Politics The Hangar Politics Thread

Remove this Banner Ad

What did Latham actually do/say? I've seen references to the thing but not the actual thing
 
Beerfish said:
What did Latham actually do/say? I've seen references to the thing but not the actual thing
Click to expand...
He called a 12 year old boy speaking about feminism gay.
 

Log in to remove this ad.


:) :) :) :)
 
fodzilla said:
Doesn't matter who comes next - there was only one politician with enough individual cachet to drag the Coalition back into relevance, and he's run his race.
Click to expand...

The ideological split in the Coalition is what killed it. Without a socialist enemy to fight, and the Cold War long gone, the next generation has been free to push their preferred ideology, thus splitting the party/ies between liberals and conservatives. They survive now on inertia, as all major parties across the world do.
 
Yep, though that's a function of a couple of things - that they've lost the connection to a social base that previously did the ideological heavy-lifting (as have all major parties), but also that the anti-labour parties have as a rule filled a purely oppositional role. Hence, in the absence of any real societal division, we now see policies geared around opposition to brown people and trees.
 
fodzilla said:
And again, and with no little help from Hawke and Keating, a complete disconnection from any social base.
Click to expand...

I would say they follow pretty naturally. If the leaders of a party throw away socialism and replace it with liberalism, some of their base are going to go with them, and some will not, which will erode the 'traditional social base' of the party. There are still plenty of socialists who want Labor to be a socialist party like it used to be. This will become more apparent once the economy finally gives way.
 
And thus the rise of independents and small parties, watering the crumbs after the two big parties chop and change from one populist policy to another without due regard for any prescribed ideology or perceived 'base'. It's short-sighted, but perhaps inevitable.
 
Jenna Price said:
Tony Shepherd says baby boomers are entitled. Look who's talking

Australians are mean and getting meaner.

It's particularly true of our politicians. They speak to each other so rudely, and with such disrespect, I'd like to send them all to the naughty corner. They are not a good example of how democracies are meant to work.

But politicians and their cronies also do it to us.

The most famous example of contempt for your ordinary average Australia was delivered by then treasurer Joe Hockey when he described women taking parental leave as leaners; apparently in stark opposition to lifters, such as himself.

Definitely a lifter, particularly of cigars. Sorry, that was mean.

But this contempt is beginning to appear across every variety of political conversation. Those with power, those nestled up to the elite, speak about average Australians so disparagingly.

My favourite lifter is Tony Shepherd, he of the national commission of audit. He's the man who was able to persuade the Abbott government to pay for a report so filled with wealthsplanation, misinterpretation and errors in numbers that I have barely heard it mentioned since it was released in early 2014.

He's at it again. This time, it's about baby boomers. Now, strictly speaking, Shepherd is not a baby boomer; he's part of the silent generation. Except he's not very silent.

He says we are self-interested and planning to cash in on entitlements by using the age pension to fund our retirements.

I hardly know where to begin with this one. (And, please, don't imagine I'm about to attack millennials, various alphabet generations or anyone with a passing interest in avocadoes. I have three adult children and some avocadoes of my own and doubt my life would be worth living if I went there, however briefly.)

We can't know exactly how many baby boomers are in a complete panic about how their children will ever find permanent homes. That measure doesn't appear on the census.

And we can't know how many actually help beyond the panic. How many adults live with their parents and pay next to no rent, to support a savings plan? We don't know to what extent that happens nor do we know how successful those savings plans might be.

How often does the Bank of Parent fund the deposit for a teensy flat about 30 kilometres away from where said parents live?

Nor can we know the numbers of parents going guarantor for their kids' homes. We don't know how often it's the Bank of Parent funding the deposit for a teensy flat about 30 kilometres away from where said parents live. Yes, our first house was some distance away from my mother. It also had an outside toilet. I'm pretty sure my kids don't think they can buy into any inner city, unless it's inner-city Shepparton (glorious art museum, specialises in ceramics, also a lovely river).

