- open24hours
- Jan 7, 2001
-
|
The point they're trying to make there should be pretty obvious. They never gave up their sovereignty voluntarily and they don't accept the legitimacy of the Australian government.
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2016 00:22
|
|
- Adbot
-
ADBOT LOVES YOU
|
|
|
#
¿
May 11, 2024 18:30
|
|
- open24hours
- Jan 7, 2001
-
|
is 10,000 hens per hectare meant to sound more cramped than 1 per square metre? Everyone's reporting on it that way.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2016 05:24
|
|
- open24hours
- Jan 7, 2001
-
|
He's PM now.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2016 09:04
|
|
- open24hours
- Jan 7, 2001
-
|
Here are some helpful articles
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_jure
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_facto
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2016 23:25
|
|
- open24hours
- Jan 7, 2001
-
|
Little did the British know that by doing this they created Australia. Go back in time and show Captain Cook this thread, problem solved.
I remember a bunch of lovely shows on the History Channel saying that the British were a mere few days away from being beaten by the Dutch. Speaking dutch would be pretty rad.
The French, but close enough.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2016 02:34
|
|
- open24hours
- Jan 7, 2001
-
|
The main reason for the world wars was that the Germans and the Italians were butthurt about their weak colonial game.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2016 03:45
|
|
- open24hours
- Jan 7, 2001
-
|
They're equivalent in the sense that neither one is a writing system. The more contentious claim is that they didn't have agriculture, which they had at least some form of.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2016 23:21
|
|
- open24hours
- Jan 7, 2001
-
|
I was looking for stuff earlier and I found this article: http://rupertgerritsen.tripod.com/pdf/published/Evidence_for_Indigenous_Australian_Agriculture.pdf
It seems to be a fairly under-researched field.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2016 05:47
|
|
- open24hours
- Jan 7, 2001
-
|
Was the colonisation of Maya lands less just than the colonisation of indigenous Australian lands?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2016 09:41
|
|
- open24hours
- Jan 7, 2001
-
|
You can point to women who were successful in business in that era too. Cherry picking examples of successful women doesn't change the fact that most women who worked with computers, like most women who worked at all, were generally given low responsibility roles.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2016 23:55
|
|
- open24hours
- Jan 7, 2001
-
|
Obviously, but only now are they starting to get an opportunity to show that. There were some exceptional women in early computing, but pretending it was some sort of egalitarian utopia compared to other industries doesn't help anyone.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2016 00:18
|
|
- open24hours
- Jan 7, 2001
-
|
Is it illegal though?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2016 06:08
|
|
- open24hours
- Jan 7, 2001
-
|
I hope there's a torrent or something. I'm sure everyone and their dog who has jumped on the big data craze is just aching to try out their skills.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2016 06:54
|
|
- open24hours
- Jan 7, 2001
-
|
Considering what the money gets spent on, who can blame people for wanting to minimise or zero their tax?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2016 02:30
|
|
- open24hours
- Jan 7, 2001
-
|
Giving money to politicians only encourages them.
I wonder what's more immoral, avoiding tax or paying a politician to pass laws you like? In any case, I find it pretty difficult to get worked up about this kind of thing. The entire economy is set up to encourage this kind of behaviour and the faux outrage from the political class is all a bit much.
open24hours fucked around with this message at 03:48 on Apr 5, 2016
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2016 03:13
|
|
- open24hours
- Jan 7, 2001
-
|
That happened ages ago.
https://twitter.com/DavidLeyonhjelm/status/717157825110089728
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2016 04:57
|
|
- open24hours
- Jan 7, 2001
-
|
Do you hassle people for liking music that isn't charting in the top ten too?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 6, 2016 03:47
|
|
- open24hours
- Jan 7, 2001
-
|
WiFi decimated the wire industry, we can't keep making mistakes like that.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 6, 2016 06:35
|
|
- open24hours
- Jan 7, 2001
-
|
Is there a good reason why the Greens have so little popular support? Is Australia just generally more conservative?
The Greens are a newish party that really formed to represent environmental issues and have had to pick up the slack on other issues since the ALP decided it didn't want to be a socialist party anymore. A lot of people who vote ALP think they're voting for a socialist party.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 6, 2016 22:01
|
|
- open24hours
- Jan 7, 2001
-
|
Progressive is the most meaningless word.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 6, 2016 23:40
|
|
- open24hours
- Jan 7, 2001
-
|
Make it compulsory for everyone, same with organ donation.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2016 11:23
|
|
- open24hours
- Jan 7, 2001
-
|
They still have their blood taken/organs harvested, they just get chucked if they're no good.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2016 11:47
|
|
- open24hours
- Jan 7, 2001
-
|
Maybe then we could keep the blood god happy without having to go to war all the time.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2016 12:28
|
|
- open24hours
- Jan 7, 2001
-
|
As if the government has to go through an ethics review to pass laws.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2016 12:58
|
|
- open24hours
- Jan 7, 2001
-
|
There are lots of things you have to do that you wouldn't ordinarily do to be eligible for welfare. I doubt the JSAs would complain about being given the power to stick a needle in someone.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2016 13:06
|
|
- open24hours
- Jan 7, 2001
-
|
I don't remember anyone complaining about 'ethics' when people suggested vaccinating your kids should be mandatory.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2016 13:11
|
|
- open24hours
- Jan 7, 2001
-
|
No you see it's voluntary to vaccinate your kids, but in order to get welfare you have to vaccinate your kids.
