Before the union movement employers could pay what they like. Employers could pay just enough to keep workers from starving, and the workers had to take it. There was great social inequality, and there still is. However, there is much less. A worker can retire with some dignity because of superannuation. Education is no longer just for the rich and religious as there is a public system open for all. Medicaid assures one that medical care is available for all. I am 93 today and am quite healthy. Part of it is due to my genes and to my life style. Part of it is due to the excellent medical care I have received in Australia.

Last year my wife had a fall and two neurosurgical interventions were necessary. Her medical care and her stay in a rehabilitation facility were supplied by the government. If we had been living in many other countries she would be dead or our resources would be so depleted that we would be spending the rest of our lives in poverty.

I appreciate the ABC and SBS. They provide commentary and documentaries of a nature the commercial networks do not supply.

In online opinion many see the Left as an enemy. The Left is rambunctious. The Left doesn’t respect authority. The Left makes a fuss. The Left demonstrates against social injustice. The Left protests wars. I appreciate the Left for making Australia a great place to live.

Dear David,

Happy Birthday to you today. May you continue to live a
happy and a healthy life. I have also experienced a vast
variety of health problems - and am grateful for the medical
attention that I was given. We've always had private medical
insurance - and that also has helped a great deal.

I think all of us should be grateful for what our governments
have done for us. We criticise and complain - but we have to
admit that despite everything Australia is a happier place
than many other countries. We should count our blessing and
stress what unites us rather than what divides us.

I hope your wife is still writing?

Dear David,

My husband, an architect, worked with a David
Fisher in the 1980s in Melbourne.

Any relation to you?

He would be about the right age to be your son
or nephew.

Happy birth day David and good afternoon Foxy.
The left, even the greens, are our conscience, they pull our trouser leg and remind us people matter.
What is the purpose of an economy if it needs to leave most.many/any one behind?
Is it evil to think caring for those who can not care for them selves is the best way to travel.
Why has generations of the right, while being in associations that are unions, tried to convince us a lower living standard for those that produce the wealth is needed.
good subject thank you

congratulations on reaching 93 David f. May you and your wife have many more blessed years. Obviously we are never going to agree on ideology. Capitalism certainly feeds greed while the early 'left' did much to give people a fair wage. Nowadays people on the left are often in very overpaid Government jobs where they virtue signal to anyone who knows that marxism is putried. abc presenters are among the worst. They ask others how much they earn wanting to hide their own overpaid tax payer funded salaries. The left have created a massive 'swamp' in Government, univerisites and even among corporate Australia.

“Medicaid” is presumably Medicare; and it doesn't help a lot unless you have access to a bulk-billing GP. And you must have private hospital insurance or you could wait months or years for elective surgery. Right and proper that is too. Your wife must have been treated as an emergency, or you wouldn't have her now. Please do not say that her care was provided by the government. It was provided by taxpayers.

You “appreciate” the Left because you are of the Left. But it is not the Left that “makes Australia a great place to live”. It is the enterprising Right that collects and organises the benefits you enjoy. But, as what passes for conservatism is now moving to the Left, we will all be on the bones of our arses very soon. You are fortunate to he 93. You will miss what is to come.

In another thread I highlight some have other views, but in truth while I said I could get it wrong you can bet the usual suspects have never had that thought.
A right that needs to rubbish those who care for others in my view is a lost right

The unions were extremely good for the workers but then they found better financial rewards in the academic/bureaucratic circles which provided the loopholes to infiltrate politics via Leftist media & shonky power mongers & the rest is history

Dear Foxy,

As far as I know he is no relation of mine.

Capitalism does three things very well.
1. Allocation of Resources
2. Organising Production
3. Concentrating Wealth

The third thing is one reason why the system breaks down. When the wealth becomes concentrated those on the top live well, and those on the bottom live in poverty. In the depression of 1929 the warehouses were bulging with goods. However, many people were unable to buy the goods that they produced. It costs money to store the goods, and the value of the goods declined. Most of the goods were junked, and the system started up again due to New Deal pump priming and preparation for WW2.

In the global financial crisis subprime mortgages were bundled and sold as financial instruments. People having mortgaged properties were unable to make payments and the banks took over the properties. With a great deal of property available and many people without the resources to buy the property, property values went down, and much of the world entered depression.

The Scandinavian countries and the Netherlands seemed to have solved the problem. They have a productive capitalistic system, political freedom, very good education and extensive social benefits. They have done by the following:

1. Encourage entrepreneurs to create wealth.
2. Have high taxes to distribute the wealth in social benefits.
3. Have a strong union movement which ensures workers will get their share of the wealth.

It works for them, and there is no reason that it wouldn’t work for us.

It works for them, and there is no reason that it wouldn’t work for us.
david f,
My suspicion is that the Scandinavians are less opportunistic & more community minded.

Dear Foxy,

My wife is not writing at the moment.

Dear runner,

Corruption is rampant. There is corruption in the corporations, the unions, the universities and the government. When I was working for Philips, one of the employees, a doctor, was sent to Kansas City to oversee a magnetic resonance imaging system. While he was there he uncovered corruption between a supplier and the hospital that was getting the system. The hospital employees were getting kickbacks from the supplier. He was fired. Apparently Philips thought it was none of his business, and it might disturb the relations between Philips and the hospital. He should have turned a blind eye to corruption. To eliminate corruption we must expose it wherever it is found.

https://www.transparency.org/news/feature/corruption_perceptions_index_2017
lists corruption by country. The ten least corrupt countries are New Zealand, Denmark, Finland, Norway, Switzerland, Singapore, Sweden, Canada, Luxembourg and the Netherlands. There are 180 countries examined, and Australia ranks 13.

I don’t know why they are the least corrupt countries. Individual could be right, and people in those countries might be more community minded. One thing the union movement does when it is working right is to make people more community minded.

Hi David,

A belated happy birthday ! May you live to 120.

Yes, we must keep working towards, thinking about, a better society which operates somewhere between the totalitarianism of socialism and the multiple opportunities for corruption inherent in capitalism. Some sort of Third Way which many people have been trying to push for over the least seventy years or more, but haven't found.

Perhaps, as Popper became resigned to, a hard-working society dedicate to incremental change where it was desperately needed, was the most likely workable way to go. Sort of a deliberately middle way, between the neo-fascism of the 'left' and the corruption possibilities of the 'right'.

I'm only 76, withered and sour, so I marvel at our persistence and dedication. If I live that long, 93, I hope I still have a glimmer of your spirit and passion, David. Le chaim.

Joe

Again mud is thrown at the left, not by informed people but those stuck in a well worn grove.
Fueled by refusal to understand, throw away insults as hollow as egg shells that have been pricked and blown out.
Some things we once had, think we still have, or will have after the right takes them away are left generated
Education health pensions, the list of things is long and mostly things we demand government give us.
Yes it failed us Capitalism is failing us a third way now please
But let it come because good people thought about it long and hard while leaving their biases in the bucket at the door

I know that you don't believe in freedom of speech, Belly, but opinions another than yours are not "insults". You are living proof of the fact that the people who know the least yap the most. What sort of "grove" are you referring to: an orange grove, an olive grove?