But if I end up on an age pension, it won't be because I'm frittering my money away on cruises down any rivers. It will be because I want to give my kids the deposit to buy a house. Please note: not the whole house. I'm first-generation Australian and my parents died young, lacking enough time to squirrel away several million dollars, in either home ownership or superannuation.

The entire tone of the conversation about ordinary Australians is critical, demeaning. And it bears noting that this intense scrutiny and criticism comes from those who witness – indeed, support – social structures that make it hard for young people to have predictable earnings, let alone predictable housing. Indeed, they are the beneficiaries of those structures.

They then turn around and say there is no such thing as structure. It's about lifting and leaning.

This should not be a generational war, because parents are all too involved in this discussion.

A sociology professor at the University of Sydney, Danielle Celermajer, describes it so well. This kind of discourse says some of us are less worthy than others.

"We present them as not worthy of the respect of others and not worthy of self-respect. But to be able to participate in the democratic system, you have to feel you are worthy of that role and [that criticism] has an effect on your capacity to exercise citizenship," she says.

"It comes down to neoliberal conceptions of what worth a person is. If you fail on those criteria, then you are belittled, not a contributor."

She says those constant personal criticisms can have a demeaning effect.

We need to have a basic respect for difference, even across the political divide. These are democratic virtues, not that we are seeing much leadership from our actual leaders.

"The ones who are accusing others of not taking advantage of opportunity, of being leaners, they are the beneficiaries of these unjust social systems," Celermajer says.

Seriously, I know it's a bit steep to bleat on about how mean Shepherd was to baby boomers. After all, we've seen the way politicians describe those of us who've been victims of the Centrelink catastrophe, the NDIS debacle, the government's cruel acceptance of the severe cuts to penalty rates, the chaos of childcare funding, and the bedlam of parental leave. And in each case, politicians and their mates keep telling us we are at fault.

We are needy and greedy. We cut corners. We are leaners. We cheat to get welfare.

But the real cheats are those who don't acknowledge their own power and privilege. And with people like Shepherd, you can't even vote them out.
Click to expand...
http://www.smh.com.au/comment/tony-...titled-look-whos-talking-20170327-gv7eob.html
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Yeah shocking. Natural causes while hiking in the Grampians.
 
Killer_Mike said:
Yeah, how dare I be entitled to an opinion!
Click to expand...
yes you are, but the left winged opinion are ones of naive and stupidity
with out those minerals from the ground, you wouldn't have a phone, the computer your typing on, an internet connection, the desk your computer is sitting on & a chair your backside is sitting on, the room you are in, the electricity or house that you live in!

picked up on the common theme yet
 
bombersfan4000 said:
yes you are, but the left winged opinion are ones of naive and stupidity
with out those minerals from the ground, you wouldn't have a phone, the computer your typing on, an internet connection, the desk your computer is sitting on & a chair your backside is sitting on, the room you are in, the electricity or house that you live in!

picked up on the common theme yet
Click to expand...

I'm confused, what does that have to do with population?


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app
 
Budgets out. Can someone explain the first home owner super contribution in 20 words or less please.
 
boncer34 said:
Budgets out. Can someone explain the first home owner super contribution in 20 words or less please.
Click to expand...

"Limited to 30k contributions over two years, pre tax contributions mean you are about 6k better overall vs savings account."
20/20

Of course it does not address the supply issue and pretty much means sellers can just push their prices up, similar to when first home buyers grant was around. This is limited though as it will take 2 years to be felt but its not as great as people are thinking. I think if you are in Vic and building regionally state legislation is more helpful for a first home buyer.
 
Gold! :D
 
Beerfish said:
Gold! :D
Click to expand...
hahaha - that's great. Obviously. I get the reference of course, but you might want to just explain it for others who might not get the reference.
 
jmoo said:
hahaha - that's great. Obviously. I get the reference of course, but you might want to just explain it for others who might not get the reference.
Click to expand...
I have this bad habit of assuming everyone knows what I'm talking about.

It's The Excorcist. Ha!
 
lol
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top