. Yeah that probably wasn't a good example thinking back on it now Pete, sorry about that. I guess now we at least have both parties agreeing that some form of an NBN is needed to push the infrastructure to "modern" standards, so I am happy in that regards. Obviously this election isn't just the NBN though, so you have to weigh in on all those other policies. |
09:33pm 06/09/13 Permalink
Anyone see this?orite, NOW people are jumping up and down about newscomau being s*** iframe embed (noob) showing what I think about that |
09:35pm 06/09/13 Permalink
That is true, and I'll admit that was a bit hyperbolic saying it would benefit everyone without us knowing if this is the case, but from what we have seen with people who do have access to the NBN is that its generally a good thing.huh? what evidence do you have to support even THAT? (note: speedtest images do not count as evidence) |
09:36pm 06/09/13 Permalink
huh? what evidence do you have to support even THAT? (note: speedtest images do not count as evidence) Generally a good thing in that people are saying "hey this is actually really handy and helps" when they do gain access to the NBN. Schools taking up the NBN in particular are saying it does help their students, but of course this is only a small percentage of the people in Australia who have actually have the NBN, so we don't really know if it will turn out to be a good thing until, like you said, the country has full access. The big thing is that people are hoping that the NBN will allow for new ways to conduct our everyday lives, hopefully in a positive way. Will that happen? No clue really, but I think it would be safe to say that by pushing for this new infrastructure we would have to benefit at the very least from new technology. http://www.itwire.com/it-industry-news/market/60743-nbn-finds-favour-with-independent-schools http://www.whs.sa.edu.au/__files/f/7691/img-625142929.pdf - interesting piece on how the NBN has helped schools currenlty connected http://www.businessspectator.com.au/article/2013/9/4/technology/australia-what-do-you-think-nbn http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-09-04/report-shows-households-will-be-3800-better-off-under-nbn/4932976 http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/school-children-take-up-the-election-debate-with-insightful-results/story-fnjj6013-1226709363062 http://www.uq.edu.au/news/?article=26648 - this one is actually interesting because its UQ offering their high-speed Internet to a school, which is really cool Of course there is also the argument that it is taking longer than anticipated and that is what I don't want to see. Obviously its a big task, but NBN Co. definitely needs to be shook up to help push the rollout quicker but within efficiency/not cutting corners. |
09:47pm 06/09/13 Permalink
I'm just going to chime in here and say I work for an NBN RSP for NBN Satellite - and NBN have grossly mismanaged the system. They're hugely incompetent, and the system is already poorly load balanced and congested at only 40,000 users. I have absolutely no faith in their ability to manage millions of fibre connections unless some drastic changes are made to their management.
|
10:32pm 06/09/13 Permalink
Well may we say God save the Queen
Because Nothing will save the Labor Party tomorrow. I hope Rudd has a big breakfast. |
11:20pm 06/09/13 Permalink
I simply can't wait for the end of today. I can't wait for a new government, it's so exciting!
|
01:45am 07/09/13 Permalink
lol thx reddit
http://i.imgur.com/SJz9UAu.png |
02:53am 07/09/13 Permalink
voted the other day at the consulate.
byebye NBN I guess, but Labor has to learn a lesson |
07:39am 07/09/13 Permalink
Can I save this for later when Liberal announce they are just going to continue with a number of Labor policies because "looking closely" showed that the costings weren't as bad? If they did this for the NBN, they'd get my vote... |
08:44am 07/09/13 Permalink
Make sure you vote everyone and good luck!
|
08:55am 07/09/13 Permalink
08:58am 07/09/13 Permalink
Why is the thing to find where I can vote on this weird domain: http://www.ehoundplatform.com/Services/AEC/ ?
|
09:05am 07/09/13 Permalink
I have a serious question, who are Liberals going to blame when they don't stop the boats?
Will they actually just blame everything that f**** up for them on the previous government? |
09:05am 07/09/13 Permalink
I hear people whispering about freedom.
|
09:15am 07/09/13 Permalink
make sure you get a sausage when you vote!I keep getting errors :( |
09:17am 07/09/13 Permalink
I said the same thing to hoggy yesterday - probably some mate of an AEC manager said he could run the polling booth locator site for a good price. |
09:31am 07/09/13 Permalink
I hear people whispering about freedom. lol bipolar disorder edit: signs of a rabies breakout in conjunction with a large amount of liberal votes. |
09:33am 07/09/13 Permalink
I have a serious question, who are Liberals going to blame when they don't stop the boats? Censor arrivals of course http://au.news.yahoo.com/election/a/-/article/18775934/coalition-may-censor-boat-arrivals/ The saddest thing for me is still the NBN, killing FTTH is easily going to be Australia's biggest blunder of the 21st century. Not for speed, but for guaranteed reliability for every house - rebuilding the infrastructure that we so badly messed up by not keeping up with technology. Health, aged care and education costs are going to skyrocket going into the future because we can't implement advances in technologies and learning methods because they rely on a standard of minimum connectivity. Instead we'll go for bigger hospitals, poorer education and a crapload more aged care while the rest of the world moves on (debatably already has moved on). |
10:20am 07/09/13 Permalink
Hehe People voting in a conservative government wanting change... irony much.
|
10:22am 07/09/13 Permalink
Where is there evidence that faster broadband speeds will increase quality of education for same costs as now OR that failure to have faster broadband speeds will make education cost more?
It doesn't mean much to have super fast broadband to a school, when that schools computers are ancient anyway. So in order to actually use the NBN in schools to its higher potentials, MORE money needs to be spent on upgrading and maintaining computers attached to that broadband... So that kind of makes it more expensive. Then you need to consider that online technologies for school content delivery that require FTTH level broadband isn't going to be free to use... O wait, more money. So how is it going to reduce costs again? |
10:26am 07/09/13 Permalink
wooo accounting exam done and voted before 1030. now the serious business of drinking can begin.
|
10:27am 07/09/13 Permalink
10:44am 07/09/13 Permalink
voting was a great success!
2 sausages on rolls 1.5 bacon and egg sandwiches and a can of solo! |
10:47am 07/09/13 Permalink
Only god can save our great country now.
Its in your hands big guy. |
10:48am 07/09/13 Permalink
Censor arrivals of course Well that is completely f***ed up. Doesn't that outrage anyone? Hehe People voting in a conservative government wanting change... irony much. I vote for progressive parties, always. |
10:55am 07/09/13 Permalink
I think its a Shame... Bye NBN, bye ETS...
|
11:01am 07/09/13 Permalink
Its in your hands big guy. http://resources3.news.com.au/images/2013/06/14/1226664/119391-130615-clive-palmer.jpg |
11:04am 07/09/13 Permalink
Well that is completely f***ed up. Doesn't that outrage anyone? I think I have moved from outrage to "resigned to the horrible truth that we are f***ed" mode. Nothing surprises me and I think it's about to get a whole lot worse. But I am outraged by Trog's lack of sausage. Wait... |
11:07am 07/09/13 Permalink
The crappy religious nutbag establishment where I voted had no sausage sizzle! I was forced to go and buy bacon and eggs elsewhere (actually that was delicious).Was that at the church near Montezuma's and the tattoo parlour? |
11:15am 07/09/13 Permalink
Where is there evidence that faster broadband speeds will increase quality of education for same costs as now OR that failure to have faster broadband speeds will make education cost more? Not..about...faster. Its about guaranteed level of access. You can't push forward new methods of education (such as MooCs, or flipped classroom) if you can't guarantee that everyone has access. The people who choose not to get broadband - fine, but everyone should have the right to be able to access it if they so want (in the same way as electricity). It doesn't mean much to have super fast broadband to a school, when that schools computers are ancient anyway. So in order to actually use the NBN in schools to its higher potentials, MORE money needs to be spent on upgrading and maintaining computers attached to that broadband... So that kind of makes it more expensive. Then you need to consider that online technologies for school content delivery that require FTTH level broadband isn't going to be free to use... O wait, more money. School computers are minimum level of access. They guarantee that people without computers/internet at home or laptops have at least some level of access - almost no students with computers at home would use campus supplied computers (unless of course you have bad internet at home). The more and more people get internet, the less important it is for schools to provide infrastructure. Worldwide education is no longer 6 hours of sitting in a classroom - its a constant stream of knowledge. You are correct, FTTH isn't going to be free, in the same way electricity isn't free, or a phone line isn't free - its a cost of *living*. The infrastructure is guaranteed, then you as a consumer figure out who you want to pay and for how much. Technology like this reduces costs in the long run because you have the ability to innovate in education, like what the universities are starting to do now with MooCs and flipped classrooms - students spending more time studying and collaborating at home, competing at a global level. S***, I see final year medical students that don't have home internet - they are so uninformed of the area compared to the other students, it genuinely blows my mind. Access to knowledge should be through a tap, not a town well. |
11:35am 07/09/13 Permalink
i got 2 spam recorded phone calls from Clive this morning telling me about his policies.
First one to work mobile and then within 1/2 hour another via work land line (which is diverted to mobile a/h) Isn't that s*** supposed to stop 2 days before? I'd also like to know how they got both numbers. well i sort of know I guess, they are only advertised on our website and my LinkedIn profile but I'd like to know the process. IE. are they trolling LinkedIn or company web sites? Anyone else got anything? |
12:19pm 07/09/13 Permalink
I hear people whispering about freedom. I'v been hearing the whispers of freedom since pre polling opened! This is so exciting! I await the new regime! |
12:53pm 07/09/13 Permalink
it is funny door, you do more to make anyone considering voting the coalition sick to the stomach with your rampant frothing than actually convincing/changing anyone's mind
|
01:15pm 07/09/13 Permalink
im hoping hes single handedly driven labor back into power.
i agree though, i though infi was the most gag inducing poster of all time, how wrong i was (i stand behind by fat comments from last nite also) |
01:22pm 07/09/13 Permalink
I have a plan (dream).
1. Coalition wins election 2. Labor sack Rudd as leader and bring in someone else (Beattie, Shorten) 3. Greens / Others block coalition bills in Senate. 4. Abbott calls double disalusion election. 5. Labor win |
01:39pm 07/09/13 Permalink
The nutbag parties were out in force today. barry shootsalot from the shooting shooters party.
|
02:59pm 07/09/13 Permalink
lol whispers of freedom ;p ludicrous.
as usual, totally annoyed by all the f**n pointless fliers & pamphlets. i cleared 4 addressed lib fliers from my letterbox & 2 more unaddressed ones & an unaddressed flier from the greens, labor & katter. despite saying 'no thank you' while i am walking into the vote, i still got passed a lib & labor & katter pamphlet .. they just wouldn't accept no ffs. dropped 'em all straight in the bin just like 90% of people were doing. it's like the baby kissing bulls*** that pollies do for the tv.. does that s*** really work? do these inane posturings & lame fliers actually do anything other than make the political parties look like jerks? |
03:06pm 07/09/13 Permalink
I have a plan (dream). But changing Labor leader won't change their policies(which is why they are being voted out so badly)................. Why don't people understand this? im hoping hes single handedly driven labor back into power. Well according to todays newspoll the Labor is heading for an election wipeout of 40 seats. I think the only way Tony could lose is if he dropped a nuke on Sydney. it is funny door, you do more to make anyone considering voting the coalition sick to the stomach with your rampant frothing than actually convincing/changing anyone's mind It's funny that you still call me Door when the real Door a.k.a "Mo" and "pjano" is in this thread. Nothing i say is "frothing" i don't need to froth, the Liberals have this one in the bag. I don't expect to change anyones minds on here, there is no chance of changing die hard Labor supporters minds. I can't wait for the hardcore butthurt frothing after the election result comes in, it will be good viewing :) |
03:37pm 07/09/13 Permalink
Vote is away, not that it'll make a difference, since i live in a rich liberal area, but made sure the religious types have a smaller chance of government influence. and here's hoping the sex party gets more votes this time around.
