Opinion Politics (warning, may contain political views you disagree with)

[wayToGo_]

Jenny Macklin sure is past it, she retired at the last election and isn't in parliament

Yeah, I'm waiting for her to do an Alannah MacTiernan (who is a year older I think)

 

[wayToGo_]

The Rudd rules make it much harder for Labor to change leaders between elections. Albo will most likely be the leader at the next election

Still very possible when in opposition. A lot harder to change the PM if they are the current govt though. So it'd make sense to do it before the next election. But it all depends on who is in the seat and who and how many are challenging, and how popular they are across both factions.

For instance Rudd wouldn't have toppled Beazley but Gillard would have still toppled Rudd easily. Rudd wouldn't have toppled Gillard later on either.

 

[Kram]

Why give the Murdoch press more info to lie about.:Silence is golden on Albo,s part. Morrison is doing a great job of stuffing up every time he opens his mouth.
I seem to remember before the last election endless questions as to how much Labour's climate policy would cost but not a whisper as to how much it would cost if we followed the Libs mantra of doing nothing. How is doing nothing working out?.

Damn Murdoch!

 

[Ben The Donkey]

Not defending the guy but given that he did it twice - once to a man, once to a woman... can it really be characterised as a gender issue?

It was a PR disaster and speaks volumes about his sense of entitlement but is it a gender issue? If it is, that would mean that he has the same issue with both genders. Two gender issues! One about women, one about men.

Once an accusation has been made of any form of discrimination, it's too late. They've got a name for every form of outrage, and little niches of non-conformist behaviour they're able to point, accuse, and blame until we're all numb. And you know you're screwed when terms like "emotional intelligence" are coined and become mainstream - implies that the stronger the emotional response, the more rational (intelligent) the person responding. Which is about as opposed to pure rationality one can get, but there you are.

A guy comments that he thinks Indian food is overrated - Racist.
A fashion designer designs blonde wigs made into cornrows - Cultural Approbation.
Whether or not Scomo is sexist, or was, in this instance, is completely irrelevant. Once it's been categorised as a gender issue for political purposes, then its a gender issue, and no further discussion will be entered into.

Unfortunately we appear to be moving further and further away from a fact-based, objective society with every passing decade. Although I suppose you could argue convincingly we never have been one, its just more obvious now due to the volume of information out there, and far easier to control mass responses.

 

[salim malik]

Damn Murdoch!

Still getting your view of the world from the Australian and 2GB?
They appeal to a certain kind of individual, glad you're happy to be counted amongst them.

 

[Kram]

Still getting your view of the world from the Australian and 2GB?
They appeal to a certain kind of individual, glad you're happy to be counted amongst them.

Mostly the ABC and sometimes Sky just for a laugh.

Don't even know 2GB and very, very rarely read the Australian.

AFR is the only other one.

 

[Bigger]

Ben, that may be something you have drawn or created from the term “emotional intelligence,” but it isn’t the accepted meaning of the term - or its synonymous term “emotional IQ”.

 

[Bigger]

And rationality is kind of overrated given we make most of the important decisions in our life with our feelings.

 

[wayToGo_]

Unfortunately we appear to be moving further and further away from a fact-based, objective society with every passing decade.

Not really. We're hitting a critical mass of those who have realised what we've been fed by the 'establishment' for many centuries is generally a load of self serving horse s**t. We are fighting back against it by questioning it and those who spout it as fact. And hilariously the 'establishment' is now trying to play the victim card.

I don't disagree opinions can soon become consensus with today's technologies but is it really worse than the alternative where a handful of people control the entire news and media and everyone acts like a bunch of autonomons doing what we are told without question?

 

[wayToGo_]

Whether or not Scomo is sexist, or was, in this instance, is completely irrelevant. Once it's been categorised as a gender issue for political purposes, then its a gender issue, and no further discussion will be entered into.

But in your precise example, further discussion was entered into. I explained why it was my opinion. Some others disagreed. I have no problem with people having an alternate opinion to me - but I won't stand when people infer others shouldn't have a right to their own opinion.

On the flip side, ScoMo today blamed Labor for coining "Scotty from marketing". He said it more than once via several media channels. It wasn't Labor - that was a lie. Plenty of people will now blame Labor thinking he was telling the truth. How is that any different to your example? So it happens both ways. It sounds very much like one side doesn't like that the playing field is becoming more fair for the other side.

 

[Bigger]

All the cool kids are calling him SmoCo.

 

[wahooo]

All the cool kids are calling him SmoCo.

I hear he cracked the shits about being called Scotty from marketing.

