Auspol June/Election - hang parliament - The Something Awful Forums

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Auspol June/Election - hang parliament

Senor Tron: May 26, 2006

http://www.afr.com/real-estate/council-and-government-should-have-put-the-seawall-up-residents-20160607-gpdqmq

quote:

The owner of a Collaroy beachfront home devastated by the Sydney storm, Tony Cagorksi, blames the council and state government for not building a seawall to protect his home.

The flooring business owner, who saved for years to buy the six-bedroom house at 1130 Pittwater Road for $2.4 million last year, has been forced to abandon his home because its foundations are crumbling after being battered by the storm and a seven-metre king tide.
"The council should have put up the seawall and they didn't. They are bumbling bureaucrats," Mr Cagorksi said.

"I have just paid over $100,000 in stamp duty for the home I live in and my money is going to schools and everything."

Warringah Council said it was not its responsibility to put up the seawall and residents had opposed it in a 2014 planning exercise.

"The history of the seawall has been long. The community was opposed to it, and in the last LEP [local environmental plan] prohibited the seawall," Warringah Council general manager Mark Ferguson said at a press conference on Pittwater Road on Tuesday.

"Council has endorsed it since then but we need residential support, and it is about a financial support."

The decision not to build the seawall was due to its impact on the sand, council said.

"But it was the loud surfers and greenies who opposed and defeated the seawall plans," Mr Cagorksi said.

Since the storm, the council, which is providing temporary housing for the evacuated owners along Pittwater Road, has been in discussions with owners about resurrecting the seawall project. Most residents have declined to comment to the media.

While it would come at a cost to owners, the Northern Beaches council administrator Dick Persson said he had the support of about 25 affected residents to pay for a seawall with some even agreeing to a levy.

Council also said it was discussing with residents about demolishing the houses that are teetering on the edge but a final decision has not been made.

Mr Cagorksi said he was concerned his insurance would not cover his loss if his house is demolished, after his neighbour's claim to insurer Youi was rejected.

"We are going to fight it, through media, and goodwill, and try and get them to cover it," he said.

The State Emergency Services has been sandbagging Collaroy Beach, in anticipation of another king tide.

The worst affected area is Pittwater Road but further north, many backyards have been eroded.

I started bolding parts, but it just turned into one of those "bold the whole thing" exercises.

# ? Jun 9, 2016 02:37

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 4, 2024 18:04

ewe2: Jul 1, 2009

"nobody warned me" because the risk was so obvious to people with a braincell they just assumed your greed overcame your limited capacity to forecast possible events. Greenies my rear end.

# ? Jun 9, 2016 02:39

I would blow Dane Cook: Dec 26, 2008

Senor Tron posted:

http://www.afr.com/real-estate/council-and-government-should-have-put-the-seawall-up-residents-20160607-gpdqmq

I started bolding parts, but it just turned into one of those "bold the whole thing" exercises.

One of those rare circumstances where I sympathize more with the Insurance company.

# ? Jun 9, 2016 02:40

Senor Tron: May 26, 2006

Those drat selfish greenies and surfers who didn't want an entire beach ruined so that developers could build on sand dunes.

# ? Jun 9, 2016 02:41

Recoome: Nov 9, 2013; Matter of fact, I'm salty now.

DON'T BUILD ON THE FIRST DUNES :siren:

# ? Jun 9, 2016 02:43

iajanus: Aug 17, 2004; NUMBER 1 QUEENSLAND SUPPORTER
MAROONS 2023 STATE OF ORIGIN CHAMPIONS FOR LIFE

Would be great if the names of the people who were responsible for stopping the seawall being built were on record and they turned out to be the people bleating now.

# ? Jun 9, 2016 02:43

Zenithe: Feb 25, 2013; _{Ask not to whom the Anidavatar belongs; it belongs to thee.}

quote:

The owner of a Collaroy beachfront home devastated by the Sydney storm, Tony Cagorksi, blames the council and state government for not building a seawall to protect his home.

Jesus wept.

# ? Jun 9, 2016 02:43

Amoeba102: Jan 22, 2010

People who live in Sand Castles shouldn't ignore the tide.

