- Wistful of Dollars
- Aug 25, 2009
-
|
https://twitter.com/noplaceforsheep/status/730726794874118145
Which one of you is this?
|
#
?
May 12, 2016 16:37
|
|
- Adbot
-
ADBOT LOVES YOU
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2024 07:02
|
|
- Kafka Syrup
- Apr 29, 2009
-
|
I wish I was surprised by the actions of the Herald Sun but we gotta discredit the poor people somehow
If poor people don't hate each other, they might hate us.
|
#
?
May 12, 2016 21:56
|
|
- gay picnic defence
- Oct 5, 2009
-
I'M CONCERNED ABOUT A NUMBER OF THINGS
|
I wish I was surprised by the actions of the Herald Sun but we gotta discredit the poor people somehow
Especially this fucker. How dare he disrupt the trickle down narrative?
|
#
?
May 12, 2016 22:13
|
|
- I would blow Dane Cook
- Dec 26, 2008
-
|
http://twitter.com/ResignInShame/status/730759903480938496
Lovely
|
#
?
May 12, 2016 23:27
|
|
- Amoeba102
- Jan 22, 2010
-
|
So, is this defamation? Or is it only defamation when you expose dodgy political dealings?
|
#
?
May 12, 2016 23:29
|
|
- drowned in pussy juice
- Oct 13, 2009
-
by FactsAreUseless
|
I'm pretty sure to be defamation it has to be false in the first place
|
#
?
May 12, 2016 23:35
|
|
- Snod.
- Oct 3, 2014
-
|
23,254 people accidentally left the tv on
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 00:09
|
|
- WhiskeyWhiskers
- Oct 14, 2013
-
"هذا ليس عادلاً."
"هذا ليس عادلاً على الإطلاق."
"كان هناك وقت الآن."
(السياق الخفي: للقراءة)
|
All those TVs were in office lobbies.
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 00:10
|
|
- Amoeba102
- Jan 22, 2010
-
|
I'm pretty sure to be defamation it has to be false in the first place
Thought that was for libel. But it looks like I'm wrong.
Legalese is unclear to me http://www.lawhandbook.org.au/11_02_01_what_is_defamation/
Amoeba102 fucked around with this message at 00:14 on May 13, 2016
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 00:12
|
|
- open24hours
- Jan 7, 2001
-
|
Too hot.
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 00:31
|
|
- I would blow Dane Cook
- Dec 26, 2008
-
|
The way he talks on his show, the awkward pauses, it's just off. He has a face for radio, and a voice that's better suited to print.
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 00:44
|
|
- SadisTech
- Jun 26, 2013
-
Clem.
|
Razer has posted another stupid opinion:
http://www.crikey.com.au/2016/05/12/why-i-wont-vote-for-the-greens/
Anyone with an active sub want to post the full text so we can point and laugh
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 00:50
|
|
- Other
- Jul 10, 2007
-
Post it easy!
|
Sure
quote:
Why I’ll never vote Greens
Don't believe what the Tele tells you; there's no red in the Greens, and they aren't the party of revolution many take them for.
Helen Razer — Writer and Broadcaster
There is something wrong with the ABC’s democratic novelty, Vote Compass. There must be, because since its inception, this “Whom should I vote for?” quiz has whacked me in the Greens quadrant every time. This makes me sore, as I am about as likely to ever vote Green as I am to afford a life in a suburb that is full of people who name their daughters after sexually liberated French modernist writers.
Actually, that’s an input the ABC’s psephologists should really think about including in their test: “Have you seriously considered calling your child Anais?” would be a more accurate means to align a voter with the Greens. As would “Do you have an unread copy of Thomas Piketty’s Capital in the Twenty-First Century sitting on your reclaimed ladder bookshelf?” Without such data, the outputs for the leftist voter will continue to be just (upcycled) garbage.
But we can’t blame the algorithm. We can’t even really blame the ABC. The policy questions posed by the quiz — roughly “do you support income and social equality?” and “do you believe that our species has become a monstrous geological force?”– are the same questions posed by the Greens. The problem is that these are largely the wrong questions to ask. Even, and especially, if you happen to be the kind of voter who will answer “yes” to each of them without hesitation.
