Jump to content
Rocket Salad

The Politics Thread

Recommended Posts

 

34% Lib/Nat + 12% so-called 'Undecided' (Palmer) + 12% so-called 'Other' (One Nation) = 58%

 

See I can do that too. :)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reflecting on this thread and the other one. Given the way we engage and converse it’s little wonder the political landscape is divided.

We (me) don’t accept views other than our own and seek to twist others words to suit our agenda.

Being right and attacking other points of view is more important than seeking common ground. Our leaders are a reflection of this.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, BarryBevan said:

Reflecting on this thread and the other one. Given the way we engage and converse it’s little wonder the political landscape is divided.

We (me) don’t accept views other than our own and seek to twist others words to suit our agenda.

Being right and attacking other points of view is more important than seeking common ground. Our leaders are a reflection of this.

Well said! I think lot of the topics are emotive which leads people to lose their impartiality. Then there is the problem of tribalism and people wanting their 'team' to win, defend them no matter what. 

I personally like to explore ideas-that's why I'll often throw something out there which cops some flack, but at least it's considerd. Hopefully the discussion then leads me to change my mind or confirm the view. 

People strictly voting only for one side is the most idiotic thing ever. When people are taken for granted they get abused. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, more said:

People strictly voting only for one side is the most idiotic thing ever. When people are taken for granted they get abused.

True. At the last election I probably voted stupidly (not that it counted in the end). Not for the reason above, but because of emotion. In my mind (and for me personally), a Coalition Gov would PROBABLY have delivered a better outcome. You never know though, as there no guarantee that either party will actually keep their promises. But I just couldn't vote for the Liberal member, because I detest him more than I've ever detested any other politician I've ever known. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ex-Hasbeen said:

 

34% Lib/Nat + 12% so-called 'Undecided' (Palmer) + 12% so-called 'Other' (One Nation) = 58%

 

See I can do that too. :)

If anyone other than Tony Jones was in charge, that breakdown might have been plausible 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BarryBevan said:

Reflecting on this thread and the other one. Given the way we engage and converse it’s little wonder the political landscape is divided.

We (me) don’t accept views other than our own and seek to twist others words to suit our agenda.

Being right and attacking other points of view is more important than seeking common ground. Our leaders are a reflection of this.

As I've said before, people need to get away from the idea that if someone doesn't agree with them it's because they are stupid and/or morally deficient, and are therefore free game

It gets us nowhere

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ex-Hasbeen said:

True. At the last election I probably voted stupidly (not that it counted in the end). Not for the reason above, but because of emotion. In my mind (and for me personally), a Coalition Gov would PROBABLY have delivered a better outcome. You never know though, as there no guarantee that either party will actually keep their promises. But I just couldn't vote for the Liberal member, because I detest him more than I've ever detested any other politician I've ever known. 

There is no way you could have detested him more than Bill Shorten.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, IronmanFoz said:

There is no way you could have detested him more than Bill Shorten.

You don't have to put up with his deceptions & outright lies daily, 365 days a year. He's worse than Ennis.

Edited by Ex-Hasbeen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Paul Every said:

Last Monday's Q&A audience stats:

Lib/Nat 34% (vs 41% of primary vote in May's election).

Labor 32% (vs 33%)

Greens 9% (vs 10%)

Undecided 12% + Other 12% = 24% (vs 15%)

"Stacked"?

Gosh.  And since the Election they are now 75% liberal.  God bless em.  😂

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 29/6/2019 at 2:02 PM, Prince said:

Gosh.  And since the Election they are now 75% liberal.  God bless em.  😂

I'd be curious to know the stats for the panel members over time. Same goes for The Drum and Insiders. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

still by bolt and far right logic and last election being behind in the polls means you win the election and are doing the right things

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting stats coming out about the $800 bonus that the government said would be paid to a million pensioners when they finally lowered the deeming rates. The government has refused to announce how many will actually get it, but documents obtained under FoI show that no single pensioners will actually get the $800, and only 191 couples will receive it. The average amount for a single pensioner is $249, and for couples is $165.

Just a little short of the million promised. At least it won't hurt the budget very much.

