EXAKT Science posted:

Liberals are the real racists

hooman posted:

Guys, I'm starting to think those UPF guys with swastika tattoos might be the real racists.

EXAKT Science posted:

Treating people with respect gone mental itt

#thereAlcoholBloodContent posted:

Adelaide driver William Graham accidentally ran over and killed drunk man on road

An Adelaide driver who accidentally ran over and killed a drunk man has avoided jail but has been ordered to maintain a shrine to the victim.

William Graham, 21, of West Lakes Shore, dragged Malcolm Gollan under his car for more than 70 metres along Hardy Street at Rosewater.

The District Court heard he then reversed over the man, steered around the body and left the accident scene.

Birb Katter posted:

White dude runs over indigenous man (Who was lying in the road drunk) fails to render aid at the scene and flees, is let off.

quote:

I don’t know an associate professor of sociology at Macquarie University called Amanda Wise, but she knows me. She knows me so well, in fact, that she’s not only able to tell me what my cartoons mean, but she’s also able to tell me what I was thinking while I was drawing them.

There I was, naively thinking that if I drew a group of poor Indian people trying to eat solar panels contained in parcels sent to them by the UN anyone seeing the cartoon would assume it meant the people in it were hungry. But, no. What I thought I was thinking wasn’t what I was thinking at all. According to Ms Wise, my “unequivocally racist” cartoon drew on “very base stereotypes of third world, underdeveloped people who don’t know what to do with technology”.

These and other startling revelations were included in an article by Amanda Meade in The Guardian on Monday. As well as being sternly reminded by the shocked Ms Wise that my cartoon would be unacceptable in Britain, the US and Canada (heaven forbid!), I was also told my cartoon was “racist” by no less an authority than Yin Paradies of Deakin University, whose research includes the economic effects of racism.

Professor Paradies didn’t think I’d made the people in my cartoon look hungry, either, but rather, in my own twisted, racist way, I’d managed to portray not only them but the entire population of India as “too stupid to handle renewable energy”.

More: Let them eat solar cells

I’ve been reliably informed my cartoon also triggered a hostile response from the sanctimonious but bloodthirsty mob who spend their time trawling the internet looking for anything they find offensive to provide them with an opportunity to join the orgy of competitive compassion and moral grandstanding that is Twitter.

Such people, understandably, are probably on a bit of a high at the moment having just spent a couple of weeks watching heroic and revered climate scientists such as Leonardo DiCaprio, Sean Penn and Robert Redford spouting a series of hypocritical platitudes in Paris that culminated in world leaders signing up to an agreement to meet again in five years so they can sign another one, thereby saving the world from an impending environmental catastrophe. Again. No wonder they’re angry. First chance I get I spoil the party by reminding them that, back here, in the real world, there are billions of people who not only lack food, health, water and education, but also have no access to electricity, and more than 20 per cent of them live in India.

And there’s something obscene about the fact that there are billions of others who’ve had all those things all their coal-power-driven lives and they’re now distributing solar panels to the world’s poor because they think that provides a virtuous, if inadequate, form of electricity for which they should be grateful. I think that’s racist, I think it’s condescending, and I think it’s immoral. But it’s also the truth, and when an impertinent cartoonist dares to tell the truth these days he’d better watch out because telling the truth is a dangerously subversive thing to do.

It has the same ability to simultaneously shock some people while amusing others that four-letter words used to have when Lenny Bruce discovered he could use them to such devastating effect that his audiences would still be laughing while he was being dragged offstage by the police and arrested for obscenity.

In court, Bruce argued he was being denied his right to freedom of speech, and so he was. But I can’t help thinking he had it easy, living at a time when the only people who had to stand up for their rights to freedom of speech were comedians who wanted to say f. k in public.

And not only that, but the only people he had to worry about offending were undercover coppers in the audience whose job it was to be offended so they could arrest him for doing his job.