I am truly making an effort to avoid you ttbn but please keep your rants honest
I know it will be hard but we all need to learn new things
the forum, if not us, is worthy of much more respect than I think you are capable of.
Defending any thing left of our current government is my default position, insulting me for that reminds me some are unable to do any better

"Before the union movement employers could pay what they like. Employers could pay just enough to keep workers from starving, and the workers had to take it."

While that is strictly true, its also true to say that before democracy those things were true and before the rise of liberal capitalism, those things were true. What isn't true is the implication that the union movement was the cause of the change.

Redistribution of the new wealth of the industrial revolution occurred in countries that had strong unions and countries that had weak unionism.

The notion that the pre-union workers (say before 1850) were utterly powerless and exploited shows utter historical ignorance. The workers in the new industrial towns were there because life in these places, though immeasurably miserable by current standards, was very much better than life elsewhere. That is why there was a constant and growing movement off the land and into the towns beginning around 1750 and continuing to today. Looking at these things in isolation shows a lack of historic understanding.

The workers in these towns and cities were very much better off than their counterparts on the land. They were immeasurably better off than their grandparents.

What the left, in the main, fails to appreciate is that, to redistribute the wealth, a society has to first generate that wealth. The left has little understanding where the wealth comes from, thinking that it just happens and will continue to happen irrespective of what they do.

The left, or at least that part of it that is represented by the likes of those on these pages, doesn't understand how fragile the mechanisms behind wealth creation are. It was, for example, the great failing of the Whitlam government which, having seen unending growth post-WW2, didn't understand that they couldn't just rape the golden goose without consequence. In the end they created much more poverty than they alleviated.

/cont

/cont
(Its why I so admire Bob Hawke, who learned and implemented the lesson that its easier, and less dangerous, to ensure that the pie continues to grow even while you redistribute that growth. The ALP and most of the Libs have forgotten that lesson).

You can see the same phenomenon in places like Venezuela, once one of the richest countries on earth, and now a basket case after the left decided that redistribution of wealth could occur without regard to where the wealth came from. It was only just over a decade ago that the left's so-called intellectuals were saying we should emulate Venezuela in its socialism.

Around 1900, Argentina and Australia were the two wealthiest nations on earth. While Australia went down the path of income redistribution, it did so with caution and consent from all sides. And we remain relatively wealthy. Argentina caught the left disease and eventually threw it all away.

Part of the problem with the left is that it considers itself the home of the intellectual and knowledge. So when its shibboleths are shown to be wrong, it finds it very hard to backtrack. The area north of the Crimea was a net exporter of food for at least 2500yrs before 1917 when the left's theories were implemented there to try to 'improve' things. As they failed, utterly utterly failed, there was no avenue for the left to admit error. So they didn't and the area remains a net importer of food.

Likewise Venezuela continues to implement policies that have clearly failed and the left in the rest of the west continues to cheer those policies. The USA's leftists implemented policies in the 1960's to lift the blacks out of poverty. Those policies have clearly failed a portion of the black community, which is why many blacks are now looking to Trump for better solutions. In Australia, the notion that social policy could lift all aboriginals out of poverty is clearly wrong. But the left cannot bring itself to admit it and failed policies continue and aboriginal poverty continues.

/cont

/cont

Another problem we see with the left 'idealism' is that there is no notion of an end point. Yes there is relative poverty in Australia, with people below the poverty line. But there will always be relative povery. But what about absolute poverty? Today's poor having living standards that would be the envy of the richest classes from a century ago. But there is no acknowledgement or, perhaps even undrstanding, that absolute poverty has been long since solved in the capitalist west thanks to the wealth created by those the left hates.

Its all very well for the left to claim kudos for helping the poor. But that help is paid for by the productive classes. To the extent that the left fails to see this, it endangers the economy and therefore the nation. To be sure, we need those who point out inequality and work to alleviate it. But we also need those who keep a check on misplaced idealism and who keep a look out for the welfare of the wealth-making mechanisms.

__________________________________________________________________--
"The Left doesn’t respect authority. "

On the contrary the left adores authority... so long as they have it. They disrespect it in others hands, but defend it absolutely when they have it.

The young girl boasting of shop lifting and drug taking and being a Greens canditate speaks a million words. Very typical. Would not be surprised if she is also sucking on the teet of Government while stealing off hard working Aussies. To think the Greens get 10% of the vote. And they call Hanson extreme!

Political protagonists are more likely to identify
themselves as conservative or progressive rather
than right or left.

Today we are a collectively more educated and informed
society and simple sloganeering with left or right
bias no longer holds sway. Tony Abbott and Co. it
seems are slow to learn this lesson.

runner you do know by the stand you take in every thread you are an extremist?
Pick a politician, say barn yard Barnaby Joyce, dig deep enough, about one mm will do, you will find dirt.
But transferring that to his whole party takes a special type of blindness

Did the Left ever have something like this ?

https://www.businessinsider.com.au/australia-trade-surplus-september-2018-11

'runner you do know by the stand you take in every thread you are an extremist?'

Of course I know Belly. In a dumbed down environment where biology is denied and babies are murdered, gw prophecies fail daily, gender is removed from birth certificates, homosexuality is promoted to kids, yep I am an extremist by pointing out facts. You just stick to the mainstream Belly if it makes you feel better.

some of the left showing that they are identical to the Westboro Baptist ' i hate fag' mob by protesting against Trump family paying respect for the murdered Jews. What a despicable bunch! More of Belly's mainstream I suspect. You would think funerals would be above the grubby left's policies although after those leftist women liars tried to destroy Kavannaugh nothing should surpise as to how low they will go.

Dear runner,

I believe that both Judge Kavanaugh and the woman who accused him were telling the truth.

She remembered the incident because it had a great impact on her.

He had no memory of the incident and denied it. He forgot it because it meant little to him and he possibly was drunk at the time.

I think a person's political beliefs have nothing to with their truthfulness. Your political opinions are very different from mine. That does not make you a liar. My political opinions are very different from yours. That does not make me a liar.

Dear david f,

Judge Kavanaugh claimed to have been a virgin at the time, so it would not have meant so little to him even if he was drunk.

They can not both be telling the truth. One of them is lying, and we don't know which one.

Yep David f you are certainly a typical leftie who believes a narrative rather than the truth.

Dear Aidan,

Kavanaugh could have been telling the truth about being a virgin. He still could have forgotten about the assault.

I remember being in an army camp in the summer of 1944, and everybody was grieving about the death of President Roosevelt. I was in an army camp in the summer of 1944, but President Roosevelt died in 1945. I remember wearing a blue coat with yellow brass buttons when I was a little boy. It was snowing, and I took a long walk with my father past the Commodore Apartments in Syracuse. My father said it never happened. I don't know whether it did or didn't. Maybe my father forgot. Maybe I imagined it because I wanted my father to take a long walk with me. I have memories that seem true to me but obviously are in question.

I think both Ford and Kavanaugh were honorable people. I had the impression that Professor Ford was telling she thought was the truth and so was Judge Kavanaugh. Neither had witnesses to back up their version of events.