Spotted Jaymes diaz in his electorate the other day, with only 1 other person with him. he's avoiding the media like the plague. Typical liberal lol |
03:44pm 07/09/13 Permalink
not so much butthurt, just sad really.
|
03:48pm 07/09/13 Permalink
03:51pm 07/09/13 Permalink
It's funny that you still call me Door when the real Door a.k.a "Mo" and "pjano" is in this thread. haha "Nothing i say is "frothing"", maybe from your point of view but for the rest of us, sorry bro but you are the actual worst on this forum also lol still denying it |
04:09pm 07/09/13 Permalink
If it didn't work do you think they would do it? Research shows 30% of voters are undecided as they walk into the polling booth. It's the ultimate one day sale.
|
04:19pm 07/09/13 Permalink
But changing Labor leader won't change their policies(which is why they are being voted out so badly)................. Why don't people understand this? I don't think they are being voted out based on their policies... I think they're being voted out because people are sick of the leadership squabbles, and don't have any patience for Labor or Rudd anymore. The extra funny part is, I don't think many people like Abbott either, which is why I think had Labor gone with someone else, like Shorten or Bowen, they might have had more of a chance... |
04:27pm 07/09/13 Permalink
To all the doomsayers and sooks, let's focus on the positive outcomes:
- No more Rudd/leadership soap operas for Labor. Politicians go back to being politicions. - Katter will learn how pointless it was to try and form a party - Palmer will steal some gimme votes but be completely ineffective and give up - The Senate will almost certainly remain out of reach of the coalition, which provides the necessary checks and balances of legislation (it is never a good thing for rubber stamping, no matter what side you're on) - The Greens will go back to being that quaint little party that nobody votes for, and hence, lose attention - Boats will still sail on Australian waters, and arrive on Australia's shores - The internet will still work, the sun will still rise and set, and Australia will still remain one of the best f*****g places to live. So chin up, have some cement, and get on with your lives. And quit f*****g whining. :) |
04:28pm 07/09/13 Permalink
05:00pm 07/09/13 Permalink
Nothing i say is "frothing" You're taking this piss, right? |
05:05pm 07/09/13 Permalink
I'm starting to think that the Middle East has the best method of dealing with s*** govt.
|
05:07pm 07/09/13 Permalink
I'm starting to think that the Middle East has the best method of dealing with s*** govt. everyone shoots guns at one another and then blames the jews or the americans? |
05:09pm 07/09/13 Permalink
That Senate paper was rubbish. Smokers Rights? Really? First for four parties were Labor, Sex Party, Greens and Pirate Party, rest went to all the other nutbags but that religious nutbag one and Liberal were waaaaayyyy down at numbers 70-82.
|
05:19pm 07/09/13 Permalink
I'm tipping greens getting more votes than ever (but still not majority)
|
05:31pm 07/09/13 Permalink
i don't think so, not after how badly that has gone this term with the greens having some power
so any boats that arrive on monday are the coalitions fault i'm assuming |
05:38pm 07/09/13 Permalink
Adam Bandt set to lose his Melbourne seat. Fantastic news, no more greens in the lower house.
|
05:45pm 07/09/13 Permalink
The real soap opera will be Rudd Vs the Faceless Men for whatever is left of the Labor Party.
Prolly be over by 7pm. Coalition 90 seats. |
05:50pm 07/09/13 Permalink
The real soap opera will be Rudd Vs the Faceless Men for whatever is left of the Labor Party. Doubt it. I've personally heard way more Labor supporters than Liberal, but we won't know the full carnage until early next week. |
05:55pm 07/09/13 Permalink
my facebook is reporting a huge labor support, but then again, i dont often friend retards, so its hard to know what everyone else is thinking.
|
05:56pm 07/09/13 Permalink
The polls are more reliable than our social circles, unfortunately Tony Abbott is almost certainly going to be the prime minister of australia. An ex-journalist... oh goodie...
-- p.s. There appears to be an online results thing here: http://www.abc.net.au/news/federal-election-2013/map/ |
06:00pm 07/09/13 Permalink
my facebook is reporting a huge labor support, but then again, i dont often friend retards, so its hard to know what everyone else is thinking. hey bro, who did your wife vote for? |
06:01pm 07/09/13 Permalink
Doubt it. I've personally heard way more Labor supporters than Liberal, but we won't know the full carnage until early next week. That's what I'm hearing too. All my friends except 2 are very against Abbott. Most of my friends would vote Greens, Labor or Sex/Secular. |
06:07pm 07/09/13 Permalink
I know hoggy already posted it, but it feels like this needs to be posted again for Door's sake
http://i.imgur.com/SJz9UAu.png |
06:07pm 07/09/13 Permalink
The polls are more reliable than our social circles, unfortunately Tony Abbott is almost certainly going to be the prime minister of australia. An ex-journalist... oh goodie...--p.s. There appears to be an online results thing here: http://www.abc.net.au/news/federal-election-2013/map/Haha doubt it. Those polls are known to target only landlines and are probably very specific on where they pull votes from. |
06:12pm 07/09/13 Permalink
There's a huge chunk of Australia, particularly older Australia, who form a very different voting block unfortunately
At a guess I'd say that the polling groups do try to obtain their results with a huge measure of statistical validity. Whenever I get hopeful that the polls may not be representative, I remember how the republicans/fox news got themselves into a tizzy denying the statistical validity of the polls before the last US election, calling them liberal number games, then were shocked when they didn't win. Bracing for reality is best imo. |
06:16pm 07/09/13 Permalink
The polls especially Galaxy and Newspoll are deadly accurate.
|
06:17pm 07/09/13 Permalink
channel 9 claims exit polls show Coalition 55 labor 45
http://boomerangbrief.files.wordpress.com/2011/12/gillard-destroyed.jpg?w=640 |
06:21pm 07/09/13 Permalink
Bracing for reality is best imo.Been on that path for a few weeks now. Such a shame. |
06:28pm 07/09/13 Permalink
This thread convinced me to vote liberal for the first time
twas amusing watching the deputy PM's rant on channel 7 tonight |
07:06pm 07/09/13 Permalink
Been on that path for a few weeks now. Such a shame. No it isn't. |
07:15pm 07/09/13 Permalink
very early but not as bad as it could have been.
ABC coverage is all class 7s is not too terrible 9 is awful Oakes has no personality. and karl tries too hard to be funny beattie doing well hes a chance Craig Thompson 3% so far Mal Brough winning, Slipper 2% Palmer seems to be getting around 6-8% some seats ahead of the greens. still very early |
07:16pm 07/09/13 Permalink
totally team rob when it comes to the broughs
|
07:20pm 07/09/13 Permalink
This thread convinced me to vote liberal for the first time I'd have to imagine you were already thinking about voting Liberal anyway, because there really hasn't been much in these threads except rabid frothing. I couldn't imagine anyone reading these threads and getting any sort of meaningful information or deriving useful commentary from them. |
07:24pm 07/09/13 Permalink
Is something weird going on with Ch 9? They are reporting 9 seats for Lab when ABC is reporting 42.
|
07:27pm 07/09/13 Permalink
just depends how early they are willing to call a seat
|
07:33pm 07/09/13 Permalink
I am most interested to see if Greens keep Melb. I hope they do.
I wonder how much effect the Murdoch empire had on this election. They were talking about it earlier today on ABC24, saying that in some regions the only papers that are there are Murdoch papers. And it wasn't until after the boost Labor got from Rudd returning that Murdoch's papers really started the anti-Labor campaign. Also, I thought this was pretty scary. |
07:41pm 07/09/13 Permalink
The Project coverage is where it's at!
|
07:42pm 07/09/13 Permalink
Anthony Green is pretty convincing, calling it around 7PM for the Liberals.
Where I live which has been Liberal for 20 years, is still Liberal. 40% counted, 6.5% swing to the Libs. |
07:47pm 07/09/13 Permalink
I think everyone knows LNP is going to win, the question is how many seats will they win and how many ALP seats will remain.
At the moment it doesn't seem like the apocalyptic result that was talked up in the media. Sure it's nowhere near a hung parliament but ALP will still have a big presence. |
07:52pm 07/09/13 Permalink
Kroger called the election at 4:39pm and Green called it at 7:19pm. It's over. I'm watching the election coverage just for lulz.
Clive Palmer was just on tv claiming hes taking the AEC to the surpreme court to make the WA result be turned down beause his party didn't get the leve lof votes he wanted plus some other "OMG MURDOCH MEDIA OMG" conspiracy theory. Bob Katter is also threatening legal action if he loses his seat. Just when i think the level of butthurt can't get any higher, it gets higher. Labor must be getting that sinking feeling right about now. Good to see the Greens getting owned too. |
07:55pm 07/09/13 Permalink
Here's to a stagnant 3 years.
I'll probably be fighting the masses to secure a property somewhere that Labor's NBN is still scheduled to be built. |
07:58pm 07/09/13 Permalink
Clive Palmer looks set to take my seat with preferences. What in the flying f***?
I guess he at least has business experience. :/ |
08:13pm 07/09/13 Permalink
Here's to a stagnant 3 years. If by stagnant you mean no more debt? I hear ya. |
08:27pm 07/09/13 Permalink
I guess you're the type of person to never own a property because you can't buy it outright? lol
Debt is a necessity. Money is debt. |
08:29pm 07/09/13 Permalink
I liken the win tonight for the LNP as good a decision as starting shots of tequila at 2am in the morning. It's seems like a great idea at the time, but you'll regret it later!
On a positive note, at least we'll have plenty of gaffes to keep us amused over the next 3 years. |
08:31pm 07/09/13 Permalink
If by stagnant you mean no more debt? I hear ya. The libs recycled labor's plan for getting to surplus... The timeframe will be exactly the same. Without the debt, most economists that I've seen seem to think that we'd be in a much worse situation than we are now with it. |
08:33pm 07/09/13 Permalink
true that Zapo. look at Abbott's bungles just in the election campaign. Going to enjoy watching him squirm on the international stage.
|
08:33pm 07/09/13 Permalink
Debt is a necessity. Money is debt. Why is it a necessity? Money is the accepted exchange for goods and services. I work 9-5, the business pays me for my services. I then have money - they are not in debt to me, I'm not in debt to them. So how is money debt? |
08:34pm 07/09/13 Permalink
Money is created from debt. Wealth, growth.. all comes from debt. The main thing to ensure is to not allow crippling debt. Our level of debt now is well within manageable means, and it's only liberal propaganda that states otherwise.