Edited by Ex-Hasbeen
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it interesting that there is nothing mentioned in this thread about $100k cash in an Aldi bag

I find it even more interesting that the very law that the NSW opposition (then government) brought in to hamper the current governments fund raising efforts is the one they broke in the current saga

 

And surely whoever it was that proposed that pollies takes ethics classes as they may not he aware that taking a donation of $100k in cash may be suss is taking the piss 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mr Tinman said:

I find it interesting that there is nothing mentioned in this thread about $100k cash in an Aldi bag

I find it even more interesting that the very law that the NSW opposition (then government) brought in to hamper the current governments fund raising efforts is the one they broke in the current saga

 

And surely whoever it was that proposed that pollies takes ethics classes as they may not he aware that taking a donation of $100k in cash may be suss is taking the piss 

doesnt affect anyone, if it happened, and it may well have, labor lost elections so it achieved nothing.  keeping it a secret was dumb, much better just having it out in the open like pre election when abbott was going to commie fund raisers.  chinese infiltration of both sides is terrible but especially bad with liu in the liberal party elected to fed parliament.  at least labor sacked distari and they were just in opposition, morrison should be tough on national security and sack Liu from the liberals, and morrison playing the race card to defend her was and is a disgrace.   

both sides of politics need to step up on this issue and especially the elected government when it comes to liu.  No surprise it happens when you look at how many dual citizens went to the high court in recent times, the background checks are terrible, just seems if you can raise money, you are good and we will ignore all else which is how we end up with the 100k you talk of, or the liu with a history of commie ness elected as a liberal to fed parliament. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the other thing that amazes me at the moment is the centre and left seem to have moved on on climate change but the hard right seem to have it as a religion and cant move on.  its weird to see so much anti climate change in the media but nobody arguing with them.  i saw craig kelly last week slamming the abc and when you read what the abc did, they agreed with him.  just bizarre, you'd think they would actually be trying to build an express way or something rather then just impersonating a hot air balloon and whining about stuff that nobody is actually raising anymore.

the extreme right on climate change  reminds me of those jap soldiers they found in the 70's and they have to be told the war is over, people have moved on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Parkside said:

they've also moved on to drug testing welfare recipients as a means to reduce the welfare budget.

its just bizarre,  again, the dogma of creating an issue that doesnt actually exist, and logically if it does exist and people can no longer use welfare to buy drugs, crime goes up as they steal to get the drugs.   

truely bizarre but assume the lobby groups needs the work, the libs and nationals need some donations.  good tender to get, would be worth a fortune, few instant millionaires out of winning that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Oompa Loompa said:

its weird to see so much anti climate change in the media but nobody arguing with them. 

Really? We must be looking at different media 😋

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, A2K said:

Really? We must be looking at different media 😋

Yeah, there's still arguing both sides, but I'm now seeing a lot more anti-climate change than pro-climate change in social media.

It's as if the raving greeny has been replaced by the raving denier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, A2K said:

Really? We must be looking at different media 😋

stuffed if i know, i dont read much murdoch, though sometimes i watch fox news which led to the post.... just stunned at people like craig kelly looking for unicorns...lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what i really want to know is under morrisons urine test of the unemployed, will they watch the unemployed piss in a cup or is their trust that your urine is your own.   If you dont answer the door because you are off your face, stoned, will there be a three strikes and you're out ? are you able to dob in an unemployed person you want to wee in a cup?  

would love morrison to drop the money he is spending on knowing whats in the poor's urine  into road safety and do more random drug and grog testing on our roads... 

Imagine if he did his job and secured our borders and just stopped drugs in Australia...lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Oompa Loompa said:

 

would love morrison to drop the money he is spending on knowing whats in the poor's urine  into road safety and do more random drug and grog testing on our roads... 

Imagine if he did his job and secured our borders and just stopped drugs in Australia...lol

maybe if they were not on drugs, they may have a job and they wouldn't be poor.

whilst I don't really agree with it, it is a very popular scheme. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Prince said:

maybe if they were not on drugs, they may have a job and they wouldn't be poor.

whilst I don't really agree with it, it is a very popular scheme. 

maybe they can test rich people with jobs who take drugs

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Prince said:

maybe if they were not on drugs, they may have a job and they wouldn't be poor.

whilst I don't really agree with it, it is a very popular scheme. 

100% agree it will be popular and people will blame state govt for ant increase in crime, not federal...

If he was fair dinkum, should bring in urine testing for any federal govt transaction, tax returns, medicare, to leave australia......etc etc......lol   

stand for election as an mp, with regular testing on pay days.... lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

probably should just do away with the socialist state and get rid of the pbs, medicare, uni subsidies, pensions etc.....  just fend for ourselves.  ...oh, and raise the tax on wine and spirits so the toffs pay what the working classess that drink beer pay in tax.... and level it out with a sugar tax on coke, lemonade etc.