# ? Jun 9, 2016 02:48

Dude McAwesome: Sep 30, 2004; Still better than a Ponytar

They literally built on a beach. What did they expect to happen?

# ? Jun 9, 2016 02:48

wombat74: Sep 30, 2005; Corporate Fat Cat

BUT YOU GUYS, the previous owner didn't say anything when he bought the place, and he asked Spiro next door and he didn't say anything!

SOMEONE MUST PAY (as long as it isn't him, it's... that other guy's fault)

# ? Jun 9, 2016 02:50

open24hours: Jan 7, 2001

If you'd just lost hundreds of thousands of dollars you'd probably be trying to get it back too. It's worth a shot, he might win.

# ? Jun 9, 2016 02:51

ewe2: Jul 1, 2009

The Oz is going Xenophon for slumlord offences

Don't loving read the Arsetralian posted:

Nick Xenophon appears to have been caught out denying he or his family had unwittingly become slumlords in a unit block blighted by illegal overcrowding.

The senator admitted last week to failing to declare to parliament that he was the director of the company that developed and sold the Adelaide Towers apartments.

He flatly denied in an interview with the ABC that he, his father Theo Xenophou or their company had owned units turned into slums by student tenants.

The Australian can reveal that land title records show Mr Xeno�phou�s company owned unit 101, which came to the attention of the Residential Tenancies Tribunal because it had illegal partitioning, sub-letting and overcrowding.

It can also be revealed that Senator Xenophon, who was sold two units at less than the average price of an apartment in the building at the time, and his father owed $230,000 between them to the owners corporation.

Mr Xenophou had failed to pay strata fees for a year over a dispute about asbestos, rubbish chutes and tiling. A legal bid to recover the money cost the owners corporation almost $100,000 and was settled in 2012.

Senator Xenophon, who stands to win the balance of power, insisted during an interview last Friday on ABC radio in Adelaide that �he (Mr Xenophou) was not the owner of those apartments where there were overcrowding issues�.

�In relation to the issue of overcrowding; my father developed the building but the overcrowding had nothing to do with any apartments that he owned.

�The issues in respect of overcrowding were not in respect of any apartments that my father owned, that the company of which he was the director owned.�

According to a Residential Tenancies Tribunal decis�ion of March 21, 2012, apartment 101 was subject to an order because of breaches of council by-laws and the Tenancies Act in relation to partitioning, illegal sub-letting and overcrowding related to a tenancy that began on February 18, 2011.

Property agent Sandy Szabo, who represented apartment 101 at the tribunal in 2012, said partitioning had been put in place by tenants and �bogus people� across a number of apartments owned by different people in the complex at the time. �There were others we found out about through the strata,�� he said.

Mr Xenophou sold the apartment in 2014.

Stephen English said he stepped in as the corporation�s presiding officer between 2010 and 2012 after what he considered poor maintenance of the building. He said the management committee fought the overcrowding issue for the two years he was in office.

During a bitter dispute with the community corporation over tiling, asbestos, and rubbish chute problems in the apartment block, Senator Xenophon�s father stopped paying contributions and levies, resulting in other unit �owners being slugged an extra $250,000 levy. When the community corpora�tion began recovery action in 2011, Mr Xenophou counterclaimed, and Senator Xenophon�s and Mr Xenophou�s cases were joined in the District Court, with a trial date set for July 2, 2012. The case was settled prior to the trial date.

According to correspondence at the time, the case was settled on the eve of the trial, leaving the corporation with a legal bill of about $97,500.

Adelaide Tower (Mr Xenophou) paid $200,000 and Senator Xenophon $30,000 to settle the action, correspondence shows.

Senator Xenophon currently owns two apartments at 65 King William Street, sold to him by his father�s Adelaide Tower Pty Ltd for $192,000 and $150,000 in March 2005. He sold two other apartments in the block during the past four years, one in June 2012 for $285,000 that he bought from his father for $150,000 in 2005, and another in December 2013 for $297,000 that he paid $183,000 for in 2005.

Apartments in 65 King William Street went on sale in March 2005, with the average sale price in the first three months being $201,500.