In the long run, the spending that Labor has done will benefit us. I'll relink this, i think it was in the thread before. http://i.imgur.com/Ny35rRk.jpg |
08:38pm 07/09/13 Permalink
The LNP's slashing will be touted as reducing government debt, however in reality it is about their conservative agenda. Limiting the size of government and reducing public services will appeal to typical conservative voters, eg. those who are better off and can afford things like private hospital insurance.
What all these people who have voted for the LNP this time around have failed to realise is they are about to suffer from a loss of services that are crucial to their survival. Time will to tell if Abbott's people make a positive change to the nation when they streamline services, or if they will cut aggressively and destructively like Campbell Newman has done. |
08:46pm 07/09/13 Permalink
You think Campbell cut destructively, I think he barely made a dent.
Vash, yes debt is used for investment, assets which grow. Debt used to fund consumption sets you on the road to ruin. So if you were to say borrow money to give to your mates so they could go down to the pub or to give to your mates so they can renovate their homes that would be very wasteful and foolish. We now have an annual interest bill of $15b. Why is that? What did we get to show with all of that $300b in borrowed money? Please advise. |
08:51pm 07/09/13 Permalink
A solid result for the future of our great nation
|
09:02pm 07/09/13 Permalink
Even in that graph you supply graph Greece is sitting at the top.
Just sayin. |
09:03pm 07/09/13 Permalink
spot on dais.
Consumption is growth. It's what drives economies. The argument that most people spent the stimulus at the pub is short sighted. In reality it was spent where it was needed. in the retail sector. Renovations is a good way to spend the stimulus. Generally those goods are bought locally. The interest bill is a necessary expense, and a pittance compared to the rest of the world. Labor isn't silly with money, that's what the liberals want you to believe. |
09:04pm 07/09/13 Permalink
Even in that graph you supply graph Greece is sitting at the top.what |
09:06pm 07/09/13 Permalink
We now have an annual interest bill of $15b. Why is that? What did we get to show with all of that $300m in borrowed money? Please advise. Why do you keep asking these questions then ignoring the answers? Here is an economist explaining it in very simple to understand terms - http://www.smh.com.au/comment/australia-you-dont-know-how-good-youve-got-it-20130901-2sytb.html |
09:06pm 07/09/13 Permalink
You cannot quantity that spending vash. To claim that is not justified.
|
09:10pm 07/09/13 Permalink
We have a AAA credit rating because
a) our country didn't go into recession from exports to China (GDP kept growing causing growing tax receipts, its just that Labor's spending grew faster) ; and b) because the spendathon started from a zero net debt position. I completely reject that article cited. The concept of stimulus is total nonsense. Japan, US and Europe all tried it and it has done absolutely nothing. Somuch so in Europe that they have now dumped stimulus altogether realising that debt ridden countries simply need to STOP SPENDING on s*** they can't afford. it is such a basic logical piece of advice. Australia has been digging holes in the ground and shipping everything we could to China. if you can't figure that out then gawd... You think it was the government masterstroke of splash a bit of cash hah |
09:14pm 07/09/13 Permalink
Somuch so in Europe that they have now dumped stimulus altogether realising that debt ridden countries simply need to STOP SPENDING on s*** they can't afford. it is such a basic logical piece of advice. The article mentioned those and what happened to the economy in those sudden shock austerity cases, I don't think that you read it. There is more to economic health than exports, there is circulation and mutual propping up of businesses that can fall like dominoes if money is removed too quickly. If you knew me personally you'd know that I am hysterically anti debt except for the non-growing HECS variety, but even I see the intelligent argument to be made for high national spending in bad times, as opposed to what Howard did which was high spending in good times. |
09:17pm 07/09/13 Permalink
I completely reject that article cited.Says the guy who obviously didn't even read the whole thing. |
09:19pm 07/09/13 Permalink
09:22pm 07/09/13 Permalink
The good thing to come out of this I guess is that Labor and the independents can at least deny Abbott some of his more outrageous policies like increase uni fees and the bizarre parental scheme.
|
09:28pm 07/09/13 Permalink
looks like rudd is keeping his seat.
|
09:44pm 07/09/13 Permalink
Fpot it was less then well put but vash's graph puts greece at the top of both graphs. that is high debt, low growth.
|
09:47pm 07/09/13 Permalink
Bloody good speech, very well said and hopefully we can get Labor in soon enough!
|
10:03pm 07/09/13 Permalink
Abbott is now speaking on ABC1
ALL HAIL KING TONY ! |
10:12pm 07/09/13 Permalink
https://fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn2/1235902_431018710352909_1767328182_n.jpg
Just gotta find them horcruxes |
10:14pm 07/09/13 Permalink
Fpot it was less then well put but vash's graph puts greece at the top of both graphs. that is high debt, low growth.The graph showed that Australia has an acceptable level of debt and is managing it well. That was the point. Greece has an out of control debt that is literally plunging their country into ruin. The LNP and the Murdoch media have somehow convinced the public we are in some sort of similar scenario. It's worrying that even just a cursory glance at reality shows that this isn't the case. Now this economically sound government will implement unneeded austerity measures and oh, an incredibly expensive maternal leave system for some reason. |
10:22pm 07/09/13 Permalink
Where's that graphic about how democracy doesn't work and must be abolished..
Clearly the vast majority of Australians don't support K-Ruddles or the ALP. If they were as great and wonderful as proclaimed to be, we'd have photoshopped images of Kevin instead of Tony being posted. Tony and the LNP is the reality for the next few years (barring any double dissolution or other shenanigans). |
10:27pm 07/09/13 Permalink
well, I look forward to the forward thinking, business-centric libertarian utopia I was promised by infi Oh I'm sure any problems that the LNP government have from this point on is because of what they had to take from the previous gov and because of Labor or Greens somehow. One thing I don't understand is Australia's apparent hard on to get back in to surplus. Our debt isn't that bad by any standards and our economy is doing pretty good compared to other countries. |
10:27pm 07/09/13 Permalink
Heh, this is funny. Also apparently Hanson is set to get a senate seat?!
https://twitter.com/campricenews/status/376294452077133824/photo/1 |
10:33pm 07/09/13 Permalink
The best part is about ol Mate Clive, I look forward to further antics by him.
|
10:37pm 07/09/13 Permalink
9pm: CLIVE'S MELTDOWN: |
10:37pm 07/09/13 Permalink
well, I look forward to the forward thinking, business-centric libertarian utopia I was promised by infi now if we can just get a senate that will allow carbon tax to be removed... |
10:38pm 07/09/13 Permalink
don't worry infi,
If this Senate doesn't respect the Coalitions MANDATE to repeal the Carbon Tax... We'll make a new one. |
10:44pm 07/09/13 Permalink
The best part is about ol Mate Clive, I look forward to further antics by him. only in queensland |
10:54pm 07/09/13 Permalink
Grats to the very greedy and racist people of Australia. Wear your label of shame with pride......
Although I will say NBN co has enough monies to fund FTTH up until 2018 (inclusive) and the new government can't take it away.... |
10:58pm 07/09/13 Permalink
I've stocked up on 56K modems. If anyone wants one to use on the coalitions NBN hit me up.
I knew it was a good investment! |
11:14pm 07/09/13 Permalink
I've stocked up on 56K modems. If anyone wants one to use on the coalitions NBN hit me up. strangely enough, i still have my 56k modem. Not sure why I've hung onto it but it's there in a drawer. waiting. |
12:13am 08/09/13 Permalink
Commence reducing the number of boats by stimulating the boat building sector of the Indonesian economy!
|
01:33am 08/09/13 Permalink
So infi when should we expect a total halt to boat arrivals? Have you got a date for us?
|
02:21am 08/09/13 Permalink
It feels so weird having a competent government. I simply cant believe we have a government elect that doesbn't lie, that doesnt cheat, that doesn't spin. It almost feels not right. hahaha
Bring on the golden era of good government once again. It's time to commence operation sovereign borders. Australia is once again open for business, |
02:47am 08/09/13 Permalink
cambell newman's 'aggressive and destructive' cuts in his first budget was actually an increase in government outlays of around 1% over 2011/2012. so the queensland government increases the amount of money they spend and everyone screams blue murder over savage cuts. then in 2013/2014 we have an increase of spending of 4% over 2012/2013. this is the painful effect of government debt. everyone expects spending on services to be the same, tax rates to be the same, and debtholders to be paid but at some point in time one or all of these groups expectations are going be broken.
|
03:53am 08/09/13 Permalink
it is also unfair to put 100% of the blame for public service job losses on campbell newman. what if the next queensland government over its term in office increased government spending by 100% and doubled the size of the public service. however, they also did not increase revenues and as a result completely destroyed queensland's credit rating. the next government is elected promising to return government spending to the original amount over its term. are the resulting massive job losses the fault of the new government or the old government that irresponsibly increased the size of the public service? if this increase of the public service did not happen most of these people would have been otherwise gainfully employed and wouldn't be worrying about losing their jobs and having to find a new one. responsibility for job losses has to be shared between those that expanded the public sector and also those that reduced the public sector.
|
04:38am 08/09/13 Permalink
Shhh Hast - you're supposed to follow the mob and bemoan austerity measures.
WON'T SOMEONE THINK OF THE PUBLIC SERVICE!!!!?!?! |
04:41am 08/09/13 Permalink
So where do we get put a list for opting out of the net filter?
|
05:28am 08/09/13 Permalink
cambell newman's 'aggressive and destructive' cuts in his first budget was actually an increase in government outlays of around 1% over 2011/2012. so the queensland government increases the amount of money they spend and everyone screams blue murder over savage cuts. then in 2013/2014 we have an increase of spending of 4% over 2012/2013. this is the painful effect of government debt. everyone expects spending on services to be the same, tax rates to be the same, and debtholders to be paid but at some point in time one or all of these groups expectations are going be broken. yeah the reason there was an increase in spending was for all the payouts to the public servants, all the mates of the lnp spending on bulls*** audits of blame, and the cost of filling rehiring laid off people because they found they lack staff in some areas!! also, not sure if anyone noticed but the promised lnp budget surplus was only 1bn more the labors promised, and but magic we will earn/save 1bn when the boats stop?, I really dont think any of the budgeting will be close to what was promised, and we'll be not better off, |
08:18am 08/09/13 Permalink
Australia is once again open for business,Wait I thought that wasn't the goal of the Liberal government? Thought they wanted to cleanse the border and close it down to anyone who is in danger within their home? Also my Internet is acting up, going like molasses since last night. Have they already started turning back to dial up? |
08:48am 08/09/13 Permalink
Did not see four horsemen riding through the streets this morning or a return to burning witches and gays at the stake.