If we question both sides on every issue we go out of our way to bury the truth.
In this case some of the mans friends said he was a far different, often dangerous, man than he told us he was

Dear Belly,

We really still don't know for sure what happened. It was a party line vote at the end. Republicans supported Kavanaugh. Democrats supported Ford. What was truth was lost in the politics.

Yeah we know David f this woman had a fear of flying, The guy she had been shacked up with for years never knew. She had manmy trips with him never mentioning it. Your discernment is greatly lacking.

Comrades! having been charged by the rabid right with being lefty [a term used to insult any view other than theirs] I hereby gift you the title comrade.
We meet here time to time, park our rusted Combi wagon along side their rolls Royce and throw our empty milk shake containers at them
Or we could ask them what is a lefty? left of what?

David,

Funny how a left whinge government in power it takes years to clear up the mess.

As for Ford and Kavanaugh, the left whingers think that all that is required is to give a stirring and emotional speech to settle an argument and that detail and proof are for dummies.

The problem with Ford's testimony is that it was completely bereft of any verifiable detail. Given that Ford was a staunch democratic supporter, and her recollection of the "incident" could not recall the date, the address or anyone else that was there, it sounded more like a protection against a perjury charge than a genuine recollection.

There were a lot of things that were not investigated
due to the lack of time given. Much was not looked into
and much was simply accepted without a thorough
investigation being carried out. None of us can really
claim to be the fountain of knowledge to which all should
aspire. Hopefully - history will be the judge - eventually.
Probably though not under President Trump.

funny stuff SM great for the garden however
Again and again the right here reminds us why they, not the left are dangerous.
Truth is first victim every time

Re Kavanaugh:

"There were a lot of things that were not investigated
due to the lack of time given."

Such as?

Remember there were three women making accusations against Kavanaugh. All three were utterly believed by the left until two of their stories became so untenable that not even the most biased could accept them. Then those women were cut loose and those of a certain leaning pretended that they never existed. Only now do we find out that some of the news agencies knew before hand that these women were making it up, but decided to hide the facts so as to help the Democrat narrative.

As to Ford, yes it is theoretically possible that her story is true and/or that she really beleives it....in the same way as its theoretically possible that the planet Proxima Centauri b is made of strawberry yoghurt.
While it is true that its possible that Kavanaugh has simply forgotten the facts of this 'rape', it is also true that its possible that Ford is suffering from recovered false memories and that she misremembers what happened. After all she misremembered the facts behind the second door she installed in her house and misremembered the facts about her 'inability' to fly and misremembered the facts that her attorneys told her she didn't need to fly to DC.

On the other hand, maybe she correctly remembered that no one ever went broke telling the left what it wants to hear...
http://www.breitbart.com/politics/2018/10/29/kavanaugh-accuser-christine-blasey-ford-rakes-in-1-million-several-book-offers/

Of coarse, we are told that these days, all women must be believed in matters of rape and sexual assault. Unless those women are accusing a Clinton or a Booker or an Ellison or any other luminary of the left, in which case the process is to release the left leaning daleks and exterminate. Where is Monica these days? Not to mention Juanita Broaddrick.

The whole thing was designed to destroy a good man's life and that of his family for crass political advantage.

mhaze,

There is so much on the web from so many sources -
including the Washington Post, Huffington Post,
and others, regarding the FBI probe and White House cover
up concerning Kavanaugh.

Here is just one link on the subject:

http://edition.cnn.com/2018/10/05/opinions/kavanaugh-fbi-probe-cover-up-opinion-ghitis/index.html

There's more if you're interested.

//While it is true that its possible that Kavanaugh has simply forgotten the facts of this 'rape', it is also true that its possible that Ford is suffering from recovered false memories and that she misremembers what happened.//

TLDR: nobody is psychic and we'll never know for sure; but the allegations are unproven and the presumption of innocence still applies even to dicks like Kavanaugh.

Truth is first victim every time,
Belly,
yes, without fail but why are you then so vehement to defend the truth-lkillers ?

indy I just know you can not defend your last post
You never do never try
Without evidence you hurl a single line in to the comments and wander off grinning to your self, no doubt saying that told them.
Show me, just once, your evidence who gave you the info she lied
What insight do you have that we lack,
gee, see in one post enough words for ten of yours!
Shame is this one has merit

So Foxy,

Nothing more to be investigated, just more people to talk to who had no knowledge of the alleged rape(s). Frankly I'm surprised the FBI was able to fill in a 5 days with this investigation. I guess it took 4 days to stop laughing - investigate a rape where the 'victim' doesn't know when it happened, where it happened, who was there when it happened, no forensics and never mentioned by anyone for 30 years.

The one and only aim here was to drag it out. That's why the Democrats sat on the claim for 2 months before unleashing the dogs. Their aim was t drag it out past the elections in the hope that they'd win the Senate and kill the nomination. They didn't care what damage they did to the individuals concerned (including Ford) or to the nation's institutions. Or delay until Kavanaugh and/or Trump caved as other presidents and nominees had previous. But they were made of sterner stuff.

On the other hand, perhaps the FBI should have investigated more. We now have one of the accusers admitting it was all made up...

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/11/02/brett-kavanaugh-accuser-referred-fbi-doj-investigation/1863210002/

They are now referred to the Justice Dept. That now makes 4 people under DOJ investigation over false claims. Plus Ford's lawyers referred to their Bar Association for misconduct.

Perhaps you could help me with one thing that confuses me. Under #metoo we are told we must believe all women. But when a woman says she was raped and then that she wasn't raped, which version should we believe? Or do we adopt the left's version of doublethink and believe both?

Toni,

Had to lookup TLDR meaning. Usefully I found this...

"Too Long. Didn't Read.

Frequently used acronym by lazy, ignorant people in Internet Forums, where their urge to type something exceeds their ability to read something or if they generally lack semantic ability to either comprehend or respond to a post.

Stating that they were to lazy reading someone else's post just confirms the ignorant attitude.

The average IQ of people typing TLDR in Internet forums is about 64."

mhaze,

According to reputable sources like CNN, NBC News,
Washington Post, Huffington Post, and others.

The investigation was limited in scope and incomplete.
The White House directed the FBI's
probe leaving key witnesses off the interview list.
In other words - the White Hose straitjacketed this
investigation. It really is the story of unfollowed
leads, unanswered questions and uninterviewed witnesses.
It raised more questions than it answered.

However, I am not going to argue with you. You have a
right to your opinion. I have a right to ignore it.
The facts speak for themselves. And I prefer to go with
the facts - and not the sham and the horrific cover up
that followed.

As for what some organisation says about women - that doesn't
hold much sway with me. I make up my mind on a case by case
basis.

Oh dear Foxy,


CNN and NBC are reputable (??) but the Dept of Justice is 'some organisation'.

NBC have been outed as having hidden data that showed that one of the accusers (Ramirez) was likely lying. But they are reputable.

Meanwhile the DOJ is being asked to look into charging a woman who admitted lying and they are some organisation??

I wouldn't have enough allowed posts over the next week to cover all the irreputable actions of CNN but this is a mere flavour....

http://www.dailywire.com/news/23206/koi-gate-cnn-deceptively-edits-japan-video-show-emily-zanotti

"I make up my mind on a case by case
basis."