The lowest publicly recorded sale price at the time was 25/65 King William Street, which sold for $160,000.

Senator Xenophon said yesterday he would only deal with The Australian in writing. He did not respond by deadline.

Haw. Only in writing. Then not writing at all. Notice the paranoia in the bolded bits, they're so transparent.

# ? Jun 9, 2016 02:52

SMILLENNIALSMILLEN: Jun 26, 2009

"I have just paid over $100,000 in stamp duty for the home I live in and my money is going to schools and everything."

# ? Jun 9, 2016 02:57

Dude McAwesome: Sep 30, 2004; Still better than a Ponytar

open24hours posted:

If you'd just lost hundreds of thousands of dollars you'd probably be trying to get it back too. It's worth a shot, he might win.

I love that he only bought it last year. The previous owner must be loving life, or saw this coming a few years back.

# ? Jun 9, 2016 02:57

open24hours: Jan 7, 2001

Dude McAwesome posted:

I love that he only bought it last year. The previous owner must be loving life, or saw this coming a few years back.

Buy low sell high.

quote:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-06-09/notorious-bikie-aj-graham-wins-visa-appeal/7495972
One of Tasmania's most notorious bikies AJ Graham has won his Federal Court appeal against the Immigration Minister's decision to cancel his visa.

Graham was a founding member of the Rebels motorcycle gang in Tasmania and former president of the club's Kingston chapter.

Immigration minister Peter Dutton cancelled Graham's visa in June 2015 on character grounds, and the 48-year-old was detained as part of a major crackdown on Tasmania's bikies.

Justice Richard Tracey heard the appeal against the decision, and found Mr Dutton's personal decision under the Migration Act was invalid.

Justice Tracey quashed the decision to cancel AJ Graham's visa and ordered the Federal Government to pay his costs.

AJ Graham was locked up in a prison in Goulburn, New South Wales, awaiting deportation to his country of New Zealand after his visa was cancelled.

He hired a team of lawyers to fight the decision, headed by Victoria's former chief magistrate Nick Papas, and included Hobart lawyers Greg Barns and Neil Humphrey.

Is this going to stop the immigration minister from arbitrarily cancelling other people's visas?

# ? Jun 9, 2016 03:03

CATTASTIC: Mar 31, 2010; ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

open24hours posted:

Is this going to stop the immigration minister from arbitrarily cancelling other people's visas?

Only of those people able to fight back

# ? Jun 9, 2016 03:13

hooman: Oct 11, 2007; This guy seems legit.; Fun Shoe

I think that "HA-HA"-ing at people who bought houses on the beach for extremely high prices with no awareness about the dangers of included is a bit gross in this thread. The responsibility lies with the council for allowing that land to be developed in the first place and not instituting a buyback and or restoration scheme and the developers who built on the land without sufficient protection. Yeah the guy is a rich idiot, but the only things I know about beach management, coastal erosion and king tides are things I've learned from people in this thread.

That said though if they did include a "your house will probably fall into the sea" document with the package when he bought it, then I have less sympathy.

Basically a rich victim of terrible land management is still a victim.

# ? Jun 9, 2016 03:44

Senor Tron: May 26, 2006

ewe2 posted:

The Oz is going Xenophon for slumlord offences

Haw. Only in writing. Then not writing at all. Notice the paranoia in the bolded bits, they're so transparent.

Theo was always a fun customer when I worked at the Adelaide Casino. He would wait until there was a table with thousands riding on each hand, then saunter up, open one box just to annoy them, and then saunter off after enraging them.

Great times.

# ? Jun 9, 2016 03:50

ewe2: Jul 1, 2009

hooman posted:

I think that "HA-HA"-ing at people who bought houses on the beach for extremely high prices with no awareness about the dangers of included is a bit gross in this thread. The responsibility lies with the council for allowing that land to be developed in the first place and not instituting a buyback and or restoration scheme and the developers who built on the land without sufficient protection. Yeah the guy is a rich idiot, but the only things I know about beach management, coastal erosion and king tides are things I've learned from people in this thread.

