Individual,

I sure that you sincerely believe that, but it beggars belief that what has been said on OLO had any influence on such a serious economic matter. The very few posters we have is enough to rule the idea out. There are no politicians on OLO, whereas most of them seem to have a Twitter or Facebook account to defend themselves or push what they think, not to get policy ideas from anonymous people with no ability of expertise on anything - just opinions. They might listen to well known and respected professionals writing in, or being reported by, the traditional media; but not to often wild and emotional avatars on a computer screen.

Sure, media monitoring is done, but it is not used for picking up ideas from social media to be used in government. If you have proof of what you claim , I would of course change my mind; but, in the meantime, I cannot accept your claim as true.

Hi Indy,

You're correct. Politicians have been given a platform
on this forum in the past which makes sense as On Line
Opinion is owned and published by Brisbane based
conservative political "think tank" the Australian
Institute For Progress Limited (AIP). According to the
Executive Director - it is "ideologically
centre-right" with its criticisms favouring right-wing
political parties.

The owner, Graham Young has strong links to the Liberal
National Party of Queensland. Graham Young was once
Vice President of the Queensland Liberal Party.

There's more at:

http://www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Line_Opinion

cont'd ...

Indy,

My apologies, here's the link again:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Line_Opinion

The sooner their ABC is privatised the better.

shadyminister,

Is that so you will be able to control what they report thus preventing them from reporting the truth?

Ttbn- thanks for you thread. The financial situation could be summed up by "be careful what we wish for because we might just get it". I admire your efforts in support of Traditional British Australia. Make sure you pace yourself mate.

The comments on the Red Army Faction were interesting.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Army_Faction

The Australian Institute is a progressive (ie. Soft Communist) Australian think tank.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Australia_Institute

Interesting that Mr Opinion still appears to support the ABC- not sure why- his comment on "truth" is interesting too- perhaps this is ironic . Perhaps Traditionalists believe that equal access speakers of different opinions is no longer sufficient to restore the balance and so they are now promoting a similar power grab to what has been used against Traditional Australians- it seems fairly Newtonian. Everyone is biased but some have more power (such as the power and resources the ABC has that don't seem to be used in line with the views of the Traditional British Australian community). Many people support the idea of freedom without understanding that in the current context freedom means- the right- no the requirement- to teach gay sex to their children in public educational institutions- freedom should have limits because it corrodes morality and society.

At least Foxy admits that the ABC is biased (and hence undemocratic)- even though she still believes that being biased is valid.

Many of these subjects are subtle.

What problems does democracy solve?

What does it fail at?

How do you deal with practitioners that are philosophically dishonest and subversive?

Does philosophical dishonesty lead to internecine war?

What is the purpose of the economy and for whom and in what proportion?