Yes I see that. If the case isn't what you want to be true its ignored. Otherwise its reputable.

mhaze,

The organisation that I referred to in response to your
raising it regarding women - was the "metoo," organisation
not the Justice Department. I would have thought that
this was self-evident.

As for the rest of your post?

I can see what you believe - thanks for sharing.

Q! there did it, some Americans fall at the feet of that letter, Q see they think it is code for some thing they are not sure of but like it as it in their view is on Trumps side.
madness but that is modern day right of reality for you. Q

The left, in a desperate attempt at trying to make themselves even marginally relative, keep coming up with insignificant and irrelevant things, which are mainly means of deflection, such as trying to latch on to owning the ridiculous notion that they are the instigators and the promoters of this spurious attempt to change the titles of 'left' and 'right' to 'progressive' and 'conservative'.
Did you catch the subtle 'pat on the back', or to put it in their language, 'look at moi, look at moi'.
Progressive my arse.
And the right is 'conservative'?
If you mean we are mature and focused with actual achievements which benefit everyone, just to scratch the surface, then YES!
If by 'progressive', you mean out of control, immature, irrational, narrow views, no foresight, and much more then, YES!
The left don't get to make major decisions because they are incapable of the three dimensional thinking involved, and the size of the parameters involved.
The left can only see what is directly in front of them and imagine the rest.
That's OK because they have the mental capacity and maturity of children so we pat them on the head tell them how wonderful they are and move on allowing us to make the 'real' decisions and implement them.
Oh, news flash, stop using words like 'hard working Australians', that's a myth.
The 'hard working' meter was thrown out very early as one of the blackmail demands of the unions.
I think I saw one in a museum dedicated to a time before unionism, it was a telling experience walking through the displays.
It showed what a 'worker' actually looked like.
Then we entered the new and bigger museum of the post union era.
We could not see a display of a 'worker' let alone a 'hard worker'.
We saw people taking smoke breaks, paid maternity leave, standing around laughing and carrying on, and plenty more, especially in the 'hall of entitlements', it went on forever.
But we never saw this fictional person, the 'hard worker'

Political commentators tell us that -

The Coalition government is polling at around
46 to 54 on current indications. On any measure
that's an incipient electoral wipe out. Right
now the government is in the position of
Wile E. Coyote after running off a cliff; its
legs are still pumping but the final plunge is
only a matter of time. And that means politics in
Australia is about to get very weird. The government
continues to govern because it must. But it has no idea
what it is governing for, or what it wants to achieve
in the next six months.

We're warned that there will be many more hare-brained
schemes, wacky Senate votes, and policies-by-announcement
in months to come.

Interesting times ahead.

Foxy, so how is that any different from what we have been putting up with for the last hundred years or more?
Nothing changes, only the date.

That's because the Liberal Party has spent more
time in government than any other federal political
party in Australian history.

thanks for the thread I got a lot out of it, the right of reality crowd filled me with hope.
Ranting and raving about a left that now firmly sits in the ground they came from.
Truth not considered they ran in kicking and squealing about the phantom left and re-enforced the case for a stable center they insist on calling left.

Belly,
The truth is that you're having yourself on. Ranting & raving as you say is not a good thing but it's not as bad as lying & believing lies.

Foxy,

"The organisation that I referred to in response to your
raising it regarding women - was the "metoo," organisation
not the Justice Department. I would have thought that
this was self-evident."

Well, since there is no such thing as the metoo organisation, I'd have to say that it was utterly, sectacularly, monumental UNself-evident.

Frankly I find it mind-boggling that anyone who hasn't been comatose for the past 12 months wouldn't know about #metoo. OTOH, since you think NBC is reputable and they have been instrumnetal in trying to suppress #metoo issues, perhaps you have managed to avoid it.

But assuming that you really did refer to #metoo as "some organisation" (I actually think this is just another of your attempts to hide an error) then let's all note that Foxy is utterly unconcerned about what the #metoo movement thinks about women ..."As for what some organisation says about women - that doesn't hold much sway with me. "

oh what a tangled web....

mhaze,

It appears that you Sir have too much time on
your hands.

However, once again - Thank You for sharing.

another standard post from my mate indy, probably a good bloke if you get to know him.
Suspect he thinks his views are incisive that every one agrees
had a mate once, reminds me of you indy, his nick name was yabby, meat in the tail you know the rest

mhaze,
The abbreviation tl;dr is used in two completely different contexts. An indication of the poster's laziness is the less common context. The more common context is to indicate they're providing a summary for other readers too lazy to read the whole thing.

Now regarding your Thursday posts:
You seem to have fallen hook line and sinker for the myth that the Right want to grow the pie but the Left just want to redistribute it. In reality the Left are at least as interested in economic growth as the Right, but they try to achieve it in different ways. The Right try to make the "productive classes" more productive by giving them more incentive; the Left try to increase the productivity of the less productive by giving them more opportunity. This is likely to bring greater economic benefits (especially as the strategy of the Right has prevailed over the last few decades) and definitely brings greater social benefits.

Whitlam was before my time, but from what I've heard (mainly on TV) Whitlam's main problem was unfortunate timing, with the effect of huge oil price rises affecting not just the Aussie economy but many round the world. Have you any evidence his government stifled wealth creation?

Venezuela's an interesting one. Certainly the current socialist government are terrible economic managers, but the problems largely predate them. The country was always highly dependent on oil, and almost every time the oil price has been low (relative to its past highs) the country has been in trouble. If only they'd let the market determine the value of the Bolivar, nearly all the trouble could have been avoided. Instead they've had catastrophic devaluations and rampant inflation (and more recently, hyperinflation).

A fixed currency rate is also to blame for many of Argentina's recent problems, but I think their 20th century problems were mainly caused by lack of accountability rather than Left v Right.

(tbc)

mhaze (continued_

You're partly right about Aboriginal poverty, but one of the things that makes it worse is politicians prematurely declaring programs to be failures without even giving them a chance to succeed.

Regarding your "where will it end?" question: true poverty is not a measure of relative income, but nor does not just mean destitution. Poverty is the inability, due to lack of resources, to fully participate in society. As society progresses, it is only right that everyone has access to what previous generations may not even have dreamed of.

Your notion that the Left hates the productive, or indeed the rich, is also completely wrong.

Regarding respect for authority, it's partly due to a different view of what Authority is. There are many on the Right who think authority comes from above, rather than from people's willingness to respect it. Having said that, there are also many on the Right whose views on authority are driven primarily by self interest.

Re Kavanaugh,

Foxy thought that if only there'd been a more thorough investigation then he'd have been outed as the rapist all good leftist know he is...or something.

The US Senate have just released the report about their investigation of Kavanaugh and his accusers. To summarise the 414 page report...

“After an extensive investigation that included the thorough review of all potentially credible evidence submitted and interviews of more than 40 individuals with information relating to the allegations, including classmates and friends of all those involved, Committee investigators found no witness who could provide any verifiable evidence to support any of the allegations brought against Justice Kavanaugh. In other words, following the separate and extensive investigations by both the Committee and the FBI, there was no evidence to substantiate any of the claims of sexual assault made against Justice Kavanaugh,”

Another interesting take is that they apparently are continuing to investigate likely witness tampering in regards to Ford's evidence.