 

[Ben The Donkey]

Ben, that may be something you have drawn or created from the term “emotional intelligence,” but it isn’t the accepted meaning of the term - or its synonymous term “emotional IQ”.

You don't think the use of words like "intelligence" and "IQ" have a meaning in and of themselves? How about emotional maturity?

Intelligence/maturity.
Agree, or you're stupid/a child.

Think.

 

[Ben The Donkey]

And don't think it's escaped my notice that those who have either posted that they want a respectful/intellectual discourse are for the most part the same ones above who are having a bit of a chuckle over what names the "cool kids" are giving political leaders.

 

[Bigger]

Ben the Donkey wrote:

“And you know you're screwed when terms like "emotional intelligence" are coined and become mainstream - implies that the stronger the emotional response, the more rational (intelligent) the person responding.”

Whereas the first definition for emotional intelligence I found on the internet, and a reasonable indicator of mainstream use and acceptance, has:

noun

1. the capacity to be aware of, control, and express one's emotions, and to handle interpersonal relationships judiciously and empathetically.
   
   ​

 

[Bigger]

You may have been thinking of the “primacy of emotion” or some such. Who knows.

It’s a bit typical of how you work.

 

[wahooo]

And don't think it's escaped my notice that those who have either posted that they want a respectful/intellectual discourse are for the most part the same ones above who are having a bit of a chuckle over what names the "cool kids" are giving political leaders.

Uh oh political satire is outlawed.

No more laughing, no more fun!

 

[wahooo]

And don't think it's escaped my notice that those who have either posted that they want a respectful/intellectual discourse are for the most part the same ones above who are having a bit of a chuckle over what names the "cool kids" are giving political leaders.

PC brigade gone mad, I tell ya!

 

[bushchook]

Wouldn't trust Rudd to hold your wallet?

Did you forget the GFC? Ruddy boy saved your wallet.

I guess if you still believe in Keynesian economics which was proven false in the 1960s then you could somehow believe Rudd "saved us" from the GFC.

 

[bushchook]

A healthy economy always needs a certain level of unemployment. Full employment is an industry killer. An ugly truth perhaps.

A certain amount of unemployment is impossible to avoid because there are people who are simply not capable of work, people who are moving between jobs and therefore unemployed for the duration etc.

But by far the biggest cause of unemployment is the minimum wage, especially in a country like Australia with a ridiculously high one. The cold reality is that there are a great deal of people who just aren't worth $17 an hour. You'd be losing money by hiring them. So they just become what we now call "long term unemployed", a concept that didn't really exist before the creation of the minimum wage.

 

[bushchook]

Just to digress a little ... the political issue I'm obsessing over is Jock Palfreeman, a 33 year old Sydney man who has was found guilty of murder in Bulgaria back in 2007 and sentenced to 20 years - except most people agree it was self-defence and he was just caught up in a horrible set of circumstances. He was unexpectedly paroled in September last year, but Bulgarian officials have slapped a travel ban on him, so although technically a free man he cant leave Bulgaria.

So there's been this agonising wait. He is stuck in limbo while Bulgaria refuses to make a decision on his case - indeed it's highly possible his parole could be revoked and he'd be sent back to jail for another 10 years. In the meantime, Jock works tirelessly for other Bulgarian prisoners to improve their lot - prison in Bulgaria is a notoriously miserable existence.

To their shame imo successive Australian governments have done nothing for him, also the media have largely ignored him. Jock has a Facebook page - pretty boring actually - and I've joined a Facebook supporters group, but everyone is out of ideas and absolutely nothing is happening.

View attachment 805484

Was he the guy who stabbed a soccer hooligan with his own knife? Think I saw it on "Banged Up Abroad"

 

[wahooo]

I guess if you still believe in Keynesian economics which was proven false in the 1960s then you could somehow believe Rudd "saved us" from the GFC.

You can't just claim something to be false without providing some kind of evidence or argument against it. Yes there's different approaches to economics that gain and lose popularity over time but Keynesian economics was never proven false, it's still taught in universities and schools today.

Ps, it was actually around the 70s, with the oil shock and stagflation that Keynesian economics lost popularity

A certain amount of unemployment is impossible to avoid because there are people who are simply not capable of work, people who are moving between jobs and therefore unemployed for the duration etc.

But by far the biggest cause of unemployment is the minimum wage, especially in a country like Australia with a ridiculously high one. The cold reality is that there are a great deal of people who just aren't worth $17 an hour. You'd be losing money by hiring them. So they just become what we now call "long term unemployed", a concept that didn't really exist before the creation of the minimum wage.

Love this argument. For every theoretical argument saying that minimum wages increase unemployment there's an emperical one that will show that raising minimum wages decreases unemployment.