I am this kind of voter. I agree that we are headed to hell in a hand cart that runs on unsustainable fuel. I agree that nationalism is a hateful contagion, that economic inequality will cannibalise the state and that a treaty with indigenous Australia can only produce good dividends all ‘round. I am opposed to metadata retention. I am appalled by the irrational rationalism of offshore detention. I have often been critically disappointed by the ALP. FFS, I am a queer, unmarried, disabled woman who huffily left the Communist Party for feminist reasons in her teens and never returned. Fine, Vote Compass gets me. I should not simply be a Greens voter but a lifetime Greens member with a Samoan-inspired tattoo of Bob Brown etched on her arse.
But I’m not. And this is not entirely due to the current possibility that the Greens will trade preferences with the Libs or that they may have done so in state elections of the past. This is not entirely due to the Greens support for their deal with the government on pensions, their stubbornness and myopia on the ETS and the fact that Larissa Waters is a cultural totalitarian who will not rest until all evidence of gender is purged from the shelves of our toy stores. It’s not my revulsion for fashionably named children or the tastefully rustic surrounds in which their Green-voting parents raise them. It’s not even the reclaimed ladder bookshelf; it’s more the Piketty that rests upon it, whether read or unread.
Personally, I have made my way through about half of Piketty’s tortured data-gasm. This, by the by, is apparently above average. A scratch analysis of the those who purchased history’s best-selling work on economics found that no one much made it past page 26. But they kind of got what they paid for, because any assay beyond that will just reveal that Piketty, like the Greens, is interested only in making noise about inequality. When it comes to disturbing inequality at its foundation, he is every bit as chic, and every bit as useful, as the Greens.
Spare yourself the trouble of Piketty. Just buy the book, as I did, to remind yourself that you are one of those consumers who thinks that inequality is really, really bad. If you do read it, you’ll just have a graph-hangover and perhaps the vague sense that Piketty, who uses the ideas of wealth and capital interchangeably, is being a bit opaque. Perhaps because he wants to hide the fact that he is recommending only minor changes to the economic organisation of the world.
Buying Piketty is like buying a Fair Trade decaffeinated organic coffee. You get no real buzz, but you feel like you’ve done something civic-minded. Even though you really know you haven’t.
Which is pretty much like voting Green.
This election, as in previous elections, the Greens policy reads very much like the liberal compassionate documents of the World Bank. Which is to say, the party sounds very soothing in its acknowledgement of serious problems, but offers no surprising solutions to these, and seems to believe that it can benchmark its own success.
The Greens say “inequality is really, really bad” and speak urgently of change. But they provide no real prescription for the big shift they say, and I agree, is needed. The optimistic leftist might choose to believe that this is because they are cleverly concealing their red flesh. This pessimist believes they are honeydew melons: a mild shade of green right through. Even those who came to the party by way of classical Marxism seem to have paled, believing only the most convenient and optimistic bits about an innovative new era of production.
It’s true that the Greens provide, for some of us, a refreshing enticement. On the issue of offshore processing, for example, it’s tempting for some of us to throw a protest vote their way. But so long as they choose not to disturb our social and economic organisation, there will always be a group as maligned as asylum seekers. Inequality is really, really bad. It’s also inevitable if you don’t take a hammer to its foundation.
And they don’t. The Greens’ focus is not on constituting our base differently. It’s about reflecting it more favourably. It’s about taking “gendered” toys off shelves, lighting compassionate candles and generally moralising about those who won’t publicly agree that inequality is really, really bad.
It’s communism. But without the caffeine, or the communism.
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 01:00
|
|
- G-Spot Run
- Jun 28, 2005
-
|
So, the executive summary as I'm reading it, "I like Green policies but I don't like arts students and hipsters. Also the greens won't form government because nobody votes for the greens because the greens won't form government because~"
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 01:10
|
|
- SadisTech
- Jun 26, 2013
-
Clem.
|
Thanks.
tl;dr: "The Greens are correct about most things and are in fact the most progressive option on offer but they don't have a clear, actionable 3-point plan to Smash the State so I'm not going to vote for them."