Another quote...
"The witnesses that Dr. Ford identified as individuals who could corroborate her allegations failed to do so, and in fact, contradicted her."

Hopefully people will end up behind bars as an example. But the deep state protects its own, so probably not.

The Left. Sounds like The Pox, or The Plague, only more dangerous.

"The Left. Sounds like The Pox, or The Plague, only more dangerous."

Some think of people whose political positions are different from theirs as a disease rather than as people with a different opinion. In Australia there are a number of political parties and political opinions. I agree with some of them, disagree with some of them, partially agree with some of them and partially disagree with some of them. All the people in different parties and with different opinions are human. Thinking of a group of people as a Pox or Plague makes it easier to physically eliminate them. Nazi propaganda showed Jews as vermin. The Holocaust followed. Do we want to think of people with different opinions in the same way?

Dear David F.,

Bravo!

//But the deep state//

Ye gods, the deep state? Really, mhaze? I expected better of you.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uWd6XgBVIcg

I'm OK with Jews and I deeply regret the Holocaust, David. It's your Left that I don't like. It is a bigger threat to the West than Islam, and it is increasingly anti-Semitic.

Unfortunately, there is the revival of the idea of socialism throughout the developed world, largely championed by people who have no idea what socialism actually entails, but who are disappointed with the current system not delivering all the outcomes they want and/or not to the extent they want, and socialism sounds like something cool that’s not the current system.

At 93, you should know better. You have lived through it. As an academic, you were, perhaps, part of it?

mhaze,

Re: Kavanaugh

Come on. You can't be that gullible?

Of course the US Senate which has a Republican Majority
is going to support their President and his choice of
a Supreme Court Judge. And of course they won't "find"
anything in the FBI Report. Here you had a conservative
President who had his conservative nominee and the
conservative majority in the Senate of course would be
predisposed to put that nominee on the Supreme Court
for life. They could do not less.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-10-05/senate-panel-gets-fbi-report-on-kavanaugh-misconduct-accusations/10340030

Dear ttbn,

You are also human.

Foxy, so now that someone has given the source of their reasoning, and because you don't agree with it, or it doesn't confirm your version of the 'truth', it's suddenly not true or not acceptable.
When you do this you are showing your hypocrisy, and your true state of mind.
When others suggest that there are opposing views to yours, they are immediately challenged as being stupid and un-informed or dispatched, aggressively dismissing anyone who dared to question anything you say.
Well guess what, there are always more than one version of events, and unless you or the author were present when said incidents took place, I will steadfastly demand you not make comments as if you are the only one who knows the truth or the facts on everything posted on OLO.
Become the 'bigger man' and accept that there is always another view, and that people are corrupt, dishonest, greedy, selfish, lazy, and many more bad things.
I feel sick when you go on and on with the veiled attempt at promoting the 'everything and everyone is rosey', line.
The truth is not what you describe.
What you describe is your version of the truth.
Unfortunately, because your version is only something you desire, it has no bearing on the 'real' world, and so it is that your comments, even though very sweet, are just not relevant to any 'real' discussion.
They would be perfect for a forum discussing the way things should/could be, but just not here where it is expected to discuss what IS!

individual,
Regarding your question on Thursday, IIRC large trade surpluses occurred under the Rudd and Hawke governments.

Our balance of trade has more to do with the strength of our dollar than who's in power. It's quite easy to run a big trade surplus when our dollar is weak as it currently is.

ALTRAV! that medication is not a SUPPOSITORY
Now go and wash your hands

What positives do we ever get from the Left ? All I seem to see is divison, low morale, corruption, incompetence, PC, professional stupidity, bureaucratic nonsense & fleecing of wage earners. I'm told registration fees are going up again in Qld which has a leftist Govt.

A mixed economy, based on democratic principles, that allows fairness and social justice for all is the most workable and desirable system possible.

"Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time."
Sir Winston Churchill, November 11, 1947

A mixed economy, based on democratic principles,
Paul1405,
I'd call that exploiting loopholes & promoting greed. If you really want a democratic economy then you'd need to agree to a flat tax but you wouldn't like that because the opportunists wouldn't make as much as they do now. Leftists aren't economic managers, they're managers of mismanaging public funding.

Come to think of it, a lead balloon kind of policy by way of an upper limit for profit would stimulate the economy to a huge extent. And, of course a limit to Public service salaries. No-one should earn more than the PM. Even the PM's get too much already in return for their performances.
Now, would that be more democratic or not ?.

Foxy wrote: "Come on. You can't be that gullible?"

You didn't even read the source material did you Foxy?

This new report isn't from the FBI, which you might have gleaned had you bothered to even peruse the document. But mustn't read anything that might discredit what we know to be true, eh Foxy?

After the brouhaha of early October and the FBI's last report, the Senate Judiciary Committee (SJC) then set about doing further investigations into some of the claims made. Earlier in this thread, you asserted, based upon one of your 'reputable' sources that insufficient numbers of people had been questioned. Well the SJC did that further investigation and this report is its findings.

So earlier it was a cover up because insufficient numbers were investigated, now its a coverup because...well just because.

Its true that 11 members of the SJC are Republicans but 10 are Democrats. Not a single one of those 10 have disputed the report at this stage. Remember that Ford, Ramerez etc are no longer of any use to the Democrats, so no more protection is necessary.

But for some, no amount of evidence will sway them.

_________________________________________________________________

Toni,

This time two years ago I would have agreed that the deep state was a mere conspiracy theory among nutters on both sides. But enough has been found in that two year period to show that there is a well organised group at the highest levels of the various US government agencies whose commitment to their own position and power supersedes all other concerns and that they have been manipulating the press, the judiciary and the government to achieve their aims. Issues like Uranium One, HRC's emails, spying on Trump, railroading Flynn etc have persuaded me.

One of those accused in the report of witness tampering is ex-FBI. I assume she'll be protected.

mhaze,

We're going to have to agree to disagree on the
issue of Kavanaugh.

Have a nice day - and again Thank You for sharing.
Your opinion obviously means a great deal.

Aidan,

Within the constraints of a few hundred words, its not possible to talk about all the nuances of a argument. OF coarse not all the left fail to understand the importance of economic growth to achieve true redistribution. I did talk of Hawke etc.

But in the main, the left is distrustful of capitalism and the market and, when they seek to achieve growth they seek other routes...and those other routes almost invariably lead to problems.

A case in point here was Whitlam. He, by his own admission, was an economic illiterate. He's seen the previous multi-decade growth and, not knowing how it happened, built a career on spending the new wealth. I agree the fates conspired to cause the post-war economic miracle to evaporate just as he took over. But that didn't cause him to pause in his desire to implement programmes designed for better times. He and his party just ploughed on because they had no understanding of how to respond to new circumstances. To be sure, they did try to enhance growth (eg the disastrous tariff cuts) but that only created more problems. The end result was unemployment more than doubling, even after a precipitous fall in the participation rate, and inflation getting completely out of control, at least in Australian terms. As per their programmes, workers were given significant pay rises but inflation ate that up even for those who kept their jobs.

