Here you go again, Ludwig, setting up your own absurd interpretation and then criticising it as if it were mine. A classic ploy of the propagandista. None of the numerous options for new states have ever considered a state without the country towns. It is the metropolitan hordes with no idea and buckets of bigotry that we can do without. And if you ever actually related to people in the bush you would know that people in the towns are just as supportive of the concept as farmers. But of course, Ludwig claims to be part of the bush but he obviously prefers a political system that imposes urban priorities on his country neighbours. It must get pretty lonely out there sometimes.

And as for Remco, full of his own crap remedies for regional problems but I bet he doesn't even own a house block of land or a single tree.

OK so country towns are allowed in the new rural state. What about larger towns? What about Cairns or Townsville? Afterall, North Queensland is for the most part rural. But there are large urban populations in these centres. Would they be allowed in a new northern state or are they too much like Brisbane and the Gold Coast?

My interpretation is based entirely on what I have read about this idea of a separate state for farmers from one correspondent, plugged on a number of threads on this forum, and ignored by the vast majority if not all other correspondents. I have entertained debate on separate states before, and I think that a two-tiered system of government has some merit. But a separate state based on segregation of rural people and “metropolitan hordes”? Um…no.

I value genuine debate on this forum. I am not about to invent an interpretation that I think is not what the particular correspondent is trying to put across.

As always this single correspondent fails to address the points of concern that I expressed, or at best responds to just one. Is he actually agreeing with all the others? Can he not mount a counter-argument? Would it not be a much better approach, in the interests of his arguments, to tackle all the points that are raised regarding his suggestions?

Talking of setting up false interpretations or perhaps complete fantasy, what is this; “Ludwig claims to be part of the bush but he obviously prefers a political system that imposes urban priorities on his country neighbours”.

Need I say it, I have never in any way claimed to be part of the bush and of course I want a system of governance that is as fair as possible for all of us.

I don’t think this person is in any position to ever accuse anyone of falsehood or “absurd interpretation” of any sort ever again.

On Line Opinion is a valuable forum for exchanging ideas and some really deeply considered contributions have been made, including on this topic, from both sides of the fence. Amongst others, SusiQ presented a well considered contribution over two pages but this long debate is now being capped off by the personal diatribes of Perseus.

Perseus does not address the subject, and falls onto loaded opinion and even seeks to disqualify contributors based on their property ownership. It undermines the valuable insights of others notably again by SusiQ and the like.

This website needs a moderator to ensure the subject (and not the contributors) are addressed.

Steve,
I loved the wooden buckets post mate, what a great analogy, right on the money. If I sum the situation up correctly, the poor old farmer,whinge,whinge,whinge, should have been the title to this one.

I have a piece of property of poor quality, that hardly supports my business, I won't do what I tell others they should do, deregister the business, retrain at something, and seek employment, or start another business, no not me, I'm a farmer, so I expect the taxpayer to look after me, drought subsidy, flood subsisdy, all the business subsidies of course, tax dodges etc, etc...

Now you lazy dole bludgers, get off your collective bums, retrain if you are unemployed. If you are a plumber, retrain as a lady's dress designer, anything, face reality, all you disability pensioners that we employers have run into the ground, get over it, even if medical professionals have told you that's impossible, what do they know...blah,blah,blah...Me, eh! me, oh no, not me I am a poor old farmer, you need me, I'm not efficient, ummmm...

Thanks fellas, whenever I need to explain why regional areas have no future under metropolitan domination I can simply show them your prejudices. Clearly, what you would like most is a rural economy with no social safety net. That way all the assorted urban vultures would be free to pick over the casualties and get good land for bargain prices. The classic hypocrisy, all social conscience for your own urban tribe but switch to extreme social darwinism whenever a farmer is in sight. It is all good grist for my mill.

Oh dear, this sounds a child’s tantrum!

I keep trying to get the previous correspondent to partake in sensible debate by throwing up fair and reasonable questions. But he won’t go near most of them. It seems they are just too hard. He picks out the occasional one and treats it in isolation. Many times over the three months that I have been on this forum, this has happened. And there is so much hateful, strongly divisive and directly offensive stuff thrown in. Surprise surprise, Ludwig is not his only detractor!

“It is all good grist for my mill.”

What does this mean? I presume he feels that it just supports his argument: that urban people don’t care about farmers. It seems to me that everything supports his argument in his mind. Either that or it is neutral.

I had to laugh when he lambasted the ABC (6/2 on this thread). Even the nearest thing to a balanced forum in our media incurs his complete wrath!

“Anything that might clash with the green curtains is edited out quick smart.”

O yeah? what about Counterpoint (6/02/06) (http://www.abc.net.au/rn/talks/counterpoint/stories/s1561698.htm), where Jennifer Marohasy and Wolfgang Kasper ripped Jared Diamond’s ‘Collapse’ to pieces? I found their attempt to discredit him absolutely appalling, but I know that it is something that our favourite correspondent totally supports. Terrible stuff from those two, but a great program for its breadth of coverage and overall well-balanced approach.

I have said it before and I’ll say it again, because it is very important, and strongly relevant to this thread:- farmers are the ones who are going suffer from any exacerbated rift between themselves and the wider community, because they are the minority and don’t hold the power of government or big business. It is very strongly to their disadvantage for some individuals who align themselves with farmers to accentuate the us-and-them mentality and to strongly project hate for the perceived enemy – practically anyone who is not a farmer.