And I learnt those things in high school, so unless this rich idiot and his friends are all poorly educated, I fail to see how they could not have done a smidgeon of diligence when buying a house on a loving beach. You know, beaches, where those waves come from.

Councils never do anything like your suggestion until its too late and then it becomes a NIMBY shitfight (see: Byron Bay councils for the last 30 years), although I agree some sort of Australia-wide code should be developed but hahaha that will never happen. Once the money pours in, government from council up just rolls over. Developers say, we just sold the land, its not our responsibility, councils say people want to build there, and wouldn't accept a zoning plan preserving the first dune, its not our responsibility, and now the owner of a condemned wreck cries foul. Sometimes its just a tragedy of the commons, and without federal support, no council can hold off developers and greedy state politicians for long.

But: buying a house is not a small thing, you know. You have to take some responsibility for your decisions, and if not for choosing a house, then what the gently caress else can someone with more money than sense get away with? Too late to blame the council now, too late to blame everyone else, and the problem gets handed on to the next generation, and I'm betting they'll do gently caress all as well.

# ? Jun 9, 2016 04:05

open24hours: Jan 7, 2001

Sounds like nanny statism to me. Let people make their own rational decisions about where to build houses without getting the government involved. If you don't realise that your house might get washed away, well, that's on you. Caveat emptor and all that.

# ? Jun 9, 2016 04:18

hooman: Oct 11, 2007; This guy seems legit.; Fun Shoe

ewe2 posted:

And I learnt those things in high school, so unless this rich idiot and his friends are all poorly educated, I fail to see how they could not have done a smidgeon of diligence when buying a house on a loving beach. You know, beaches, where those waves come from.

Councils never do anything like your suggestion until its too late and then it becomes a NIMBY shitfight (see: Byron Bay councils for the last 30 years), although I agree some sort of Australia-wide code should be developed but hahaha that will never happen. Once the money pours in, government from council up just rolls over. Developers say, we just sold the land, its not our responsibility, councils say people want to build there, and wouldn't accept a zoning plan preserving the first dune, its not our responsibility, and now the owner of a condemned wreck cries foul. Sometimes its just a tragedy of the commons, and without federal support, no council can hold off developers and greedy state politicians for long.

But: buying a house is not a small thing, you know. You have to take some responsibility for your decisions, and if not for choosing a house, then what the gently caress else can someone with more money than sense get away with? Too late to blame the council now, too late to blame everyone else, and the problem gets handed on to the next generation, and I'm betting they'll do gently caress all as well.

I didn't learn anything about this in high school, so maybe I'm poorly educated as well but I don't think much coastal/land management is understood or even had as a known unknown by the general populace.

I don't disagree with anything you said, but I do think it should be councils/state governments making these kind of decisions and not bowing to unscrupulous property developers.

I know idiots will scream "nanny state" but we do need to protect people from these kind of things. I don't own a house, if I did buy one I would probably do research into things that could affect it, however I wonder how different the views of the thread would be about this if it was low income housing that had sunk into a swamp rather than the homes of the rich falling into the sea.

Councils and the states failing to protect people through political cowardice and being compromised by capital still doesn't really make victim blaming ok.

# ? Jun 9, 2016 04:19

Recoome: Nov 9, 2013; Matter of fact, I'm salty now.

https://twitter.com/samanthamaiden/status/740710918498045952

https://twitter.com/samanthamaiden/status/740711151906918400

lol strong words after a strong drink?

# ? Jun 9, 2016 04:42

Recoome: Nov 9, 2013; Matter of fact, I'm salty now.

imagine being part of a military where you aren't allowed to exploit your military service for cheap political points

don't imagine guys, they're living the dream

# ? Jun 9, 2016 04:43

NPR Journalizard: Feb 14, 2008

Coles tells fair work to gently caress off.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-06-09/coles-refuses-to-boost-penalty-rates-despite-fair-work-ruling/7496114

quote:

Supermarket giant Coles has defied the Fair Work Commission and refused to boost penalty rates for workers who have been left worse off under a controversial wage agreement struck with the shop assistant's union.