The government thought that the government could save the bacon by doing what governments do. So they borrowed and spent, even illegally. Only right at the end did they get good economic managers in place (previously they'd had an ex-communist Jim Cairns as Treasurer) in the likes of Bill Hayden, but by then it was too late.

/cont

/cont

Its true that Venezuela has relied on oil. But that rather is the point. Over the decades, rather than use the wealth to provide stability to the economy, they simply spread it around. And when the oil wealth disappeared, rather than learn, they simply doubled-down on more welfare spending until they got to the current quagmire. Argentina was similar. Its true that if oil remained high (or wool in Argentina's case) then their policies would have been OK. But those commodities did decline and it was insane to assume they wouldn't. As Glenn Reynolds says, socialist countries always seem to have a lot of back luck. He's being factious!


" Poverty is the inability... to fully participate in society. "

Well that's one definition. That's relative poverty. There will always be relative poverty because the only way to eradicate it is to introduce policies that destroy the economy. Australia's poverty line is basically designed to ensure that 20% of the population will fall below that line.

I've no problem with that understanding. But people, such as david f go from that truth to assuming that all poverty is the same. But today's poor have a standard of living that would be the envy of yesteryear's rich. But there is a lack of understanding that progress continues and the poor are getting richer. Fail to understand that and you fail to understand why the left's programmes are to be feared.

mhaze,
When you say the Left is distrustful of capitalism, you should be a bit clearer on what you mean. Because if by capitalism you mean keeping capital scarce so that more benefits flow to the financiers rather than the producers, the Left are right to be distrustful and it's a major failing of the Right that they're not. Whereas if you mean free market economics, the criticism is valid but could equally be applied to many on the Right. Tony Abbott in particular is very distrustful of the market, and the Liberals in general seem to have an even worse track record than Labor. In fact, considering you described Whitlam's tariff cuts as "disastrous", you seem to be rather distrustful of the market yourself!

Absolutely everything, including the Do Nothing option, leads to problems. The more sensible options also solve problems. Leaving everything to the market is often a false economy: firstly the markets often have a strong short term bias, and secondly the most profitable option isn't always the one that's best for users or the public.

(tbc)

mhaze (continued)
In 20th century Venezuela, the government was deeply reliant on debt. If they'd had a floating currency, that wouldn't have been a problem. But with a fixed currency it was a recipe for disaster, especially when the oil price crashed. Eventually the government was forced to make unpopular and very damaging cuts, shrinking the economy and impoverishing the population. That was the main reason why the socialists came to power in the 1999 election.

As for Argentina, remember Australia was also heavily reliant on wool. But we'd floated our dollar before the wool price crash, so it was easy for us to recover.

>" Poverty is the inability... to fully participate in society. "
>Well that's one definition. That's relative poverty.

No it isn't. Relative poverty is earning less than half the median wage. That does not determine your ability to fully participate in society. Indeed by investing in community facilities, the government can reduce poverty even while relative poverty is rising. Conversely by closing community facilities, the government can increase poverty even while relative poverty is falling.

>the only way to eradicate [relative poverty] is to introduce policies that destroy the economy
Even if that is true (which I strongly doubt) it doesn't mean policies that reduce relative poverty from its current level would damage the economy.

>But there is a lack of understanding that progress continues and the poor are getting richer.
That's because it generally isn't true. As governments in rich countries accepted the neoliberal consensus, the poor stopped getting richer after more and more of the burden of taxation was shifted onto them, and wages have hardly grown at all.

You appear to fear change because you fail to see the enormous problem with the status quo.

Must be left!I do not trust the banks
Did not trust the government refusing to have a Royal Commission in to them, 26 times!
thanks m haze for putting me on the right track

Hi Belly,

We can't be too concerned about The Left, now we hear the Extreme Right has got a foot hold in the Coalition, with the Nationals admitting there is a Nazi cell within. Of course we can expect the Nationals with the likes of George Christensen and Barnaby Joyce as members to make a token gesture of expelling the odd Nazi or two. I have long suspected that there are many extremist living a happy political life in the Coalition, after all the Liberal Party has their Tony Abbott, he was Prime Minister and Peter Dutton, and the extremist Hanson of the far right One Nation was once a candidate for political office to represent the Liberals in Canberra. People will have to be so careful when voting for the Coalition, they don't know who they might vote into power.

Paul yes true, we however have a problem, those who miss use the term left, are from a very real danger to world peace
the non-thinking right

Who is miss use ? Where does she fit in ?

individual rest take it easy, we do not want you falling off that rocking chair.

Individual, I hear there are a lot of hopeless people out there who have trouble with simple mental and motor skills, like just walking down the street.
Whether it's playing sports, like football, cricket even golf, or discussing simple matters, they are so predictable, they are known as the losers because they lose at everything.
Every time they bowl or return a serve or hit a golf or cricket ball, they have a serious bias to the left.
Because of this and their inability to accept they are handicapped, and the fact that others are well aware of this flaw, they are predictable and so lose every time.
At everything.

Mark me left, mark me idiot, see I truly think the very right, not conservatives true right, are a threat to humanity.
That they lack the ability to see truth even if it is under their nose.
Not an over generous left, not a failure left that gives without reason.
These days demand a thinking left, a reforming welfare left, that thinks getting a return for the community is no crime.
a left that funds health education but demands value for money from them too.
all in all my demands/wishes are driven by a very real fear we,those who care for others, must beat the extreme right back underground before it destroys us all.

Aidan wrote: "When you say the Left is distrustful of capitalism, you should be a bit clearer on what you mean... if you mean free market economics, the criticism is valid"

Well I did say "the left is distrustful of capitalism and the market" so I guess we are agreed "the criticism is valid". :)

Aidan wrote: "..considering you described Whitlam's tariff cuts as "disastrous", you seem to be rather distrustful of the market yourself!"

I'm mostly in favour of tariff cuts. But Whitlam's were done entirely the wrong way and for entirely the wrong reasons. They need to be done with forewarning and incrementally. Because they were done in the wrong way and for the wrong reasons they destroyed industries and jobs. Perhaps acquaint yourself with history before jumping to conclusions about my position.

You go on to offer reasons why this or that nation failed. Let me stipulate that every nation has its own unique proximate causes for going down hill. But the overriding underlying cause is that leftist need to redistribute without regard to economic circumstances. That was the point of the joke about socialist countries having lots of bad luck. People like you always want to look at the proximate causes without regard to the background. eg you want to say that Australia absorbed the wool price fall because of a floating exchange rate as opposed to Argentina. But you've git the timing all wrong. I was talking about the way wool enriched Argentina and Australia in the 1900s not the 1980s. Floating rates or not, Australia had long since moved beyond agriculture as its mainstay wealth creating. Argentina didn't.

I know you have this fetish that devaluations can fix every governmental and policy error but it just isn't true in all cases. Places like Argentina and Venezuela demonstrate it. Devaluations as a solution to economic woes is only valid if the nation has other wealth sources to fall back on. But socialist nations don't have creation of those other sources as a priority.