Again, any evidence on the origins of the concept of "long term unemployed"?

People are also considered to not be a part of the labour force if they haven't actively sought a job in the last 4 years. With the evolution of technology and aging populations I think it's highly likely we're going to see an increasing population who are not part of the labour force. It's wrong and misleading to classify those who are not part of the labour force as unemployed.

 

[poshman]

You can't just claim something to be false without providing some kind of evidence or argument against it. Yes there's different approaches to economics that gain and lose popularity over time but Keynesian economics was never proven false, it's still taught in universities and schools today.

-------

I have been targetted here for asking for proof or asking for workable alternatives and when I have asked for evidence I have been accused of having greedy motives and such.

But yes I agree with hitchens as I said pages ago - what is claimed without proof can be dismissed without proof.

Something we do have definitive proof for -

Every time socialism has been attempted over 30 times worldwide it has failed and made things worse for lower and middle class people. It has ended in murder, authoritarianism and worse on each occasion.

Capitalism although not perfect has resulted in the countries who have held to it (some lower taxes some higher) having the best living conditions in the world.

- - - - - - -

Re: minimum wage - as an employer, there are jobs I send overseas that I did fifteen years ago when I started that I cannot afford to pay a local worker to complete. The business would not be able to pay skilled employees who add value to the business and pay for the unskilled labour at the local rate. We offer internships (unpaid through the universities) and help the interns get experience and the best get references. The very best have been hired here for full-time roles. These, as mentioned, are jobs that I did when I started out and volunteered to do for free so I could get experience.

Paying minimum wage for jobs that are not worth the minimum wage doesn't make any sense. Before people call me a greedy capitalist and everything else you don't pay for these things either (or at least the majority of shoppers don't) - it is why Uber and Didi etc lowering prices has changed the transport market. Taxi drivers who for years have charged high rates and had (a vast majority I have experienced) a crappy attitude are pissed. Yet Uber is losing money monthly and charging fees that don't cover costs taking a risk that they will capture the marketplace and it will work for them long term. I am not sure it will and would not buy shares in Uber personally. Amazon for shopping - online shopping etc. None of us pay more for the same product unless there is a strong differential in perceived or real service or quality. Which means you are not paying more for the same item you are paying more for a more valuable product. I have a membership at dymocks which they hand out for purchasing more than $2k of books in a calendar year. I like to go into the store and purchase books. I do this less and less as they often don't a book I want, when they do it is more expensive than amazon, when they don't it is more expensive than amazon (sometimes the same price) and I have to wait longer to get the book from dymocks than Amazon. So I purchase from Amazon.

My wife made $4k profit on facebook marketplace in December. She buys good near new items - takes better pics and styles them and sells them for 50% percent more two to three weeks later. She didn't force anyone to do it - she didn't coerce or steal she found a way to add value and demand to a product through styling and photography. Both skills are skills she has spent hundreds of hours and thousands of dollars improving. She built skills - none of which are good enough to be a professional photographer and with some hustle has added value to a product that she has bought mere days before from a seller who is happy to sell at 50-80% lower than she will. Yes I am proud of my wife - but also it reminds me constantly that if I am willing to work and improve a skill and then find a market for it - I can create value and make money from it. What an amazing - seriously bloody amazing place to live.

 

[wayToGo_]

Every time socialism has been attempted over 30 times worldwide it has failed and made things worse for lower and middle class people. It has ended in murder, authoritarianism and worse on each occasion.

Capitalism although not perfect has resulted in the countries who have held to it (some lower taxes some higher) having the best living conditions in the world.

Making the convo a bit black and white perhaps? If you have a spectrum of socialism through to capitalism most countries would fit somewhere in the middle - and not just one or the other.

For instance Norway would would probably be labelled Democratic Socialism vs the US which is more Capitalist - both aren't at the extremes though. Comparing the two, Norway has longer life expectancy, lower infant mortality, higher GDP per capita, free higher education, free healthcare, rated 2nd happiest country in the world, lower poverty levels, more vacation time, parental leave, lower incarceration rates, higher home ownership and so on. The average quality of life smashes the US across almost every category.

So your statement doesn't exactly reflect reality. I think it may be fair to say both extremes of socialism and capitalism may not have any successful examples but a smart mix of the two can work well, and countries that adopt good socialist policies are in a far better holistic position than those that don't.

 

[Bigger]

You suckers on the teat of hardcore capitalist economic theory have to remember that every time the Libs do a tax break for the middle class and above, the middle class and above tend to either save or spend offshore.

Unemployed folk keep money moving. You need them.

And Poshman, you really do need to investigate the Nordic model.