Edited by Oompa Loompa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Oompa Loompa said:

probably should just do away with the socialist state and get rid of the pbs, medicare, uni subsidies, pensions etc.....  just fend for ourselves.  ...oh, and raise the tax on wine and spirits so the toffs pay what the working classess that drink beer pay in tax.... and level it out with a sugar tax on coke, lemonade etc.

it is only a matter of time  where both sides will reduce the spending on some of these subsidies. Its inevitable. cut these stupid family tax benefits would be a start. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Mr Tinman said:

I find it interesting that there is nothing mentioned in this thread about $100k cash in an Aldi bag

 

Perhaps because it’s purely a NSW thing, and as mentioned I think  Labor lost those State elections. 

Im in Qld so don’t follow it too closely but did you find it as interesting that during the ICAC herring while under oath the people involved basically provided all the information that came to light?

I don’t know why she just didn’t say “I can’t recall” like Arthur Sinodenis did 27 times under oath at the ICAC enquiry when the Libs were in a similar situation regarding excepting and laundering banned donations from property developers. 

 

Edited by Mike Del

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Prince said:

it is only a matter of time  where both sides will reduce the spending on some of these subsidies. Its inevitable. cut these stupid family tax benefits would be a start. 

Yet they keep increasing the subsidies for child-care? In my opinion, giving someone money to have their child looked after while they go to work is no different to giving someone money to stay at home & look after their child.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lets stay on point, why are we only testing welfare recipients, anyone who gets any benefit from the government should be tested, tax rebate or dole

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, BarryBevan said:

Lets stay on point, why are we only testing welfare recipients, anyone who gets any benefit from the government should be tested, tax rebate or dole

there is no evidence on a current affair though that other govt benefit recipients are on drugs, just welfare people. 

its brilliant politics.  to early in the election cycle i think, but brilliant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Oompa Loompa said:

there is no evidence on a current affair though that other govt benefit recipients are on drugs, just welfare people. 

its brilliant politics.  to early in the election cycle i think, but brilliant.

wow those poor people are pumping billions into the drug trade including their 300 dollars plus a gram coke

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, BarryBevan said:

Lets stay on point, why are we only testing welfare recipients, anyone who gets any benefit from the government should be tested, tax rebate or dole

because taking drugs is a major barrier to gaining employment. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Prince said:

because taking drugs is a major barrier to gaining employment. 

does Scomo have evidence that withholding welfare payments from drug addicts will improve their employment status?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Prince said:

because taking drugs is a major barrier to gaining employment. 

so how do you explain all the coked up lawyers and forex traders and rich people who have jobs who take drugs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Parkside said:

does Scomo have evidence that withholding welfare payments from drug addicts will improve their employment status?

yes, there is evidence. I have worked for two job networks and it is an identified barrier, particularly for long term unemployed. 

 

1 minute ago, BarryBevan said:

so how do you explain all the coked up lawyers and forex traders and rich people who have jobs who take drugs

They should be able to do what they want. Your taxes aren't supporting them. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Prince said:

yes, there is evidence. I have worked for two job networks and it is an identified barrier, particularly for long term unemployed. 

 

They should be able to do what they want. Your taxes aren't supporting them. 

spectaular

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my industry everyone is drug tested before starting work. And then all sites have random drug testing. Think I’ve been tested 4 times this year alone. I don’t have a problem with random drug testing for people on welfare 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Prince said:

yes, there is evidence. I have worked for two job networks and it is an identified barrier, particularly for long term unemployed. 

 

Was it identified which came first?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, BarryBevan said:

maybe they can test rich people with jobs who take drugs

I'm not aware of any rich people with jobs who are on newstart

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, IronJimbo said:

I'm not aware of any rich people with jobs who are on newstart

And I'm not aware of any Newstart recipients receiving Gov subsidies for negative gearing investment portfolios, capital gains tax exemptions, childcare subsidies & superannuation tax breaks whilst earning double the average income.

Government subsidies & allowances actually benefit the rich more than the poor.

Edited by Ex-Hasbeen
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Limited said:

In my industry everyone is drug tested before starting work. And then all sites have random drug testing. Think I’ve been tested 4 times this year alone. I don’t have a problem with random drug testing for people on welfare 

Is that for safety reasons?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, IronJimbo said:

I'm not aware of any rich people with jobs who are on newstart

so you only want poor people who receive benefits from the government drug tested?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...