/cont

/cont

"Relative poverty is earning less than half the median wage."

No that's being below the poverty line. Relative poverty is a term in juxtaposition to absolute poverty. People on $2 a day are absolutely poor in any terms. People below the poverty line in Australia are poor relative to others in the society but not absolutely poor ie they can feed and house themselves based on the welfare they receive.

"the poor stopped getting richer after more and more of the burden of taxation was shifted onto them, and wages have hardly grown at all."

Well now you're just making it up. The real value of the poverty line in Australia has grown by over 30% in the past 3 decades. So someone on the poverty line today is 30% richer than the same person on that line 30 years ago.
The poor don't pay income taxes.
Real wages have continued to grow over any period over a year you care to mention.

"You appear to fear change because you fail to see the enormous problem with the status quo."

I'm all in favour of change. But I'm against economic suicide. "enormous problem" is a relative term. I'll bet the people of Venezuela or Russia or even China would love to have our enormous problems.

Belly, YOU may think what you like, luckily, this an opinion forum.
The unfortunate thing is that the left are good at making demands and spending other peoples money.
Your ilk are so eaten up with feeling like the underdogs, you refuse to accept that without the right, there would be no opportunity for the left to make ANY demands.
The left may see itself as some kind of saviour of the people, when it is the right who have that title.
The word left in Latin, roughly derives from the word 'sinistra', which relates to the word, sinister.
The left has always had a sinister connotation, this is the foundation of the 'left'.
The right have never been 'underground', unlike the left, who have a whole history of being so.
Without the right, the left would have nothing.
You speak of reform as if the left have a clue about it.
For the left to make it's self righteous demands they can only do it when the right create the medium by which the left can make demands from.
If it were up to the left, nothing would happen.
The left and their philosophy are a failure, and history confirms this.
The left refuse to accept the blame that ALL the industrial problems and failures over the years are directly created by the narrow and blinkered, irrational and arrogant attitude of the left.
Without the right, there would be no left.
This Aussie right may be crap, but it does not mean that the Aussie left is the answer.
Socialism and communism are just two of the social failures, but just because you don't like the word capitalism doesn't mean it isn't the answer.
You don't get to spend someone else's money so the left can set up their own companies and then they can preach to the world, but only if/when it actually succeeds.
As this has never happened, I would suggest the left shut up and learn how to manage/spend their income by learning to live within their means.

ALTRAV sorry but let me be honest you are the last person I will look to for intelligent thought

The left and their philosophy are a failure, and history confirms this.
Altrav,
That statement belongs in Wikipedia & other encyclopedia. It is the most apt I have read thus far.

mhaze
>I know you have this fetish that devaluations can fix every governmental and policy error
If that's what you think you know, you have COMPLETELY misunderstood my position.

It's floating currencies that I support; not devaluations.

One reason for this is that the small real-time devaluations the market makes ensure the country is always competitive, and avoid the need for the bigger (and much more inflationary) devaluations that can become necessary with a managed exchange rate.

Devaluations were necessary in Argentina and Venezuela. If they had let the market determine their currency values, no such action would have been needed.

>Devaluations as a solution to economic woes is only valid if the nation has other wealth sources to fall back on.
Though I'm all for the development of other wealth sources, I don't follow your logic here. Surely a nation reliant on a single wealth source would have FAR MORE need to devalue if that wealth source becomes uncompetitive, BECAUSE OF the lack of alternatives to fall back on?

>But socialist nations don't have creation of those other sources as a priority.
Although that's true of (present day) Venezuela, it's not true in the general sense - the economic philosophy of the government does not predetermine its priorities, and it's not only socialist countries that have become reliant on a single commodity.

Another reason I support floating currencies is that they enable countries to put all their resources to good use, whereas fixed currencies require governments to waste resources defending the currency.

I'll reply to the rest of your post later, but meanwhile I hope you now understand my position on this issue and the reasons for it.

Much of what is condemned as leftist these days was in fact the policies Sir Robert Menzies based his then new party the Liberal party on.
Research find his policies, tell me! if you can prove me wrong.
He, others such as Fraser, held far different views than todays party.
A party that not walked away from its true base but galloped.
think with me here, today we learned 59 percent of American women voted Democrat.
In my view a sure sign men in suits are not forever going to get away with marginalising even their own base and women.

Belly, you have to know one very glaring fact about the American voters.
They actually don't have to vote.
Where-as we in Australia, HAVE TO VOTE, by law, yes it is ILLEGAL not to vote.
In America if people are dis-interested or lazy or just can't be bothered, they don't have to vote.
So if there are enough people keen to make a point they will vote.
So American vote results are moot, or to put it another way, a waste of time.
Unless everyone votes, you will NEVER get the true sentiment of the people, or the country.
So the fact that one group of people, say, the 'me too' rabble, can spread their filth and lies across the whole country and rally their scum bag vermin, to vote a certain way and voila', 'we have a wiener'.
And so it is we can never trust the American political circus.

ALTRAV, about a week ago, in a post I thought was insane, you lost me forever.
Do you think I need you to tell me about compulsory voting v non compulsory?
Are you desperately TRUMP LIKE searching for reason to make Democrats victory look like a loss.

make Democrats victory look like a loss.
Belly,
I'm certain it will turn out to be a loss. Why, because I could see that to be the case for decades now everytime the left gained power.

From “Ignorance” by Robert Graef:

Conservatives have been have been more active in censoring textbooks than liberals [‘liberal’ in the American sense], while liberals have been more active in injecting controversial content. The Right tends to be more reactive since it holds to positions with greater certitude than the Left. The Right operates as though it has found its balance, while the Left is perpetually in search of a better balance. From a student’s viewpoint, the Right enjoys an illusion of philosophical tidiness as though it is a party of pathological neat freaks, an organizational plus that, before Trump, benefitted party discipline more than society or the nation. Viewed from the same distance, liberals appear to be in bed with every disaffected group that society has to offer, including Bernie Sanders’ Democratic socialism, which wrongly suggests that the Left has no identifiable philosophical center. When done right, education avoids the extremes of political zealots, allowing unbiased argument tp guide students to consider all facts, circumstances and off-setting influences of Right and Left. This level of classroom openness can and does upset partisan parents.

I offer this warning,not born in my failure to understand.
And not born from a blind ability to follow anyone based on words that are clearly untrue.
The Trump right, the Right currently controlling our federal government are a bigger threat to Democracy that any left ever was or ever will be.
Thatin an effort to fend of a left that does not exist supporters of that right harm us all.

Belly, you fail to give us reason and clarification for your views or OPINIONS.
I gave you a fact about the current state of American voting, in that the 'ME TOO' movement are so well connected throughout the country, they are a force to be reckoned with.
But for the wrong reasons.
Hitler too managed to rally his people with lies and self serving propaganda, and look what happened.
The German people are a very disciplined and righteous lot, always have been, and yet look how that went awry.
So it is that American electors are easily swayed to an incorrect or 'surprise' outcome, because everyone of a particular group or following voted, or been groomed or prompted to vote, a certain way, by pushing a contrived agenda, appealing to the group or followers.
It has become clear, that because of your hatred for all things right, you have lost the ability to reason and common sense.
If you happen to regain them, have a good hard look at your mantra and see where you have gone wrong by turning left.
On the other hand, the right IS always going to be RIGHT or CORRECT, whichever floats your boat.