The decision means that employees who work mostly at nights and on weekends will continue to be paid less than they would be under the conditions of the award, which is the basic safety net for retail workers.

The agreement raised base hourly rates of pay, but cut penalty rates, dividing the Coles workforce between those who work predominantly during the day on week days, and those who rely on penalty rates.

The Fair Work Commission last week found that some of the 77,000 Coles workers covered by the agreement would be left out of pocket, and asked Coles to lift penalty rates.

By law, any agreement must pass the better off overall test (BOOT), which stipulates no worker can be left worse off than under the award.

The agreement between Coles and the Shop Distributive and Allied Employees Association (SDAE) was originally waved through by the commission last year.

But the process ground to a halt after a part-time Coles employee from Queensland, Duncan Hart, claimed it would leave substantial numbers of workers worse off.

Coles and the union argued that the wage shortfall for those who relied on penalty rates would be made up for by an array of benefits contained within the agreement, including blood donor leave, natural disaster leave, domestic violence leave and War Force leave.

However, the commission rejected this argument.

Pay deals to revert to previous agreement

In a press release today, Coles said the 77,000 workers would now revert to the previous agreement, dating back to 2011, but that it would continue to pay the higher hourly rates contained within the disputed agreement, to ensure no Coles worker's pay would be suddenly cut.

# ? Jun 9, 2016 04:47

Recoome: Nov 9, 2013; Matter of fact, I'm salty now.

Wow if only there was a union for shopkeepers, distributors, and other allied employees.

# ? Jun 9, 2016 04:51

MysticalMachineGun: Apr 5, 2005

The Australian posted:

Strong, independent Coles bravely tells marxist fair work to gently caress off.

Found the Arsestralian headline for you

# ? Jun 9, 2016 05:06

meteor9: Nov 23, 2007; "That's why I put up with it."

Recoome posted:

Wow if only there was a union for shopkeepers, distributors, and other allied employees.

If my union rep wasn't someone I've worked with, trusted, and known for years, I would've dropped my membership ages ago. Fuckin' SDA, man.

# ? Jun 9, 2016 05:07

Quantum Mechanic: Apr 25, 2010; Just another fuckwit who thrives on fake moral outrage.
Waaaah the Christians are out to get me

lol abbottsgonnawin

I'll laugh at what happened to the houses because for once the lovely decisions of Liberal governments have actually caused negative impact to Liberal voters

gently caress Warringah, it can float off into the sea

# ? Jun 9, 2016 05:17

UrbanLabyrinth: Jan 28, 2009; When my eyes were stabbed by the flash of a neon light
That split the night
And touched the sound of silence; College Slice

hooman posted:

I know idiots will scream "nanny state" but we do need to protect people from these kind of things. I don't own a house, if I did buy one I would probably do research into things that could affect it, however I wonder how different the views of the thread would be about this if it was low income housing that had sunk into a swamp rather than the homes of the rich falling into the sea.

Clearly there's a difference between low-income housing (people live there because they can't afford to live elsewhere) and beachside minimansions (people live there because they can afford to live anywhere and choose to live there) though.

# ? Jun 9, 2016 05:22

Doctor Spaceman: Jul 6, 2010; "Everyone's entitled to their point of view, but that's seriously a weird one."

Quantum Mechanic posted:

gently caress Warringah, it can float off into the sea

I didn't expect you to support ocean dumping.

# ? Jun 9, 2016 05:22

SMILLENNIALSMILLEN: Jun 26, 2009

Sludge Tank posted:

posting for sub but have an excellent facebook meme

Seriously put this on billboards and enjoy your election win

# ? Jun 9, 2016 05:23

Quantum Mechanic: Apr 25, 2010; Just another fuckwit who thrives on fake moral outrage.
Waaaah the Christians are out to get me

lol abbottsgonnawin

LibertyCat posted:

I am pissed at Turnbull because David Leyonhjelm is my favorite senator (Mitch Fifield is #2) and the DD means we lose a great man. Thanks to the Senate changes the era of fun microparties is dead.