VERY DISAPPOINT |
09:02am 08/09/13 Permalink
Also my Internet is acting up, going like molasses since last night. Have they already started turning back to dial up? Heh I had the same idea this morning when everything was loading like 10x slower than normal. My mum worked the booths again this year and she said she noticed a significant increase in the amount of people who either left the sheet blank, wrote "Who f*****g cares?", or drew something (most often a penis) instead of filling out the form. She actually got one that had a porno stuffed inside it o.0 Seems like voter apathy levels were pretty high. |
09:13am 08/09/13 Permalink
OF Course!! I have the perfect solution to the boat people issue.
As each boat hits Australian waters, capture it and tie it to another one. Than continue to do that for every boat. Then, when you have 100 of these together you have yourself a floating village. Be generous though, give them solar panels and basic desalination equipment and fishing poles. Over 10 years the village will turn into a City of boat people, real boat people. Heck there would even be a generation of children born on and raised on the boats, the TRUE BOAT PEOPLE. Vote 1 Toll. |
09:24am 08/09/13 Permalink
We shall see, also no points are given for government taking credit where credit isn't due, in other words from outside influences or from policies that were set in place years ago that are only coming into fruition now. To be fair, the same shouldn't be used against the current government (and it should not have been used against the previous government). |
09:28am 08/09/13 Permalink
its f***ed, we're f***ed, im leaving.
|
09:35am 08/09/13 Permalink
It feels so weird having a competent government. I simply cant believe we have a government elect that doesbn't lie, that doesnt cheat, that doesn't spin. It almost feels not right. hahahaBring on the golden era of good government once again. It's time to commence operation sovereign borders. Australia is once again open for business, It's day 2 of the new government. They've havent doen anything yet... |
09:46am 08/09/13 Permalink
doesn't matter bro, they are going to be the best thing ever
regardless of how bad might end up being, they can just blame the previous government |
09:49am 08/09/13 Permalink
It's day 2 of the new government. They've havent doen anything yet... Please Greazy, don't be so reasonable. Didn't you get the memo, Tony is our new messiah who will bring us back to the greatest times of Australia, the 1950's! Long have we forgotten what it was like to not have women's rights, competent technology and open borders to those in dire needs. Also has Murdoch, our one true speaker of all knowledge, given his views on this new leader? Hath he broaden us with a full front page claiming victory? And why is everyone getting up Rudd for his speech being "too long" when everyone was clamoring to hear about it? |
09:49am 08/09/13 Permalink
Don't worry, we have a journalist with no experience doing anything useful in government, who has the same party name as the group that were in government during the last Chinese boom and Howard era high tax levels, so that will make the Chinese boom and Howard era high tax levels come back.
|
10:23am 08/09/13 Permalink
As each boat hits Australian waters, capture it and tie it to another one. Than continue to do that for every boat. Then, when you have 100 of these together you have yourself a floating village. Be generous though, give them solar panels and basic desalination equipment and fishing poles. We've already got the Great Pacific Garbage Patch, we could tow that in and they can also scavenge for recycling $$. We should form a party next election Toll! |
10:24am 08/09/13 Permalink
3 years of plague and pestilence... Buy gold.
|
10:29am 08/09/13 Permalink
3 years of plague and pestilence... Buy gold. Well actually, during the last coalition government Costello sold Australia's gold reserves for ~$306.00 an ounce (which now sells for about $1,300 to $1,750 an ounce) in their 'sell everything' strategy... http://www.australian-gold.com/blog/the-australian-revisits-the-costello-curse/ |
10:39am 08/09/13 Permalink
Thanks captain hindsight, what's your point? Gold has gone up in price due to all of the global stimulus money printing. No one could have foreseen that. Most other countries had been reducing their gold inventories over the same period and only started accumulating gold once again post 2008.
|
10:44am 08/09/13 Permalink
That the selling off of assets which propped up the Howard 'surplus' just left a budget with spending commitments which could not be paid for, and resulted in some really bad deals for Australians (but ohmygod they are perfect masters at money and would never make such massive mistakes, only labor does that).
|
10:48am 08/09/13 Permalink
Whining Labor supporters ... really showing Australia's elite mentality.
Wonder if those last few words have ever been strung together before? |
10:51am 08/09/13 Permalink
It's day 2 of the new government. They've havent doen anything yet... Sorry what? Kevin Rudd is still our Prime Minister and will be until the new government is sworn in. Also the election was last night, not 2 days ago. Nice counting. I am still in disbelief that we ACTUALLY have an incoming competent government, this feels like a dream. Whining Labor supporters ... really showing Australia's elite mentality.Wonder if those last few words have ever been strung together before? I'v never seen so much butthurt in my life. The funniest thing is that most of them still actually believe Labor was a good government........... |
11:03am 08/09/13 Permalink
Thanks captain hindsight, what's your point? Gold has gone up in price due to all of the global stimulus money printing. No one could have foreseen that. Most other countries had been reducing their gold inventories over the same period and only started accumulating gold once again post 2008. his point is that selling assets isn't the best way to get out of debt long term assests like land, housing and gold have all increased long term |
11:13am 08/09/13 Permalink
Please explain how they were "bad" in any sense? I still have a job, Australia is still plotting along nicely and hell isn't coming down from the skies so I'm not quite sure that Australia was as bad as the Coalition were claiming?
I know Australia wanted a change, that was pretty clear last night. Who knows how Abbott and his party will lead, what their policies will do to this country and how many lives are going to be affected because of this change. Who knows if it will be good for Australia, and whether their cutting spree will help or hinder the future of Australia. This is the best part of democracy, citizens get to choose the future of their country and so we will have to wait and see. Though to be fair, if Coalition screw up everyone will be out for blood. |
11:15am 08/09/13 Permalink
I am still in disbelief that we ACTUALLY have an incoming fear-mongering, homophobic, backwards thinking luddite government with a 1950's style view of equality, this feels like a dream.
It is what it is though I guess, just have to look forwards to the next election when a new generation of progressive thinking young people are allowed to vote, hopefully thats enough to swing the needle back to something less embarassing. |
11:17am 08/09/13 Permalink
Though to be fair, if Coalition screw up everyone will be out for blood. Nah they have at least 6 years, they will blame the previous government and a hostile senate for any woes. |
11:22am 08/09/13 Permalink
It feels so weird having a competent government. I simply cant believe we have a government elect that doesbn't lie, that doesnt cheat, that doesn't spin. It almost feels not right. hahaha I am still in disbelief that we ACTUALLY have an incoming competent government, this feels like a dream. Good thing you don't froth. |
11:32am 08/09/13 Permalink
Please Greazy, don't be so reasonable. Didn't you get the memo, Tony is our new messiah who will bring us back to the greatest times of Australia, the 1950's! Long have we forgotten what it was like to not have women's rights, competent technology and open borders to those in dire needs.Also has Murdoch, our one true speaker of all knowledge, given his views on this new leader? Hath he broaden us with a full front page claiming victory? And why is everyone getting up Rudd for his speech being "too long" when everyone was clamoring to hear about it? Yeah we get it eorl, you hate Abbot/Liberals. Your constant sarcasm is getting old and grating. I'v never seen so much butthurt in my life. The funniest thing is that most of them still actually believe Labor was a good government........... Apologies, I don't know THAT much about politics. My comment is still valid though, you believe they're competent != actual competency. In a years time we can look back and maybe then argue about this again. |
11:49am 08/09/13 Permalink
I agree that the Coalition NBN is very backward but just because they wont pass a law to allow pinko's to get married is that really 'homophobic'?
I'm actually for gays being able to marry because homosexuality or marriage doesn't bother me - each to his own. What does bother me is that has been used as a diversion by both parties so they don't have to talk about serious issues such as Australia's manufacturing recession, growing unemployment, unaffordable housing caused by Negative Gearing. |
11:50am 08/09/13 Permalink
I went down the street this morning to get a coffee. Not one f*****g boat in site. Tonys plan must be working already.
|
11:53am 08/09/13 Permalink
just because they wont pass a law to allow pinko's to get married is that really 'homophobic' I got nothing here. Quote will do. What does bother me is that has been used as a diversion by both parties so they don't have to talk about serious issues such as Australia's manufacturing recession, growing unemployment, unaffordable housing caused by Negative Gearing. STAHP THE BOATRTTSS!! |
11:54am 08/09/13 Permalink
Boats are a major problem. Look at the horrendous traffic on our roads.
|
11:58am 08/09/13 Permalink
STOP THE VOTES
http://www.news.com.au/breaking-news/national/informal-vote-up-to-almost-6-per-cent-aec/story-e6frfku9-1226714577670 A few members of the Coalition cabinet are in favour of removing Compulsory Voting, is it time for a change ? I didn't vote yesterday. |
12:02pm 08/09/13 Permalink
I put a stupid bet on that informal vote would be between 5 and 6%. Wtf
You are so scathing of Rudd and Gillard Faceman and yet you didn't vote. Why? |
12:07pm 08/09/13 Permalink
Yeah we get it eorl, you hate Abbot/Liberals. Your constant sarcasm is getting old and grating.I don't necessarily hate the Liberal party, more so just hate the head of that party. I'd be happy for Turnbull to lead and probably would have voted for him if he had of, as I agree with a fair few of their policies when it comes to economical management (in some regards). Don't worry though, I'll probably be leaving the comments now as its pretty clear what Australia wants and we'll see how it plays out. |
12:08pm 08/09/13 Permalink
The head of the party is trivial ... you do realize how quickly they were able to out Rudd and then bring him back in, right? This isn't America. We aren't voting for a mighty president. You vote for the party, not the person in Australia.
I agree that your comments are grating. Discussing politics is a sure way to make people hate you. You're probably young, so one day you'll see why I barely often an opinion at all these days. Or maybe you won't. Who knows, we'll see how it plays out. |
12:14pm 08/09/13 Permalink
Think I found Door/SheerObesity?
http://video.news.com.au/2404739340 HE'S SO EXCITED ABOUT NEW GOVERNMENT! |
12:16pm 08/09/13 Permalink
The head of the party is trivial ... you do realize how quickly they were able to out Rudd and then bring him back in, right? This isn't America. We aren't voting for a mighty president. You vote for the party, not the person in Australia.I agree that your comments are grating. Discussing politics is a sure way to make people hate you. You're probably young, so one day you'll see why I barely often an opinion at all these days. Or maybe you won't. Who knows, we'll see how it plays out. How old are you? You sound like a crusty old f***. <3 |
12:18pm 08/09/13 Permalink
http://www.speedtest.net/result/2952123442.png
The promise and hope of this for everyone was good while it lasted :( |
12:30pm 08/09/13 Permalink
I don't like Compulsory Voting, Government has no power to force you to vote.