ALTRAV saw in another thread you said you once had a chauffeur to drive you about.
Must be a come down these days pushing a wheelbarrow that is upside down
See we both think we are right, one of us never is,was it you? who posted that it was a shame the pipe bombs never went off? not sure please inform

Belly, 'one of us is never right'.
Correct, and you know very well it's not me, because it's you, it is because you have admitted not being right, but LEFT!
So to clarify you're not right, you're left.
I am and always have been RIGHT.
I was disappointed the pipe bombs never made it to their intended destination.
Had they done so we would see the criminals start to worry for a change, and not us, the public.
Sick of these bastards ripping us off continually, as if we don't exist.
Well even though the bombs didn't make it to their intended destinations, they now know they are targets, and even though arrogance won't allow them to show fear, they are now sh!tting themselves, and hopefully living in fear of losing their lives.
Anyone with half a brain would realise they overstepped the line, when someone resorts to pipe bombs.
But because these people only have half a brain, I doubt they will ever concede to any wrong doing.
Ah well better luck next time.
As for the chauffeur, not really, needed one to get around for meetings in the city, much more efficient than trying to find a parking spot then walking forever to the meeting, risking being late.
Retired now, so don't need one anymore.
Can't comment on the wheel barrow, don't know what you mean by the wheel barrow reference.

Your admission to holding that view re-enforces my view you need help,
No doubt exists no intention to insult just a deep feeling our Federal Police should take a look at you in the name of National defense

//I am and always have been RIGHT.//

Nope.

Toni,

No, No. We trust ALTRAV's judgement. Implicitly.
He's just wrong.

To all my detractors.
YOU are the ones with problems.
What you fail to understand is, that your comments are simply your opinions based loosely on very scant information gleaned from my comments on OLO.
Because you can only base your OPINIONS on what little information you collect here, you cannot form a true and correct picture of me and who I am.
I, on the other hand, know exactly who I am and what I stand for, and so it is that my opinion or assessment of myself is the only one worth using, when judging me.

ALTRAV no joking no taunting you sir need help
Every one of us puts thoughts they think are true here
Some of us get it right, SOMETIMES
You exhibit the signs we are told to look for and ring in if we see them.
But truly honestly I feel like putting my arm over your shoulder having a cup of coffee and trying to see if I can help, it is my default position
Be aware, please be aware,security forces DO INVESTIGATE things like a wish for terrorist bombs to kill people.
AGAIN being left today, is being a certerist, being able to sift the hate lies and con men like Trump I remain proud to be left of him

ALTRAV,

Go ahead judge others.
Just remember to be perfect
The rest of your life.

cont'd ...

ALTRAV,

Our opinions of you - are based on what you post.
They tell us everything we need to know
on a discussion forum such as this one.

Dear Belly,

See you on another discussion.

Nothing productive is going to be gained here.

How often do we hear - "Lets agree to disagree?"
Yet only thinking people do.
I look forward to the time when we're all so
open-minded that we'll hear people say -
"I'm right and you can be too."

Good advice Foxy yes let a thread tht had potential die at the hands of extremism see you in another thread

Even though they have signed off, it is noteworthy to mention that,
firstly I and the rest of the country would be incensed and angered to find that the Federal Police would be wasting their time and resources on just another disenfranchised and betrayed consumer.
Only simple minded 'children' with no life or maturity, but too much time and imagination would respond with an attempt to point score with such a pathetic notion.
Yes I can see it now, the Feds running out the door to arrest the MILLIONS of people who wish to see the painful demise of a bunch of lying, scheming, scumbag thieves.
I can understand some posters not agreeing with some of the words I use, but I find it necessary, because the written word does not allow the true meaning of the passage without some creative language.
Words in written form have no inflection, and so do not deliver the intended message.
Others have offered suggestions, but as I am not familiar with them I prefer to go with what works for me.
I feel that the commentors on side, will see my reasoning.
Those off side, are sworn to oppose no matter what and no matter how.
On of the biggest and most annoying facts about my detractors is they use virtue signalling as if they own it.
Their 'be nice, be respectful' attitude is sickening to the point of ad nauseum, and, yes I find it totally un-acceptable that simply because certain people are gutless and embarrassed by the truth, it's more pleasant and not confrontational to simply go along with everyone and lie doing so.
PC, virtue signalling, or more correctly, lying, and such fallacies are all products of being weak and immature.

mhaze,
Regarding the rest of your Wednesday post:

[distrust of capitalism]
Yes, I acknowledged the validity of your criticism. But why do you direct it only at the Left when it's also applicable to the Right?

As I said, Whitlam was before my time. But my understanding of his tariff cuts is that they were mainly intended to counteract the inflation that had occurred as a result of the oil shock. Almost any response would have resulted in job losses, and Fraser also caused job losses by attempting to solve the inflation problem. It wasn't until Hawke became PM that the problem was solved with The Accord. Which was appropriate or ironic (take your pick) because it had been Hawke, as ACTU leader, who had done more than Whitlam to create the problem in the first place.

Is any of the above objectively wrong?

> But the overriding underlying cause is that leftist need to redistribute without regard to economic circumstances.
In many cases (including 20th century Venezuela) the problem wasn't that they ignored economic circumstances; it was that they reacted to them in the wrong way.

Also you could just as easily blame the rightist need to cut taxes without regard to economic circumstances.

Ultimately countries create their own economic circumstances. But the system of fixed exchange rates created inappropriate economic circumstances. It required a lot of foreign currency borrowing, which shifted huge amounts of risk onto the debtor countries.

(tbc this arvo probably)

mhaze,
>No that's being below the poverty line.
That's what "relative poverty" is generally taken to mean, at least in Australia.

>Relative poverty is a term in juxtaposition to absolute poverty.
Yes it is, but "absolute poverty" does not mean destitution. It does not mean having nothing. It does not just mean the most severe level of poverty.

Absolute poverty means poverty measured by absolute standards (as opposed to poverty compared to the rest of the population, which is what relative poverty means).
Normally the word "absolute:" is omitted so as to avoid the need for this tedious explanation every time.

>Well now you're just making it up.
No, I'm altering you to a genuine problem.

>The real value of the poverty line in Australia has grown by over 30% in the past 3 decades.
>So someone on the poverty line today is 30% richer than the same person on that line 30 years ago.
In financial terms, yes - but that doesn't necessarily equate to a standard of living increase, as housing costs have risen a lot more than that.

>The poor don't pay income taxes.
Yet they pay GST. The government shifted more of the burden of tax onto them by introducing the GST.

>Real wages have continued to grow over any period over a year you care to mention.
They've scarcely grown at all in the last decade.

>I'm all in favour of change. But I'm against economic suicide.
I'm all against economic suicide. But unlike you I don't look at everything through a Left v Right prism. And far too often I've seen policies designed to prevent economic suicide actually causing it.