Typical Razer.
quote:The Greens say “inequality is really, really bad” and speak urgently of change. But they provide no real prescription for the big shift they say, and I agree, is needed. The optimistic leftist might choose to believe that this is because they are cleverly concealing their red flesh. This pessimist believes they are honeydew melons: a mild shade of green right through. Even those who came to the party by way of classical Marxism seem to have paled, believing only the most convenient and optimistic bits about an innovative new era of production.
It’s true that the Greens provide, for some of us, a refreshing enticement. On the issue of offshore processing, for example, it’s tempting for some of us to throw a protest vote their way. But so long as they choose not to disturb our social and economic organisation, there will always be a group as maligned as asylum seekers. Inequality is really, really bad. It’s also inevitable if you don’t take a hammer to its foundation.
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 01:12
|
|
- G-Spot Run
- Jun 28, 2005
-
|
How do you solve a problem like Maria? Is it the role of all candidates to solve the problem, not all problems are solvable, not all problems are problems, not having a solution doesn't mean the protest is invalid, etc etc
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 01:15
|
|
- G-Spot Run
- Jun 28, 2005
-
|
Or is this entire thing her making the point that nobody votes for the trots because the trots won't form government?
Yeah but there's that angry lit review in the middle that she got paid for that deserves to also be recognised in the summary IMO
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 01:17
|
|
- WhiskeyWhiskers
- Oct 14, 2013
-
"هذا ليس عادلاً."
"هذا ليس عادلاً على الإطلاق."
"كان هناك وقت الآن."
(السياق الخفي: للقراءة)
|
Yeah but there's that angry lit review in the middle that she got paid for that deserves to also be recognised in the summary IMO
Graphs make my head hurt and I didn't read the book, therefore it's garbage. By Helen Razer.
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 01:20
|
|
- Negligent
- Aug 20, 2013
-
Its just lovely here this time of year.
|
Why do people always knock Trotsky, Lenin was the real bad guy
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 01:20
|
|
- Solemn Sloth
- Jul 11, 2015
-
Baby you can shout at me,
But you can't need my eyes.
|
Huh, I saw sections of that before and I assumed it was a comments section somewhere, not an actual published article.
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 01:21
|
|
- TheMightyHandful
- Dec 8, 2008
-
|
the guardian posted:
The astute Paul Karp has the details of the high court dismissing the Senate reforms case:
The high court has unanimously rejected Senator Bob Day’s challenge of Senate reforms.
Day argued that the choice of voting above-the-line or below-the-line created different methods of voting, in breach of the constitution which requires only one method of voting.
The court held that “method” in the constitution is to be construed broadly, allowing for more than one way of indicating choice within a single uniform electoral system.
The judges said voting above the line was a direct vote for individual candidates consistent with the constitution, not a vote for the “middle man” of Australian political parties whose logos are printed on the ballot, as Day had argued.
Because voters were not disenfranchises in the legal effect of the voting process, the high court rejected the challenge. So, it’s onwards and upwards to the 2 July double dissolution election under the new system of voting, without the challenge hanging over the validity of Senate reform.
TheMightyHandful fucked around with this message at 01:28 on May 13, 2016
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 01:25
|
|
- Snod.
- Oct 3, 2014
-
|
The High Court has thrown out the challenge to the Senate voting changes.
Also who is excited for the debate tonight? Drink every time jobs and growth are said.
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 01:37
|
|
- ewe2
- Jul 1, 2009
-
|
It is such an obvious PR campaign. Discredit them instantly and paint them as Labor voters or something.
Clearly they want to Stop The Duncans. Let's hope they keep coming.
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 01:37
|
|
- Cartoon
- Jun 20, 2008
-
poop
|
I too attempt to argue that the market isn't perfect with someone literally named open24hours Jesus loving Christ you dolts
But maybe we could educate some lurkers!
what if amalgamations... are good?
Amalgamations are ridiculous. I'm pretty sure I pointed out before that councils back a hundred years had radically fewer rate payers but were created because they were considered necessary for the delivery of services. There will always be some room for improvements and economies of scale but the neocon project effectively removes a level of representation. Now having said that, PART of the legislative framework that has been stapled to the appallingly bad and detrimental amalgamation is actually one of the most needed pieces of reform in local government:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-05-13/nsw-opposition-promises-reverse-council-mergers-if-elected/7410666
quote:(extract)However, some councillors have welcomed the introduction of new governance rules including a $2,500 cap on election donations.