These days, the undercover policemen in the audience waiting for him to swear would be the least of his worries. They’d be outnumbered 100 to one by members of the Politically Correct Thought Police Task Force, all armed with iPhones and Twitter accounts, ready to pounce the moment he said something that might not necessarily offend them but could, potentially, offend someone else.

There’s no doubt the cartoon I drew for Monday’s paper offended a lot of people. While they might not have enjoyed looking at it, I’m quite sure they enjoyed using it as an excuse to parade their moral vanity.

And, while I prefer to discover there are people who think my cartoons are funny, I’d be lying if I said I didn’t derive a certain amount of pleasure from discovering they enrage the ones that don’t.

freebooter posted:

What is it with rightwingers chucking tantrums about opposing viewpoints?

Like, I doubt anybody here is a fan of the Bolt Report, but do we wage consistent campaigns to try to get it off air? If I were to say it should be pulled from air it's because Bolt is populist, not because he's conservative.

Bill Leak posted:

There’s no doubt the cartoon I drew for Monday’s paper offended a lot of people. While they might not have enjoyed looking at it, I’m quite sure they enjoyed using it as an excuse to parade their moral vanity.

And, while I prefer to discover there are people who think my cartoons are funny, I’d be lying if I said I didn’t derive a certain amount of pleasure from discovering they enrage the ones that don’t.

Anidav posted:

Come on, I know one of you goons can post that Bill Leak article. I want to know who the real racists are!

Entertain me!

Anidav posted:

MonoAus posted:

I'll tell you what's racist! {bill leak}

open24hours posted:

One day you'll have to learn how to do this yourself.

Recoome posted:

hello i am an unabashed fuckhead please ignore my opinions

clusterfuck posted:

Policy speculation station:

I was checking out the "Breakthrough Energy Coalition" aka Bill Gates & billionaires vs climate change page and noticed the "Mission Innovation" group that Turnbull signed us up for. Then more reading on the Australian renewable energy scene. I'd be interested in the opinions of better informed people.

This is speculation but given Elon Musk is not among the Breakthrough Energy Coalition it's possible that we're seeing a division between centralized energy solutions (including nuclear ) and decentralized home battery type solutions which are doing well in Australia despite a pause this year.

quote:

Waterloo chosen over Sydney University as site for new metro train station

Public housing towers in Waterloo will be bulldozed as part of a major urban renewal project over the next 20 years to accommodate 30,000 extra residents in 10,000 new dwellings around a railway station.

The redevelopment is one of the most ambitious in Sydney's history, rivalling Green Square, which is undergoing a transformation on industrial land a little to the east of Waterloo.

Announcing the plan, Premier Mike Baird said 13 hectares of land owned by the government and mainly used for public housing would be turned into a mixed-housing precinct with 10,000 dwellings. About a third will be for social and affordable housing, and the rest available for private dwellings.

The entire development will eventually cover about 40 hectares. Private landowners within an 800-metre radius of the proposed new Waterloo station, which will form part of the Sydney metro line, are likely to see their land rezoned for high and medium density.

This is likely to include the light industrial area along Botany Road and around McEvoy Street.

But landowners who find their properties rezoned for high rise can expect to pay a "value capture fee", which will be used to help pay for the public transport.

Mr Baird denied the project would result in the gentrification of the area at the expense of public housing tenants and pledged that there would be no loss of social housing from the current 2000 dwellings.

"Every single tenant will have the right to come back," he said, adding that efforts will be made to accommodate them in the area during the redevelopment.

Fairfax Media understands the government plans to begin the rebuild in areas with lower densities, such as the three-storey walk-ups, and replace them with higher density accommodation – before demolishing the two 30-storey towers in the Waterloo housing estate where 4000 social housing tenants live in blocks between Wellington and Phillip streets.

The housing estate dates back to the 1950s and includes four 16-storey buildings, and a large number of two- and three-storey blocks owned by the state's Land and Housing Corporation.

The exact site for the train station within the precinct has yet to be determined.

The selection of Waterloo dashes the ambitions of Sydney University for a new station to be built on its campus.