If your hero Senator had spent the last three years organising his party, campaigning, building stakeholder relationships, setting up a party and volunteer apparatus or basically anything except being a painfully unfunny poo poo-for-brains racist fuckwit, he'd be comfortably re-elected. Fortunately for us, he hasn't.

# ? Jun 9, 2016 05:26

Synthbuttrange: May 6, 2007

Strap yourself in for The Briefcase: Australia's most exploitative reality show.

Who's more deserving? A family devastated by a bushfire? Or a family whose mother lost both arms and both legs?

Mandy - who lost both arms and both legs to an infection - must decide whether to keep some, all or none of the money she's received.

The Briefcase is based on a US series, axed after poor ratings and savage reviews. Time magazine called it "the worst" of its genre, but Nine says the local adaptation is "fundamentally different".

I've seen both. The best I can say of the Aussie version, starting on June 20, is that it's less bad. Yet still appalling.

Struggling contestants on The Briefcase are overjoyed to receive $100,000. Then they see this note.

Cloaking itself with the genuine decency of its participants, it peddles the myth of "deserving" and "undeserving" poor. Instead of scrutinising the economic roots of disadvantage, it suggests individual acts of kindness as a solution. As viewers, we're invited to arbitrate awful situations as we scratch ourselves on the couch. "What would you do?" the promo asks.

For instance: should a quadruple amputee get new prosthetic legs? You be the judge!

Thanks Channel Nine. Thannel Nine.

http://www.theage.com.au/entertainment/tv-and-radio/the-briefcase-is-australias-most-exploitative-reality-show-ever-20160608-gpert9.html

# ? Jun 9, 2016 05:28

SMILLENNIALSMILLEN: Jun 26, 2009

Quantum Mechanic posted:

If your hero Senator had spent the last three years organising his party, campaigning, building stakeholder relationships, setting up a party and volunteer apparatus or basically anything except being a painfully unfunny poo poo-for-brains racist fuckwit, he'd be comfortably re-elected. Fortunately for us, he hasn't.

thats strange because everything lyonhelm does makes him seem like a man with too much time on his hands

# ? Jun 9, 2016 05:33

asio: Nov 29, 2008; "Also Sprach Arnold Jacobs: A Developmental Guide for Brass Wind Musicians" refers to the mullet as an important tool for professional cornet playing and box smashing black and blood

hooman posted:

Councils and the states failing to protect people through political cowardice and being compromised by capital still doesn't really make victim blaming ok.

Lol they can afford a 2$mill house. They aren't victims.

Lemme give you some perception. Median income in my area is $577/week. That's not much more than the pension. People who can afford to buy a second home losing their first does not a victim make. You can't go full liberal "equality for the rich as well as the poor" on this one, give up and get back to polishing the guillotine.

# ? Jun 9, 2016 05:34

Knorth: Aug 19, 2014; Buglord

SynthOrange posted:

Strap yourself in for The Briefcase: Australia's most exploitative reality show.

Who's more deserving? A family devastated by a bushfire? Or a family whose mother lost both arms and both legs?

Mandy - who lost both arms and both legs to an infection - must decide whether to keep some, all or none of the money she's received.

The Briefcase is based on a US series, axed after poor ratings and savage reviews. Time magazine called it "the worst" of its genre, but Nine says the local adaptation is "fundamentally different".

I've seen both. The best I can say of the Aussie version, starting on June 20, is that it's less bad. Yet still appalling.

Struggling contestants on The Briefcase are overjoyed to receive $100,000. Then they see this note.

Cloaking itself with the genuine decency of its participants, it peddles the myth of "deserving" and "undeserving" poor. Instead of scrutinising the economic roots of disadvantage, it suggests individual acts of kindness as a solution. As viewers, we're invited to arbitrate awful situations as we scratch ourselves on the couch. "What would you do?" the promo asks.

For instance: should a quadruple amputee get new prosthetic legs? You be the judge!