Its Tyranny. I guess my views are similar to the Free Man Movement. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freemen_on_the_land |
12:30pm 08/09/13 Permalink
A few members of the Coalition cabinet are in favour of removing Compulsory Voting, is it time for a change ? I'm absolutely dead against the idea of removing compulsory voting. I think the system as it stands is fine, and at best it could do with a very slight tweak. I think the idea that you need to get checked off that you have exercised your right to vote is what we should be expecting in Australia - if we were to remove 'compulsory' voting, at most it should be via a box which says "I do not wish to contribute a vote to this election" - that you should still be required to attend a voting place and be marked off as having made a decision not to vote. I do not believe that asking people to vote a few times every few years (council, state, federal) is much to ask for citizenship. In fact, what I saw at the polling booths yesterday - husbands standing over wives almost as though they're forcing their partners to vote a particular way they agree with - would be further exaggerated if we allowed people to not vote by not turning up, as you'd get people pressured or held back from voting and unwilling to report this going on. |
12:34pm 08/09/13 Permalink
Think I found Door/SheerObesity? Ha ha yeah I watched that's this morning. He got up there easily. Go door/sheer/possum you good thing. |
12:35pm 08/09/13 Permalink
Faceman Didn't vote? Cool you no longer have the ability to complain about any government action until you do. Not without being a massive hypocrite anyway.
|
12:47pm 08/09/13 Permalink
I'm absolutely dead against the idea of removing compulsory voting. I think the system as it stands is fine, and at best it could do with a very slight tweak. I think the idea that you need to get checked off that you have exercised your right to vote is what we should be expecting in Australia - if we were to remove 'compulsory' voting, at most it should be via a box which says "I do not wish to contribute a vote to this election" - that you should still be required to attend a voting place and be marked off as having made a decision not to vote. Pretty much what I think. Either make voting non compulsory or give people the choice to express their dissatisfaction with all options by actually being able to formally say "no party is worthy of my vote". It's easier than turning up, writing "D*******s" on the voting slip and drawing lines to the names of the Labor and Liberal representatives while leaving all the boxes blank. |
01:00pm 08/09/13 Permalink
Think I found Door/SheerObesity?http://video.news.com.au/2404739340HE'S SO EXCITED ABOUT NEW GOVERNMENT! They didn't really need to tackle me i just wanted a quick chat and a photo. Yes i shouldn't have been up there, but i was excited for our new competent government. |
01:06pm 08/09/13 Permalink
Faceman Didn't vote? Cool you no longer have the ability to complain about any government action until you do. Not without being a massive hypocrite anyway. force me to vote or take away my right to criticise the government ? you should be ashamed of that. |
01:18pm 08/09/13 Permalink
With non-compulsory voting, the onus is then on the parties to persuade a voter to vote for them instead of as is currently the case, voters simply voting for the least worst to avoid a fine.
|
01:21pm 08/09/13 Permalink
its f***ed, we're f***ed, im leaving. Haha spook has to leave now, will be interesting to see where you go |
01:24pm 08/09/13 Permalink
With non-compulsory voting, the onus is then on the parties to persuade a voter to vote for them instead of as is currently the case, voters simply voting for the least worst to avoid a fine. Informal voting is increasing making the whole thing more of a farce. |
01:33pm 08/09/13 Permalink
Personally, I still havn't registered to vote.
Firstly, I don't own a car and I can't be f***ed walking for 30 minutes to the local polling booths (30 mins both ways, that is). Secondly, Until recently I havn't given a single s*** about politics because it's generally just douche VS turd sandwich. Thirdly, the tired old "My vote won't change anything". I'm not going to waste half a day on my weekend to go and vote when it won't actually matter in the big picture. *shrug* call me lazy. Won't stop me complaining about politics though. |
01:33pm 08/09/13 Permalink
With non-compulsory voting, the onus is then on the parties to persuade a voter to vote for them instead of as is currently the case, voters simply voting for the least worst to avoid a fine.with compulsory voting, crazy interest groups or rich people can more easily leverage government by incentivising within their groups or using vast sums of money. There's little actual evidence to show one is a "better" option than the other; it's possible to poke holes in both sides. i don't feel like it imposes unduly on my liberty to be required to participate in maintaining it. Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time. |
01:36pm 08/09/13 Permalink
I prefer the other D,
Dictatorship! But seriously, if democracy is the worst then what is better? Unless I'm misunderstanding and you actually mean democracy is the worst but it works. |
02:09pm 08/09/13 Permalink
02:12pm 08/09/13 Permalink
Thirdly, the tired old "My vote won't change anything". I'm not going to waste half a day on my weekend to go and vote when it won't actually matter in the big picture so what if the other 15 million of us all thought the same thing? |
02:56pm 08/09/13 Permalink
If nobody voted then the Election would become void and the current Government would remain in caretaker mode until another government could be formed, most likely by another Election (where hopefully someone would turn up to vote) or I think the GG can direct one of the Leaders to form a Government, the GG still heads the Government even if there isn't one.
|
03:03pm 08/09/13 Permalink
(it was a rhetorical question to point out how retarded that mentality is facey)
but thanks for that |
03:09pm 08/09/13 Permalink
Personally, I still havn't registered to vote.Firstly, I don't own a car and I can't be f***ed walking for 30 minutes to the local polling booths (30 mins both ways, that is).Secondly, Until recently I havn't given a single s*** about politics because it's generally just douche VS turd sandwich.Thirdly, the tired old "My vote won't change anything". I'm not going to waste half a day on my weekend to go and vote when it won't actually matter in the big picture.*shrug* call me lazy. Won't stop me complaining about politics though. You and the other half a million others who haven't enrolled wouldn't make the slightest difference in the polls. |
03:11pm 08/09/13 Permalink
So we have instant precedent with the LNP's NBN and their paid parental leave that no policy is too stupid or ill-thought out for this political party. I was just trying to think of other comedy policies that could possibly come up during their term. One that came to mind is relaxing gun restrictions. Is there any possibility of that do you reckon?
|
03:26pm 08/09/13 Permalink
What about the whacky Tropo Tax for Darwin?
|
03:36pm 08/09/13 Permalink
I think those who don't want Women to paid what they are worth clearly have an issue with Women who make more money than they do.
98% of Women earn less than $100 000 I doubt we will see an avalanche of Women taking the money. I think it also encourages young Women to aim high and not worry about pregnancy terminating their career and lifestyle. |
03:40pm 08/09/13 Permalink
Oh there are heaps of silly policies to choose from bro but I thought for the sake of brevity I should just keep it to two.
|
03:49pm 08/09/13 Permalink
Half a day to vote? I think you're doing it wrong.. Took like 5 minutes tops and I got a pig in blanket.
|
03:55pm 08/09/13 Permalink
98% of Women earn less than $100 000 Pft, it wouldn't be a much higher percentage of men making more than that either. In australia, the '99%' mark is $190,000. As in, only 1% of the population earn over $190,000. We have a very flat bell shaped curve in Australia. |
04:23pm 08/09/13 Permalink
I think those who don't want Women to paid what they are worth clearly have an issue with Women who make more money than they do. And that's because you can only think in ridiculous rhetorical cliches when people disagree with you. |
04:32pm 08/09/13 Permalink
ever dated a chick that made more money than you Nerfy ?
|
05:13pm 08/09/13 Permalink
I don't know if I'd call the on and off again thing with your mother 'dating' exactly.
|
05:29pm 08/09/13 Permalink
I do facey, what is your point?
As a wise man once put it "breed on your own coin" |
05:38pm 08/09/13 Permalink
i wish my missus made more money than i did
|
06:07pm 08/09/13 Permalink
mine does. it feels good because every time I spend money it's actually mostly hers.
|
06:27pm 08/09/13 Permalink
bring on the swearing in! Lets get down to business
|
07:11pm 08/09/13 Permalink
I want to find out
a) who will be the star studded cabinet lineup for the Coalition and b) who will lead the broken and depressed ALP. |
07:27pm 08/09/13 Permalink
I want to find outa) who will be the star studded cabinet lineup for the Coalition It's going to be headed by an ex-journalist with no business or remotely regular employment experience, who had to mortgage his house when his income dropped from front bencher to opposition which is still in the top percent of all australian incomes, who struggles with credible science when it's not compatible with his pre-decided answers derived from political ideologies, definitely starting with a "star" there laaaaawl. |
07:42pm 08/09/13 Permalink
Faceman still in this thread? The man didn't vote, he had a chance to have his say and chose not to take it, perhaps spend your time at the NRL tipping thread since you have no input to this government for the next 3 years or so.
|
07:45pm 08/09/13 Permalink
Time to lock this thread and open the next chapter.
Post Apocalypse Thread. |
07:46pm 08/09/13 Permalink
His nrl and sport knowledge in general is about as credible
|
07:47pm 08/09/13 Permalink
Don't worry Paveway, Im sure the ALP are just in a rebuilding phase.
|
08:15pm 08/09/13 Permalink
It isn't about credibility, to be honest Faceman had a fairly OK grasp on the situation here. However he turned away having a valid opinion on this next government as he chose not to vote, for shame.
|
08:23pm 08/09/13 Permalink
struggles with credible science when it's not compatible with his pre-decided answers derived from political ideologies, definitely starting with a "star" there laaaaawl. So you think it's a good idea to push up co2 emissions with a tax? May as well tax you for breathing. You do realise that the air was once100% co2 right? I tried to point out that's it's not a simple case of x causes y therefore reduce x. Here's a website that actually has peer reviewed articles from 2013 http://www.climatedepot.com/2013/05/14/co2-nears-400-ppm-relax-its-not-global-warming-end-times-but-only-a-big-yawn-climate-depot-special-report/ |
08:38pm 08/09/13 Permalink
08:40pm 08/09/13 Permalink
ryan is such a safe liberal electorate so i went with my standard voting method and drew a giant d*** on the green paper. then i voted above the line for the palmer united comedy senate option because i cbf numbering wikileaks/pirate party/sex party and all the other independents i would rather support
|
08:47pm 08/09/13 Permalink
Ignoring Door Jr's now-obvious trolling,
Faceman which scientists predicted an "Ice Free Arctic by 2013"? :/ The only thing that I could find was predicting a higher rate of ice coverage this year, but a dropping trend http://www.livescience.com/39147-arctic-sea-ice-melting.html The Arctic is losing about 30,000 square miles (78,000 square kilometers) — an area roughly equivalent to the state of Maine — of sea ice each year, NASA scientists say. And while ice cover at the North Pole has rebounded from last year's record-setting lows, Arctic sea ice continues to retreat and thin at an alarming pace. One single scientist predicted in the 2050's that sea ice might drop very low - http://phys.org/news/2013-08-ice-free-arctic-2050s.html --- In unrelated news. |
09:04pm 08/09/13 Permalink
I completely reject that article cited. The concept of stimulus is total nonsense. Japan, US and Europe all tried it and it has done absolutely nothing. As much as I like to agree with you infi how can you make statements like this that are factually wrong. Still, the expansion fell short of analysts’ expectations for Japan, whose economy grew at a robust pace of 3.8 percent in the previous quarter, helped by the Abe government’s monetary and fiscal stimulus drive. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/12/business/global/economic-expansion-slows-down-in-japan.html?_r=0 There are plenty of other examples for Europe as well. |
09:06pm 08/09/13 Permalink
Still, the expansion fell short of analysts’ expectations for Japan, whose economy grew at a robust pace of 3.8 percent in the previous quarter, helped by the Abe government’s monetary and fiscal stimulus drive. Japan has been engaged in stimulus spending since the 90s. Their economy is bound to turn a corner at some point. Attributing it to stimulus is just silly. Look at Japan's debt % of GDP... ryan is such a safe liberal electorate so i went with my standard voting method and drew a giant d*** on the green paper. then i voted above the line for the palmer united comedy senate option because i cbf numbering wikileaks/pirate party/sex party and all the other independents i would rather support In the booth I worked at one voter placed another box below all of the candidates, marked it one and inserted the name: "Muthaf*** s*** c*** d*** suck f***" I should have happy snapped it |
09:08pm 08/09/13 Permalink
So you think it's a good idea to push up co2 emissions with a tax? May as well tax you for breathing. You do realise that the air was once100% co2 right? I tried to point out that's it's not a simple case of x causes y therefore reduce x.haha, that website cites the Daily Mail. Credible! Hey pjano, did you know that the Earth was once a big ball of flaming gas before it formed into a planet? Just as relevant as that thing you mentioned for some reason! We needed another science denying retard, and you are a special one who tried to posture himself as some sort of scientific person with that whole I read scientific papers charade. Hey pjano, I am gonna let you in on a little secret, I think you might have been lying about that. |
09:19pm 08/09/13 Permalink
09:21pm 08/09/13 Permalink
This post has been removed.