Under the changes a council would not be allowed to consider any matter where a councillor or a councillor's relative has a financial interest. Instead those matters will go to a neighbouring council or another planning body. The NSW Government is also planning to introduce laws that would force any councillor who used their position for financial benefit to repay the money. Former Auburn councillor Irene Simms, who has been calling for a crackdown on developers on councils, said the reforms represented a step in the right direction. Her council was suspended in February, after a string of controversies involving deputy mayor Salim Mehajer and an inquiry was established to investigated allegations councillors had been misusing their positions. Cr Simms said she hoped the measures could be applied retrospectively and that "questionable" zoning decisions made by the council could be reversed if the inquiry made adverse findings about them. "We have a couple of councillors who are going to stand very well financially by re-zonings that were made and have already made some windfalls," she said.
The Opposition said the measures do not go far enough, arguing if the Premier was serious about eliminating the risk for corruption in the sector he would ban developers and real estate agents from councils. "I want to see what the legislation actually says," Mr Primrose said. "But the Government has consistently voted against a very simple law we have proposed – that is, if you are a property developer or a real estate agent you cannot be on a council," he said.
"Everyone identifies this as a problem and there's a simple solution which the government has so far failed to implement."
One step forward...
I was going to write an effort post on subsidies and the myths of the free market but
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 01:44
|
|
- V for Vegas
- Sep 1, 2004
-
THUNDERDOME LOSER
|
62 arts organisations lose funding from Australia Council
http://www.artshub.com.au/news-arti...-council-251271
quote:The Australia Council has chosen to fund 43 new organisations among the 128 arts organisations to have received four year funding, but rejected applications from dozens of established arts organisations.
More than one third of the 147 organisations who previously received organisational funding now have no operational funding from the Federal Government.
Among the organisations no longer funded are:
Arena Theatre (Melbourne)
Express Media (Melbourne)
Force Majeure (Sydney)
KAGE Physical Theatre (Melbourne)
Legs on the Wall (Sydney)
Meanjin (Melbourne)
National Association for the Visual Arts (based in Sydney)
Next Wave Festival (Melbourne)
PACT Centre for Contemporary Artists (Sydney)
Phillip Adams Ballet Lab (Melbourne)
Red Stitch Actors' Theatre (Melbourne)
Slingsby (Adelaide)
Vitalstatistix (Adelaide)
A full list of organisations that have been funded is at the base of this article. The list of unfunded companies will be updated throughout the day.
Not all of the original 147 organisations applied for funding but ArtsHub believes applications were submitted by the vast majority of the 62 previously-funded organisations that did not receive funding.
The decline in the number of organisations funded is a result of the loss of $60 million over four years from the Australia Council budget. Of that, $12 million a year went to the Catalyst program.
The timing of the announcement will be particularly galling, as it comes in a week when the Federal Government took its Catalyst expenditure to almost twice as much as is budgeted. Catalyst does not provide operational funding instead funding projects selected by the Ministry of the Arts.
Government spends $12 m in mysterious Catalyst windfall
http://www.artshub.com.au/news-article/news/grants-and-funding/richard-watts/government-spends-12-m-in-mysterious-catalyst-windfall-251244
quote:
$11,926,128 in additional Catalyst funding was quietly announced by the Ministry for the Arts on Friday, in addition to the initial $11, 391,173 funding released last week.
Neither the Australia Council nor ArtsPeak representatives know where the money is coming from and there has been no explanation from the office of Senator Mitch Fifield, Minister for the Arts, which is now in caretaker mode ahead of the 2 July election.
Some have expressed fears that the Government has allocated next year's funding hours before it went into caretaker mode.
In total, the Catalyst program has now allocated $23,317,301 in funding, despite the fact that the program was forecast to allocate only $12 million each year, money that was taken from the Australia Council in the 2015 Budget.
