Mention of the Micro soft founders billions given freely often see cynical replies.
But he is not alone in doing just that.
Our Dick Smith, seen by some as tainted for helping greens, gives too.
And while the bloke is anti union I find it hard not to like him.
As many do give, and want nothing but good out comes in return,we should not focus only on our would be buyers of power.

You are forgetting one thing, these billionaires, or their fathers, bought arid land, mostly in places that may not have been the A hole of the world, but if you looked hard, you could have seen it from there.

That's a huge gamble, and one that most folk would not dare risk, especially with the increased awareness of the likes of both 'environmental' and 'cultural heritage' issue over the past decade or two.

Now as for all Australians owning the assetts, what a load of rot.

How can anyone claim to own so ething, when they havnt shared the risk.

However, if you are one of the ones who shared the risk, the shareholders , then by all means, you own a part of it.

Our collective governments have sat back for decades while these people's forefathers have bought this land and it is only now, that the value of the assett has gone mad, that they want it.

In America, if your land has oil, it's yours! But not here.

I say again, if you share the risk, you should share the gains.

Finally, just remember, these assett WERE STOLEN by governments in 1910 and 1923.

So what about some compensation for that theft.

yep funny how starving the peasents[potatoe famin]
drives people to go into the wilderness

where they too live the cream time of the lord

getting govt grants..for everything
well heck govt took back the rights to that under the land
because some elites wanted what was on others lands

where their small holdings get cleared
and then big money comes in...like a god
and consolidates

i guess its just how it goes
thieves feel entitled

if its a product
lets turn it into cash

http://theintelhub.com/2012/03/09/from-road-salt-to-pink-goo-whats-in-the-food/

wonder what they do with the lumps
in that sewerrage...that was going to be made into drinking water
[at a billion dollars per white elephant..[built by mates[payed for by our taxes/increased fees

so we live of the pink anf grey goo

you seem upset about the paying of royalties
that is simply a cost of doing business

govt first bleds its own people dry

lol to gift cash
to special mates projects
Crony capitalism: Green firms burn through taxpayer dollars,
pay huge executive bonuses, then go bankrupt

The Obama Administration's green energy development program, which has leveraged billions of taxpayer dollars into high-risk green energy startups, is rapidly turning out to be one of the biggest financial scams on the American people in recent history.

A new investigative report by ABC News has revealed that many of the now-bankrupt green energy companies that received massive taxpayer-funded loan infusions from the Department of Energy (DOE) awarded huge cash bonuses to their executives shortly before crumbling.
http://www.naturalnews.com/035196_crony_capitalism_green_firms_bankruptcy.html

and when even govt largess seems too big
and it looks for yet more taxes

the big babies whinge poor me
groanups get on with making life better
lets refine the brown poop/goop into money
and freeze dry the lumps...

See, here'ds the thing about the internet.
The first link cited be UOG is owned, managed and edited by a group of shock jock radio hosts.
I'm neither agreeing or disagreeing with UOG's overall contention, just pointing out that if we're going to support our positions with references to websites, they really ought to be credible ones.
Anthony
http://www.observationpoint.com.au

Hay Anthy, please explain in detail why you thing the ABC site is more creditable, than any other.

Even if a site is run by people, whom you don't like, because of your prejudices & attitudes, it is definitely no less creditable than any other.

In fact, a site run by people with their own prejudices, paid for by my taxes is definitely less creditable than one paid for by the people who run it.

Perhaps you need to have a good look at your posts. Your arrogance comes through most of them, loud & clear.

Hi Hasbeen,
First, I didn't say the ABC was a more credible site, although I think it is.
Second, a site that makes unsupported assertions, and which is run by people who make their living from sensationalism is probably not the best and most credible source on the web.
Just sayin'
Anthony
http://www.observationpoint.com.au