Reason: boring |
09:39pm 08/09/13 Permalink
This post has been removed.
Reason: boring |
10:03pm 08/09/13 Permalink
10:41pm 08/09/13 Permalink
11:16pm 08/09/13 Permalink
Make another thread if you want to discuss Socialist Science Nerfy.
Im looking forward to Direct Action. Who doesn't like Trees ? (apart from fake environmentalists) |
01:09am 09/09/13 Permalink
01:15am 09/09/13 Permalink
Refusing to admit defeat on a close count, wow how incompetent......................
|
01:29am 09/09/13 Permalink
We needed another science denying retard so ironic that you call me a science denying retard when you shrug off the papers I posted. I am done with you, how do I add you to my ignore list? |
07:44am 09/09/13 Permalink
Make another thread if you want to discuss Socialist Science Nerfy. You're the one who talked about it....... Then you have a go at others when they ask for evidence that you're not just making s*** up... Slippery. |
07:46am 09/09/13 Permalink
looks like the liberals are going to have a very bad time passing policy through this tasty looking senate. haha.
|
08:46am 09/09/13 Permalink
ryan is such a safe liberal electorate so i went with my standard voting method and drew a giant d*** on the green paper. then i voted above the line for the palmer united comedy senate option because i cbf numbering wikileaks/pirate party/sex party and all the other independents i would rather supportthank you for taking such great care with your vote just kidding, treating it like its a joke so you can get a couple cheap laughs when you tell people what you did isn't so awesome after all |
08:58am 09/09/13 Permalink
the main reason we should be reducing CO2 is to stop ocean acidification, temperature rise causes an increase of CO2 release
|
09:01am 09/09/13 Permalink
Agreed with troggles. Believe 97% of the worlds climate scientists or faceman? You decide.
I'm curious about what implications this balance of power in the senate will have for the libs. I think Abbott's poor negotiation skills will be a challenge for him to pass policy. |
09:15am 09/09/13 Permalink
In contrast I had a friend talk to each of the leaflet handing out people and ask about the issues affecting her (environment mostly) and what their party policy is on it. Armed with that information she made an informed vote. Unfortunate that the approach she took is so out of ordinary when compared with drawing d**** and "WHY BOTHER" across the voting paper.. |
09:17am 09/09/13 Permalink
if they remove compulsory voting i'll happily stay home and not draw d**** on papers
being forced to take a small amount of my time to vote once every few years under threat of financial retribution? this is not democracy, this is tyranny! |
09:45am 09/09/13 Permalink
that's a huge inconvenience for you jum. What if you were called up for jury duty? It's a citizen's responsibility to vote and to participate in the justice of criminals in our court system.
I'd gladly take an extremely small amount of time out of my every day life to express my beliefs & opinions in the electoral and court system. If you dont care to do the same then it's best you escape to America, land under the illusion of "free" |
09:50am 09/09/13 Permalink
Am I missing something with the senate?
It looks like the coalition are on track for 33 of 76 seats, with 7 senators unaffiliated with the greens or labour. I don't think the LNP is going to struggle to get one of those senators to vote with them on any given issue. |
09:55am 09/09/13 Permalink
if they remove compulsory voting i'll happily stay home and not draw d**** on papersIt is the (tiny, insignificant) cost you're asked to pay to help ensure an outcome for you and your fellow citizens that best reflects the makeup of our society. I believe in civil liberties and personal freedom wherever possible, but I'm prepared to sacrifice some of my time for the citizens I share the country with so that my views are represented. I find it bizarre that there are just no issues that people care about enough to do it properly. Saying "it's a safe seat" is the catchcry of the lazy; unless you're out there making your voice heard then of course it will remain that way. If you agree with the incumbent then fine, but surely it behooves you to support them - and if you disagree then it is utter madness to not support another candidate. (I often wonder how much of this is some weird psychological artifact where people simply don't want to have to vote for someone they feel is going to lose - they want to mentally identify with being on the "winning side" so there's some weird sort of snowball effect in situations like this.) Anyway, I can't judge too harshly - I was cavalier about voting when I was younger (though never fake-voted). I look back at myself with shame because of how little I paid attention to who I was voting for. |
09:56am 09/09/13 Permalink
Greens + Labor are 35 total, and there will be a few left leaning independents as well, and Palmer candidates which lean right. I think it'll be tight on the votes. |
10:05am 09/09/13 Permalink
It is the (tiny, insignificant) cost you're asked to pay to help ensure an outcome for you and your fellow citizens that best reflects the makeup of our society. If you ask the AEC officials, they might tell you our society appears to be made up of nascent artists with a predilection for the human phallus. |
10:06am 09/09/13 Permalink
Yeah Maybe, but Green and Labor have a rocky relationship right now. I wouldn't count them as voting block just yet. Also at least in Victoria the car guy has right leaning tendencies. The guy in NSW is from the LDP which wants more free market capitalism.
It might not be clear cut but I wouldn't call it hostile to the LNP. |
10:11am 09/09/13 Permalink
The Greens will typically agree on Labor with voting against the removal of the carbon & mining taxes, which will certainly be a first of the few to show up when parliament sits.
Then Abbott's going to have to make alot of concession to the independents to get them to swing to their position, effectively a hung situation like before. It's amazing Gillard got so much policy through with a hung parliament. |
10:15am 09/09/13 Permalink
Yeah cause Palmer's such a fan of mining and carbon taxes. I don't think he is going to struggle there to be honest, at least once the new senate sits.
|
10:18am 09/09/13 Permalink
Is there an easier way to find out who the "Other" seats belong to? 2 of them are with Palmer from what i can see.
|
10:24am 09/09/13 Permalink
If you ask the AEC officials, they might tell you our society appears to be made up of nascent artists with a predilection for the human phallus.wait a minute this explains everything everyone was drawing d**** on the ballot no wonder Abbott got in |
10:30am 09/09/13 Permalink
Yeah I really don't know.
Looking at the swing to the liberals in the lower house, it doesn't explain the wipe out. But the senate is making a bit of sense. The swing to independent parties was massive but not many independents in the lower house and a big clean up for liberal suggests to me that a decent segment of the population thinks Abbott isn't right wing enough, and has been elected by forced preference flows. Left to the parties preference flows the senate has picked up large number of independents or 'others'. Seems pretty safe to say that PUP and the liberal democrats sit to the right of the LNP, I would be shocked if an independent for the sports enthusiast party in WA turns out to be left wing. No way to know until they start voting I guess. |
10:47am 09/09/13 Permalink
Very interesting to see if The Greens and ALP decide to block the carbon tax legislation, they're both obviously on side for it to remain.
Abbott's made some big calls about this (day 1 etc etc) so delaying until the new senate will be a bit of a downer for him ... but sending the people back the polls over it will piss off the voters and may not guarantee a senate favorable to the changes. |
11:01am 09/09/13 Permalink
Abbott won't call a double dissolution election, it's all tough talk. No PM in their right mind would ever jeopardise their government over a single issue. Howard had multiple DD triggers.
|
11:05am 09/09/13 Permalink
PUP are not further right than LNP, they are pro welfare and I think Palmer is fairly socially liberal. Family First are definitely extreme right. I think if you go by the colour scheme blue and most of the white is right wing and anything else is more left. It'll be a pretty close Senate and Abbott will have to negotiate terms to get things through which he will be terrible at.
I'm pretty upset that I have to now apparently pay attention to the Australian Motoring Enthusiasts Party and The Australian Sports party. How f*****g bogan can we get? |
11:13am 09/09/13 Permalink
Very interesting to see if The Greens and ALP decide to block the carbon tax legislation, they're both obviously on side for it to remain. but the carbon tax is epic fail |
11:31am 09/09/13 Permalink
Labor will dump the Carbon Tax.
The Public has said No to it. Labor will never get elected with its Power Bill Tax. Its over for that stuff. The Greens vote fell by 25% this Election. Of all the Partys they should have increased their vote because they finally got to share power with a Government in both houses and demonstrate their competence. They need to go back to genuine Environmentalism. |
11:31am 09/09/13 Permalink
Abbot should just bite the bullet and do a DD. Get rid of the Green/Labor balance of power alliance who obviously don't support mandates and don't support what the people want.
|
11:52am 09/09/13 Permalink
The senate is a representation of the people as well. the fact it is so close and doesn't have a coalition majority shows people are undecided.
a DD would just result in the same balance, perhaps Abbott losing more seats due to the inconvenience of going to the ballot again, but who knows, with enough money into the media's pockets they could blame this senate result on Labor too! Also, FaceMan, supporting a Carbon tax is an environmentalist policy. Though i dont consider myself an environmentalist, i support a carbon tax. |
11:57am 09/09/13 Permalink
Labor will dump the Carbon Tax. What are you on about? Adam Bandt won his seat outright in Melbourne despite Liberal preferencing Labor and they picked up an extra Victorian senate seat. There's a couple of seats still to be counted and they might get from 10 up to 12 seats in the senate. Abbot should just bite the bullet and do a DD. Get rid of the Green/Labor balance of power alliance who obviously don't support mandates and don't support what the people want. You are aware that people vote for the senate too? |
12:12pm 09/09/13 Permalink
The abc is just a model based on everyone voting above the line. So it may not quite turn out that way depending on voting below the line. Still a lottery though
The Greens lost the protest vote to Palmer effectively. Which is fair enough as they spent the last 3 years trying to reposition themselves as a policy alternative and not a protest party. Some leakage of votes was inevitable. There was slight gains in many rural areas which was interesting. Still hoping Mirabella loses Indi. |
12:20pm 09/09/13 Permalink
Time to lock this thread and open the next chapter.