However, a spokesperson for the the Department of Communications and the Arts told ArtsHub that Catalyst monies spent to date combined the full 2015-2016 allocation and additional funding for multi-year projects.
Organisations to have received funding in this additional wave of announcements include AMPAG companies Circus Oz ($75,000 to present their latest production at the Australia Now Festival, Brazil in May 2016) and The Australian Ballet ($1,000,000 for the redevelopment of The Primrose Potter Australian Ballet Centre) despite the fact that Catalyst guidelines state that projects by or in partnership with small to medium organisations will be prioritised.
So this has panned out pretty much as expected - smaller arts bodies who needed the funding will close, while larger arts bodies who would have survived without it will expand.
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 01:46
|
|
- Cartoon
- Jun 20, 2008
-
poop
|
Haven't seen one of these linked in an age:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-05-12/clarke-and-dawe:-secondary-issues-facing-australia/7408718
Jobs and Growth!
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-05-12/headspace-funding-cut-to-impact-psychosis-care/7408476
quote:SA Government rules out covering federal cut to Headspace's Tonsley youth psychosis centre By Rebecca Opie Posted yesterday at 3:20pm
RELATED STORY: Youth mental health service Headspace 'facing funding crisis'
RELATED STORY: Health programs to be 'streamlined' to raise $1b
The South Australian Government will not cover the cost of federal funding cuts that will force the closure of a centre helping young psychosis patients that only opened six months ago.
Key points:
Headspace centre at Tonsley will have funding cut from mid-year
It provides mental health services to young psychosis patients
SA Government calls on Federal Government to reinstate funds
The Youth Early Psychosis Program, which is run by the national youth mental health organisation Headspace, will have its funding discontinued from July 1 following a review by the National Mental Health Commission.
"We understand funding will cease for the Headspace Adelaide site to take on new clients for this program on June 30," Headspace spokesman Michael Bennett said. The centre at Tonsley, which only opened six months ago, is one of six Early Psychosis Youth Service (EPYS) centres around the country impacted by the funding changes. The program is believed to have helped about 70 clients since January, offering community-based care to young people at risk of psychosis or experiencing it for the first time, as well as their families. South Australian Minister for Mental Health Leesa Vlahos has called on Federal Health Minister Sussan Ley to reconsider the decision. She said the cuts would be "disastrous on people's lives", but said the State Government could not afford to cover the costs of the program.
"We're continuing to look at how we can help some of the people, but we will not be able to provide the same level of care that we have currently because this federal money was helping us to do that," Ms Vlahos said. "We are imploring Sussan Ley and her colleagues to provide certainty to people providing mental health services in our state. "This is someone's son or grandson or granddaughter who won't be able to receive important mental health treatment when they need it."
No savings from cuts, Health Minister says
Under the Federal Government's plans, funding from EPYS centres will be redirected to Primary Health Networks (PHNs) to give early intervention support to a broader group of young people at risk of mental illness. A spokesman for Ms Ley said there would not be any savings from the change. "All funding from the EPYS services will be redistributed to PHNs as part of a mental health flexible funding allocation for services to youth and young people," he said. "PHNs that have EPYS centres will have the flexibility to develop a regional service model incorporating these centres, broadening entrance criteria and widening the geographical reach." The spokesman said all of the clients would be fully supported during the transition period. "The Department of Health is working with Headspace Limited, who operates the Adelaide service, to provide transition arrangements for the 40 clients currently in their care."
"It's all in their head" - Sussan Ley.
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 01:57
|
|
- birdstrike
- Oct 30, 2008
-
i;m gay
|
Amalgamations are ridiculous.
Counterpoint: councils routinely fail to extract a proper return for the community (in the form of infrastructure or otherwise) from developers because they don't have the scale/resources to negotiate commercial terms.
You can count on one hand the councils that have these resources. Larger councils somewhat addresses this.
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 02:06
|
|
- Adbot
-
ADBOT LOVES YOU
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2024 07:02
|
|
- Doctor Spaceman
- Jul 6, 2010
-
"Everyone's entitled to their point of view, but that's seriously a weird one."
|
It's also really easy for the average person to use / rely on services from neighbouring council areas and not have any say in it because Sydney council areas are loving tiny.
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 02:11
|
|