Thanks Channel Nine. Thannel Nine.

http://www.theage.com.au/entertainment/tv-and-radio/the-briefcase-is-australias-most-exploitative-reality-show-ever-20160608-gpert9.html

I know several people who will love this

# ? Jun 9, 2016 05:44

The Narrator: Aug 11, 2011; bernie would have won

SynthOrange posted:

Cloaking itself with the genuine decency of its participants, it peddles the myth of "deserving" and "undeserving" poor. Instead of scrutinising the economic roots of disadvantage, it suggests individual acts of kindness as a solution. As viewers, we're invited to arbitrate awful situations as we scratch ourselves on the couch. "What would you do?" the promo asks.

This is pretty much true of all transformative reality television anyway.

To me the concept of the show is interesting and appealing as a game/experiment, but as soon as you apply it to actual human beings it loses all ethical credibility.

# ? Jun 9, 2016 05:47

UrbanLabyrinth: Jan 28, 2009; When my eyes were stabbed by the flash of a neon light
That split the night
And touched the sound of silence; College Slice

SynthOrange posted:

Strap yourself in for The Briefcase: Australia's most exploitative reality show.

Who's more deserving? A family devastated by a bushfire? Or a family whose mother lost both arms and both legs?

Mandy - who lost both arms and both legs to an infection - must decide whether to keep some, all or none of the money she's received.

The Briefcase is based on a US series, axed after poor ratings and savage reviews. Time magazine called it "the worst" of its genre, but Nine says the local adaptation is "fundamentally different".

I've seen both. The best I can say of the Aussie version, starting on June 20, is that it's less bad. Yet still appalling.

Struggling contestants on The Briefcase are overjoyed to receive $100,000. Then they see this note.

Cloaking itself with the genuine decency of its participants, it peddles the myth of "deserving" and "undeserving" poor. Instead of scrutinising the economic roots of disadvantage, it suggests individual acts of kindness as a solution. As viewers, we're invited to arbitrate awful situations as we scratch ourselves on the couch. "What would you do?" the promo asks.

For instance: should a quadruple amputee get new prosthetic legs? You be the judge!

Thanks Channel Nine. Thannel Nine.

http://www.theage.com.au/entertainment/tv-and-radio/the-briefcase-is-australias-most-exploitative-reality-show-ever-20160608-gpert9.html

This would be much more worthwhile if the first recipients were bankers, and the second were still people deserving of support. Either bankers have to fight their strongest instincts and give away money, or they're exposed publicly as monstrous.

# ? Jun 9, 2016 05:53

Synthbuttrange: May 6, 2007

Also Sydney police confront lone knife wielder, 4 people end up with gunshot wounds. :iiam:

# ? Jun 9, 2016 05:55

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 4, 2024 18:04

hooman: Oct 11, 2007; This guy seems legit.; Fun Shoe

asio posted:

Lol they can afford a 2$mill house. They aren't victims.

Lemme give you some perception. Median income in my area is $577/week. That's not much more than the pension. People who can afford to buy a second home losing their first does not a victim make. You can't go full liberal "equality for the rich as well as the poor" on this one, give up and get back to polishing the guillotine.

I strongly disagree that a person's net worth determines whether systematic failures have screwed them or not. Honestly this cuts perilously close to "rich refugee" arguments.

UrbanLabyrinth posted:

Clearly there's a difference between low-income housing (people live there because they can't afford to live elsewhere) and beachside minimansions (people live there because they can afford to live anywhere and choose to live there) though.

So it's ok for some developments to be built unsafe and others not to be based on the socio economic bracket of the occupant?

I've never stopped sharpening my guillotine, and from the statements the guy made in the article he seems like a rich shithead. However none of that makes it ok that this problem wasn't addressed by the very processes that are meant to protect people from poo poo like this happening. Pointing at him and laughing misses the systematic failures that let this happen and he has a point that if you're buying a property anywhere, the government has a responsibility to ensure that it is safe, and when they aren't, to correct or repossess and destroy them.

I don't see how "was built on land that cannot support it" is any different to "was built full of asbestos", both should be repossessed by the government due to them being unsafe and the owners compensated. Further developments without sufficient guidelines (don't build on first dunes, don't fill houses with asbestos) should be banned. A lot of the thread seemed to be missing that point when laughing at rich mans pool fall in sea.

# ? Jun 9, 2016 05:57

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Auspol June/Election - hang parliament

«‹›229 »