While Sydney University had considerably more commuters, Mr Baird said the government had favoured Waterloo because a new station offered a chance to revitalise the suburb.

An environmental impact statement for the new metro station is expected to be released in the middle of next year, and construction is due to begin in early 2018.

Social Housing Minister Brad Hazzard said some residents of the housing estate at Waterloo would need to move to nearby accommodation but many would be able to relocate to new social housing as the redevelopment progresses in stages over the next two decades.

"I can assure Waterloo tenants that if they want to remain in Waterloo after the redevelopment, they can do so," he said. "It will be done in a calm and considered way."

The first relocations are expected to occur in the middle of 2017. About 9 per cent of the properties at the housing estate have new tenants each year.

The location of the new train station is the final major piece of the second stage of the Sydney metro line between Chatswood and Sydenham via the CBD.

While the Airport Line runs under Waterloo to the CBD, Transport Minister Andrew Constance said it would have been "too costly and very disruptive" to build a new station for an existing underground line.

Sydney University had made a concerted effort for a station for the metro line to be constructed on its campus, proposing a $1.5 billion "knowledge hub" comprising retail stores, offices and research facilities.

However, the government's property arm, UrbanGrowth, pushed for a new station at Waterloo.

Troy Daly, program director of Central to Eveleigh for Urban Growth, said the planning and design of the project would be highly collaborative.

"We want this to be an example of smart city planning," he said. "It will be an area where the choice is not to have a car because the transport and services are so good. It will be one of the most walkable areas in Sydney."

Construction of new buildings is not expected to begin until 2018.

Once the planning is complete, it is likely the area will be split up into 20 or so super-blocks, which would then be put to tender for the private sector to redevelop.

Greens transport spokeswoman Mehreen Faruqi said the government should not be using the Sydney metro line as an excuse to overdevelop the area.

"Population is set to grow by tens of thousands around this area, and we need to make transport decisions and build transport connections based on people's needs, not on the interests of property developers," she said.

Developer group Urban Taskforce said Waterloo was the right location for the station but it was concerned that the government had proposed a contribution tax of $20,000 for each new apartment.

"Any further taxing of new homes will be passed directly onto new purchasers," the group's chief executive, Chris Johnson, said.

Tokamak posted:

The more important part regarding climate change is the generation of power, not its distribution. Besides, I've never seen the case made for why onsite-solar/wind + battery is more environmentally sound than onsite-solar/wind + grid. Usually it is for reasons such as not supporting the energy industry, a lifestyle choice, or that its cheaper over the long term. The environmental impact of running copper lines vs. banks of batteries doesn't seem like something anyone actually thinks about while discussing going off the grid.

xPanda posted:

Was it the last page where we were talking about how state governments are in the pocket of property developers?

http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/waterloo-chosen-over-sydney-university-as-site-for-new-metro-train-station-20151215-gloiu2.html

tl;dr: don't build the train where people need to go, build it where we can justify demolish public housing and profit from new development.

Starshark posted:

That Leak article is some amazing qq. "Police? I wish I only had to deal with police, now I have to deal with academics calling me names and that's 10000000% worse!"

Cartoon posted:

In my experience the decision to go off-grid

BBJoey posted:

"free speech is when I get to say all the racist poo poo I want and nobody else is allowed to point out that I'm a racist poo poo "

Birb Katter posted:

Yeah, I was pretty appalled by this. 2.5k people made homeless because it's inner city property for no reason but greed. I can see not building a station at USYD because it's already at a pretty major station but that has nothing to do with the greed of what they're doing.

xPanda posted:

Was it the last page where we were talking about how state governments are in the pocket of property developers?

http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/waterloo-chosen-over-sydney-university-as-site-for-new-metro-train-station-20151215-gloiu2.html

tl;dr: don't build the train where people need to go, build it where we can justify demolish public housing and profit from new development.

xPanda posted:

There isn't any train station at Usyd.

Anidav posted:

SynthOrange posted:

Anidav posted:

EXAKT Science posted:

loving