Post Apocalypse Thread. As prev posted: http://imageshack.us/a/img849/7079/4isi.jpg |
12:27pm 09/09/13 Permalink
Can we all just be honest for a second and admit that the country probably WON'T see that many changes, and your lives will barely change at all?
Freaking drama queens. |
12:40pm 09/09/13 Permalink
I am conflicted though, because as much as I think Abbott's an incompetent, petty minded, arrogant, dangerously stupid, snide, brainfarting reptilian s*** stain, I would vigourously make love to all of his daughters either individually or as a group.
|
12:42pm 09/09/13 Permalink
Sales in kleenex will sky rocket over the next three years if this thread is anything to by.
|
01:06pm 09/09/13 Permalink
i don't get the senate voting
a lot of people must just vote for random senate parties just for the f*** of it or what? |
01:08pm 09/09/13 Permalink
I am conflicted though, because as much as I think Abbott's an incompetent, petty minded, arrogant, dangerously stupid, snide, brainfarting reptilian s*** stain, I would vigourously make love to all of his daughters either individually or as a group.ahahahah |
01:13pm 09/09/13 Permalink
01:30pm 09/09/13 Permalink
Can we all just be honest for a second and admit that the country probably WON'T see that many changes, and your lives will barely change at all? are you mad man? have you been outside since Saturday. It's f*****g chaos out there on the streets. prepare yourself, buy batteries and one of my great 56K modems, currently on special. |
01:40pm 09/09/13 Permalink
i don't get the senate voting a lot of people must just vote for random senate parties just for the f*** of it or what? Yeah the senate calculation is pretty complex from what I've gathered. Then there's something Antony Green from the ABC was saying - one of the nutter parties with a name that looked similar to the Libs managed to score the first position on the ballot paper, picked up the donkey vote and polled 9% as a result. everyone was drawing d**** on the ballot lol Still hoping Mirabella loses Indi. Amen. Even for LNP standards she comes across as such a petty, mean excuse for a human being. |
01:50pm 09/09/13 Permalink
"Ricky Muir, the likely Victorian senator from the Australian Motoring Enthusiast Party, who would take his place in July next year, appears to have a more colourful past than most.
In a video taken from his YouTube account, which was made private soon after the election on Saturday night, Mr Muir appears to be filmed taking part in a backyard kangaroo faeces fight. The video, titled "Family Fight in Australia", appears to depict the likely senator, who sports a thick moustache and goatee, running around a garden with his friends, who are hurling kangaroo faeces and laughing hysterically." |
02:01pm 09/09/13 Permalink
> Abbots incompetent
> Hasn't made a single mistake > Hasn't even been sworn in. |
02:11pm 09/09/13 Permalink
"Ricky Muir, the likely Victorian senator from the Australian Motoring Enthusiast Party, who would take his place in July next year, appears to have a more colourful past than most. laugh and think, this is straya. |
02:13pm 09/09/13 Permalink
That's amusing Sheer, there's plenty of content in the other thread depicting his character and incompetency in doing research on anything he talks about.
There's alot of hate for him for a reason. |
02:14pm 09/09/13 Permalink
laugh and think, this is straya. representative democracy in action |
02:15pm 09/09/13 Permalink
one of the nutter parties with a name that looked similar to the Libs managed to score the first position on the ballot paper, picked up the donkey vote and polled 9% as a result. liberal democratic party? i think they're pro gun and marijuana. |
02:15pm 09/09/13 Permalink
02:16pm 09/09/13 Permalink
if they remove compulsory voting i'll happily stay home and not draw d**** on papers dude, if it is that much of a f*****g hassle, become a silent voter, then you'll get a postal vote each time and you'll have a week or so to draw a really detailed d*** on the page also, really, think of something better to draw, if youre really good it might make some counter happy! on a side not related to the above d*** drawing d***, this year i counted for brisbane, and the amount of informals with drawings were very limited, most of them were blank, two had just one box numbered, and one had an extra box drawn in, and a vote for putin, there was also a lack of d*** and balls drawn in the booths, infact, very little was vandalised |
02:18pm 09/09/13 Permalink
liberal democratic party? i think they're pro gun and marijuana. pro cannabis people are pretty amusing, I was talking to one guy who tried to convince me that tobacco and alcohol are the worst things ever while cannabis is completely harmless |
03:12pm 09/09/13 Permalink
> Abbots incompetent> Hasn't made a single mistake> Hasn't even been sworn in. http://powerhouse.theglobalmail.org/dust-settles-on-the-low-moral-ground/ |
03:18pm 09/09/13 Permalink
Yeah those wacky guys.
Real talk: cannabis being legal or illegal makes little difference to me. If you want it you can get it despite its legality. It just seems silly to me how the government will say alcohol and tobacco is okay yet for some reason weed isn't. It isn't harmless, that's ridiculous, but it's certainly less harmful in a physical and social sense than tobacco and alcohol (especially if you vape, which you should be). Whenever someone states they are against cannabis legalisation I ask them if they drink or smoke. If they say no, good for them, they are anti-drug so not wanting weed to be added is a good logical course of action to take. If they say yes, well, I have never heard a convincing argument from someone who thinks it is okay for alcohol/tobacco to be legal but not cannabis. Legalising it would mean that the gubbernment could tax the hell out of it for phat stax, and it would also go someway to eliminating the current black-market sale of it. I guess that depends if the black-market can undercut the legal stuff. |
03:23pm 09/09/13 Permalink
if they remove compulsory voting i'll happily stay home and not draw d**** on papers To add to what Trog said: Compulsory voting is the price you pay to stop loud minorities controlling the process. If you look at US elections, a large amount of the effort is spent on 'getting out the base'. This means that issues that can motivate people to vote get the attention at the expense of more important things. Just one critical example: you won't generally get a lot of people to vote as pro-choice. People who are pro-choice tend to be multiple issue voters, and they might not even choose to vote. "Pro-life" people are told by their church that they will go to hell if they don't go vote for the pro-life candidate. This gives churches far more political power than they would have based just on numbers alone. This is why the US Republican party has allied itself with the social conservative forces over the last 30 years or so. George W Bush starting going to church when he decided to run for president, and stopped going once his 8 years were up. If everyone has to vote, you have to at least try to appeal to 50% of the country. If only people angry enough to vote turn up, you only have to appeal to 50% of angry people, and s*** starts going downhill fast at that point. |
03:24pm 09/09/13 Permalink
Not buying it.
You already only have to appeal to swinging voters in under a third of seats, a quite small portion of the population actually influences the outcome of an election in AU. We could do with a little less institutional- / auto-voting to stir more seats up. What they need to do is make voting secure and electronic imo, pre-polling is going through the roof because election day voting is such a pain in the arse. Its a hard fit with the anonymous vote principle but its doable imo. |
03:35pm 09/09/13 Permalink
liberal democratic party? i think they're pro gun and marijuana. I was looking at their website, they actually seem pretty interesting. Of course, the pro gun thing is a bit extreme but everything else is pretty much what you would want out of a mixed party. They seem to be interested in economic smarts (though have yet to be proven if they can succeed) and switched on when it comes to social issues like pro euthanasia and pro gay marriage. Always wondered why we haven't had a party in government that is a mix of both Labor and Liberal, would that possibly work? |
03:37pm 09/09/13 Permalink
Liberal Democratic Party are classic "libertarians" - they believe in as little government regulation and intervention as possible to permit a free market / society to operate.
I love the ideal, but it doesn't generally lead to the sort of outcomes that I'd consider "fair" for society. |
03:53pm 09/09/13 Permalink
You already only have to appeal to swinging voters in under a third of seats, a quite small portion of the population actually influences the outcome of an election in AU. We could do with a little less institutional- / auto-voting to stir more seats up.Yeh. It is sad to me that EVERY voter is not a swinging voter. I don't know how dyed-in-the-wool Liberal voters can stand themselves given how non-liberal the Liberal party is. (I found it interesting that that Liberal Democratic guy mentioned above left the Liberal party for their crushing of his liberties.) What they need to do is make voting secure and electronic imo, pre-polling is going through the roof because election day voting is such a pain in the arse. Its a hard fit with the anonymous vote principle but its doable imo.The more I read about e-voting the more I dislike it. I used to really want it but all the Smart People Who Know Stuff About Digital Voting who I read are still down on it for what seem like pretty solid reasons. Also, maybe it's different up north but voting in BNE was painless. I had the longest line I've ever waited in at an election and it still took me prolly less than 15 minutes from start to finish, a big chunk of which was filling out those damn 82 boxes. |
04:18pm 09/09/13 Permalink
The more I read about e-voting the more I dislike it. I used to really want it but all the Smart People Who Know Stuff About Digital Voting who I read are still down on it for what seem like pretty solid reasons. There's problems, sure. I just don't think they're insurmountable. Also, maybe it's different up north but voting in BNE was painless. I had the longest line I've ever waited in at an election and it still took me prolly less than 15 minutes from start to finish, a big chunk of which was filling out those damn 82 boxes. Last time I voted on polling day there was a line oat the local school that took about an hour to get through in the bulls*** up north heat. Pass. |
04:21pm 09/09/13 Permalink
Liberal Democratic Party are classic "libertarians" - they believe in as little government regulation and intervention as possible to permit a free market / society to operate.I love the ideal, but it doesn't generally lead to the sort of outcomes that I'd consider "fair" for society. Exactly. I'm not sure where people got the "nutter" part from. Their policies seem pretty sane to me. |
04:34pm 09/09/13 Permalink
Usually it comes from their gun non-control policy, selloff of the ABC and SBS. They take individual freedom to an extreme in a lot of cases:
it is not acceptable for local councils to order the removal of children's play equipment or tree houses from back yards or to require the construction of swimming pool fences when there is restricted access to non-residents. I'm a fan of pool fence laws personally, and I like how bars these days are smoke-free. Each to their own. |
04:47pm 09/09/13 Permalink
What they need to do is make voting secure and electronic imo F*** no. Have you seen how that's going in the US? Recurrent problems with e-voting machines, and without the paper trail it's much easier to rig the votes, which I think has been substantiated to have happened in a couple of cases. No. Our system ain't broke. |
05:55pm 09/09/13 Permalink
The US experience is a set of examples of what to avoid, not a instaban on the entire concept. I'm not talking about voting machines where your vote goes into the ether. Bitcoins have shown us that clever algorithms can create electronic security to the point where monetary value of a set of 0s and 1s is valid.
As for why, if it can be secure it would be convenient and much cheaper than paper voting. Paper votes are not miraculously invulnerable to vote rigging, ask half of Africa about that. What prevents rigging is independent oversight. I can securely bank and do my business' taxes online, I see no technical reason why voting should be different with proper safeguards and oversight. |
06:04pm 09/09/13 Permalink
Maybe it has to do with the whole anonymity aspect of voting. Banking and taxes are sort of based on paperwork and your identity being verified, whereas voting is meant to be anonymous. Creating an online voting system that has integrity and also maintains anonymity could be a bit tricky.
|
06:08pm 09/09/13 Permalink
Or it could at least just be for people who don't care too much about the absolute anonymity of their voting, which could potentially reduce the manual work needed by a significant chunk.
|
06:22pm 09/09/13 Permalink
And the biggest retards of the year award goes to *drumroll*
AN American journalist and photographer have been rescued by the Australian navy after boarding an Australia-bound asylum boat which got into trouble. http://www.news.com.au/national-news/american-journalist-and-photographer-rescued-after-boarding-asylum-boat/story-fncynjr2-1226715339110 |
06:37pm 09/09/13 Permalink
Every other news source says they arrived on Christmas Island safely albeit sunburnt, not that they were rescued. Good ol' newsdotcomdotau!
I reckon it's a good thing that they did. Will be interesting to read their report on it. edit: it seems they are the first journalists ever to do a ride-along like this. |
06:47pm 09/09/13 Permalink
Internet banking and other secure online transactions have a built in margin of risk which the banks absorbs into their profits as the cost of being online.
That same margin of risk cannot apply in elections. It has to work correctly. That being the case, the current system is laughable, you can vote 20 times in a federal electorate by going to each polling booth on polling day. I moved a motion at LNP convention this year requiring photo ID at the polling booth and surrender of an ECQ voting voucher. The retarded delegates instead amended it to presentation of ID OR surrender of a voucher. I was like wtf... At least it passed to some degree and should become law this year. I can't see how online voting could be audited in any transparent manner. You would need to be an IT engineer to understand how the system works. The current polling system is very simple to understand and monitor. |
07:01pm 09/09/13 Permalink
That being the case, the current system is laughable, you can vote 20 times in a federal electorate by going to each polling booth on polling day You'd think they could at least have the marking off of your name on some sort of electronic system to avoid this. Instead they still have those books they have to flck through. Must cost them $,000's each election. |
07:09pm 09/09/13 Permalink
you can vote 20 times in a federal electorate by going to each polling booth on polling day you could but you'd no doubt get boned after when the find your name crossed off 20 different polling books assuming they check this... |
07:13pm 09/09/13 Permalink
What are you on about? Adam Bandt won his seat outright in Melbourne despite Liberal preferencing Labor and they picked up an extra Victorian senate seat. Well Redhat back in the real World...
Read more: http://www.news.com.au/national-news/federal-election/greens8217-christine-milne-blames-labor-party-for-election-woes/story-fnho52ip-1226714726801#ixzz2eNwDwWRU |
07:14pm 09/09/13 Permalink
Compulsory voting is the price you pay to stop loud minorities controlling the process You do know how we ended up with a Carbon Tax ? 1 Greens candidate in the House of Reps. Why didn't Compulsory voting prevent that shamozzle ? |
07:16pm 09/09/13 Permalink
you could but you'd no doubt get boned after when the find your name crossed off 20 different polling books. Not if you say you are someone else. Secondly, after the fraudulent votes are cast they cannot be undone. |
07:17pm 09/09/13 Permalink
Instead they still have those books they have to flck through. they do cost $,0000's!!!! sweet cash money for me and my bros |
07:26pm 09/09/13 Permalink
Been reading a lot of articles today suggesting Housing Boom 2.0 has started.
I would have to agree seeing that the Libs are very pro housing bubble and the Chinese Land-Bankers are going nuts down in Sydney. Btw who do you think our new Housing Bubble minister will be? Andrew Robb? |
07:38pm 09/09/13 Permalink
You certainly do have a bee in your bonnet about Housing Bubbles. Any overheating in the real estate market is caused by interest rates. Neither party have any control interest rates, as much as they like to claim credit. What do you think a Minister for Housing Bubbles lul would be responsible for doing?
|
07:53pm 09/09/13 Permalink
And the biggest retards of the year award goes to *drumroll*yes, someone that posts newscomau links would think that investigative journalists doing actual investigative journalism are retards At least it passed to some degree and should become law this year. I can't see how online voting could be audited in any transparent manner. You would need to be an IT engineer to understand how the system works. The current polling system is very simple to understand and monitor.Yep, this is basically a big part of it. If you are interested in e-voting I recommend subscribing to the Freedom to Tinker blog; they cover a lot of good stuff about e-voting: https://freedom-to-tinker.com/blog/tag/voting/ Everything they have written has completely and utterly turned me off the idea of e-voting. I cannot see any future in which I will change my mind - this is one of the only things that I can't see getting improved (to the point that it is worth the extra risk) by the addition of computers+Internet. You do know how we ended up with a Carbon Tax ?You're an idiot. |
07:56pm 09/09/13 Permalink
This post has been removed.
Reason: citation needed |
08:03pm 09/09/13 Permalink
Japan has been engaged in stimulus spending since the 90s. Their economy is bound to turn a corner at some point. Attributing it to stimulus is just silly. Japan has been engaged in stimulus since the late 90's...with a great deal of success :/. It's monetary policy that has had traction issues due to what is likely national savings mentality. Koo argues that it was massive fiscal stimulus (borrowing and spending by the government) that offset this decline and enabled Japan to maintain its level of GDP. In his view, this avoided a U.S. type Great Depression, in which U.S. GDP fell by 46%. He argued that monetary policy was ineffective because there was limited demand for funds while firms paid down their liabilities. In a balance sheet recession, GDP declines by the amount of debt repayment and un-borrowed individual savings, leaving government stimulus spending as the primary remedy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lost_Decade_%28Japan%29 I never argued that they're debt levels weren't high, I was just pointing out that they're is clearing overwhelming evidence that government stimulus plans have been effective in the nations you mentioned. You're presenting the idea that fiscal stimulus is universally negative which is simply not the case. |
08:13pm 09/09/13 Permalink
I'd like a much easier way to find out where I'm enrolled to vote though. It was such a pain in the arse. I should be able to quickly find out online, not the guess where you where last enrolled system they had this time around.
|
08:17pm 09/09/13 Permalink
09:00pm 09/09/13 Permalink
Read more: http://www.news.com.au/national-news/federal-election/greens8217-christine-milne-blames-labor-party-for-election-woes/story-fnho52ip-1226714726801#ixzz2eNwDwWRU Yep in the real world greens increased their senate presence and retained a house of reps seat despite having unfavourable preferences. Also in the real world we don't quote news.com.au |
09:07pm 09/09/13 Permalink
Except Japan has bigger problems with an aging population, which is why stimulus isnt working. They wont implement mass immigration to offset the lack of people having babies.
Government policy is what created overpriced housing. So many tax concessions for property investors. Total joke. Same with claiming losses against tax, we're effectively rewarding failure. So government policy could collapse house prices, but that is one sharp double edged sword. Interest rates are only one factor. |
10:05pm 09/09/13 Permalink
i was looking forward to coming back to Australia with the NBN still going strong :(
but other than the fact the tony abbott may create a few gaffes at various international events (G20 should be interesting) nothing else is likely to change for me! |
02:27am 10/09/13 Permalink
but other than the fact the tony abbott may create a few gaffes at various international events (G20 should be interesting) nothing else is likely to change for me! Depends, a lot of economists were predicting that Abbott's implied policies (since he hadn't announced them, don't know what the re-assessment was) would drive Australia into recession. In the long run, climate challenges may not be dealt with either (the only mention of renewables in the Lib's new plans was an intention to launch another witchhunt into windmills by having another investigation into so called 'windtower disease'). |
09:04am 10/09/13 Permalink
Well played Russia. With the Syria problem escalating over the past year or two the US has been looking for an excuse to get in there and get a foothold in the region. With Russia vetoing/blocking any UN calls for action. However, due to the US people being rather against any foreign action with a damn good reason the US has been having a hard time finding a winning excuse.
Then this instance of chemical weapons being used on civilians of which apparently the US has 'physical evidence that a chemical weapon was used by the Syrian government' came along. This was a winning excuse for the US to get in there, with UN backing. Apparently it wasn't enough for the UK though. Anyway, Russia doesn't want the US getting involved so they came up with a well played move very recently. That is for Syria to confiscate their chemical weapon supplies to the UN for destruction. The Syrian government has agreed to this. The US citizens are sure to side with the Russian suggestion, thus eliminating the strong reason for the US to get in there. It will be interesting how the US tries to play its hand on this one. Russia 1, US 0, Syrian citizen -10000 :( Poor Abbot was probably hoping for a bit of military shenanigans early in his term. |
09:19am 10/09/13 Permalink
When he could be arsed getting sworn I believe. I think he is aiming for October sometime. I guess he too wants to play some GTA5 before slogging into work.
|
09:43am 10/09/13 Permalink
Toll the general feeling from the people i speak to here is that they dont want any US involvement in Syria at all. The public seem pretty vocal about it to which is great imho.
|
09:51am 10/09/13 Permalink
who do we blame for all the problems in syria, is it america or the jews?
|
10:04am 10/09/13 Permalink
Yah Taipan, hence why it takes something on the level of Chemical weapon use to even begin to have the US get involved. Hence why the surrendering of chemical weapons is a good move to keep the US out, it gives nothing for the US to use to convince its people that an invasion is necessary.
|
10:06am 10/09/13 Permalink
10:28am 10/09/13 Permalink
Abbott won't call a double dissolution election, it's all tough talk. No PM in their right mind would ever jeopardise their government over a single issue. Howard had multiple DD triggers. Hawke did it... and won (then didn't follow up on the issue anyways (fun times). |
10:54am 10/09/13 Permalink
Toll the general feeling from the people i speak to here is that they dont want any US involvement in Syria at all. The public seem pretty vocal about it to which is great imho.That is what I am seeing from the (tiny) number of Americans I've spoken to. Although there is a sense of grim resignation about it - i.e., "who f*****g cares what we think, these a******* will do whatever they want anyway" |
11:05am 10/09/13 Permalink
yes, someone that posts newscomau links would think that investigative journalists doing actual investigative journalism are retards Actually, the reason why they are retards is because they have risked their life in a very dangerous journey. 100's of people have already died from taking the trip, it's literally like playing russian roulette. Some poeple have a death wish it seems. https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn2/1240424_515900188491735_188887904_n.jpg I'd feel threatened by a boat packed full of creepy looking middle aged homosexuals dressed in leather short shorts too. |
11:59am 10/09/13 Permalink
Actually, the reason why they are retards is because they have risked their life in a very dangerous journey. 100's of people have already died from taking the trip, it's literally like playing russian roulette.like journalists in war zones? or journalists that go interview drug lords in some remote jungle camp? or journalists that visit countries run by dictators? I cannot wait to read what they publish on this to gain some actual insight into people smuggling. |
12:11pm 10/09/13 Permalink
Depends, a lot of economists were predicting that Abbott's implied policies (since he hadn't announced them, don't know what the re-assessment was) would drive Australia into recession. In the long run, climate challenges may not be dealt with either (the only mention of renewables in the Lib's new plans was an intention to launch another witchhunt into windmills by having another investigation into so called 'windtower disease'). What? Your crazy is showing. |
12:50pm 10/09/13 Permalink