See how this is a problem?
[EDIT: For anyone who thinks I'm anti-vaccination, lol. I'm interested in hearing what the conceptual difference here is though. Ignoring the welfare issues, is vaccinating your kids so much more important than donating blood that you should be able to punish people for refusing to do one but not the other? What about organ donation? People die all the time because of the neuroses of potential donors and their families.]
open24hours fucked around with this message at 13:28 on Apr 7, 2016
|
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2016 13:19
|
|
- open24hours
- Jan 7, 2001
-
|
Being made to live with malfunctioning lungs or kidneys or going longer than you should between blood transfusions or whatever is probably pretty harmful to a child's development too. Obviously donating blood or organs is more invasive than most vaccinations (although if the subject is dead then this doesn't really matter), but that seems like a pretty arbitrary distinction.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2016 13:47
|
|
- open24hours
- Jan 7, 2001
-
|
Everyone deserves to make good money whether they're educated or not.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 9, 2016 09:05
|
|
- open24hours
- Jan 7, 2001
-
|
No, ideally people should get paid roughly in proportion to how much society values their skills, proportional to how many people already have those skills. Spending a decade earning a PhD in something useless probably won't help anyone but will drain societies resources in the process.
I think I know what the fundamental mindset difference is between me and most of Auspol. I believe that the vast majority of Adults should be considered as rational human beings that should be allowed to take (informed) risks* if they desire, keep the payoff if they succeed, and wear the consequences if they fail. Yes people start with different circumstances but that's the luck of the draw. Some people are just Bastards and are still responsible for evil actions despite being abused as a child etc.
This thread (mostly) seems to believe that the average adult should not be considered competent to shape their own destiny, and if they fail, it's not because they made stupid choices - it's because the government didn't stop them from making the stupid choice, or it's not fair that the stupid choice has consequences and the government should fix that. If someone does Bad Things it's because of society and they just need to be rehabilitated with no punishment. People must be protected from themselves and should not be judged competent to evaluate risk.
(*risks that involve themselves, not random people, before someone jumps on me for allowing people to build nukes they're pretty sure won't go off in their apartment).
Higsian I agree with you.
They're not taking informed risks though. The whole point is that they are uninformed which is why dodgy private colleges can make so much money so easily.
Besides, education should be about more than making money. The only reason people who work in IT or engineering are in demand is because people need networks to download artistic content, and roads and bridges to see it live.
open24hours fucked around with this message at 09:22 on Apr 9, 2016
|
|
#
¿
Apr 9, 2016 09:18
|
|
- open24hours
- Jan 7, 2001
-
|
Heh. TBH you are pretty close to the mark.
In turn, how many of you are on Centrelink?
I'm not on Centrelink and I make good money, but even if I was and I didn't, it's not like I'm the only person to hold views like that.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 9, 2016 09:25
|
|
- open24hours
- Jan 7, 2001
-
|
We both know you removed the second part "proportional to how many people already have those skills" because it shoots your argument down in flames. There are a lot of people who could collect rubbish. You would have to get all of them on strike at once.
I don't think everyone is rational but we should treat Adults if they are. A Nanny State raises Children.
Can you point to a society that operates the way you would like it to? It can be either current or historical.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 9, 2016 09:29
|
|
- open24hours
- Jan 7, 2001
-
|
I'm all for individuals having the freedom to form unions. I'm against them having the strength to say "if you don't fire all the non-union employees we'll cripple your business" as this interferes with the freedom of people to Not form Unions.
Doesn't the employer refusing to fire non-union workers infringe on the rights of those who are unionised in exactly the same way?
"Yeah you can have a union, but you can't actually do anything with it."
|
|
#
¿
Apr 9, 2016 09:33
|
|
- open24hours
- Jan 7, 2001
-
|
Do you support banning the outsourcing of other types of work as well? Not very liberal.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 9, 2016 09:48
|
|
- open24hours
- Jan 7, 2001
-
|
Hey guys, what voice do you have in your head when you read LC posts?
AMU's, obv.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 9, 2016 09:48
|
|
- open24hours
- Jan 7, 2001
-
|
'Family violence leave' seems like a really weird thing to request. People should be able to take leave when they're having trouble at home, but a special category for family violence is bizarre. Aside from appearing to normalise family violence, as if it's just like having to look after a sick kid or something, would anyone who is a victim of family violence be willing to use it? Isn't one of the main reason's it's so prevalent that people are unwilling to report it?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 10, 2016 02:36
|
|
- open24hours
- Jan 7, 2001
-
|
quote:
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/malcolm-turnbulls-ticket-to-deliver-fast-train/news-story/feae238d4c3a6253982e28ff4e156c94
Malcolm Turnbull is preparing to take to the election a radical new funding approach for nation- building projects, including a plan to develop high-speed rail links on Australia’s east coast that will boost regional centres and ease congestion in capital cities.
After issuing a warning to states that they could no longer treat the federal government as an ATM for major project funding, the Prime Minister is set to unveil a sweeping cities policy ahead of next month’s budget that will also transform the funding of Australian infrastructure projects.
A key plank of the government’s infrastructure and cities policy will be to use high-speed rail developments to encourage population growth in regional centres and ease growth pressures in Sydney and Melbourne.
The rail line to Badgerys Creek in western Sydney is the government’s first priority, but The Australian has learnt the Coalition wants this followed with links to regional centres such as Goulburn, as well as another link from Melbourne to Shepparton, to create a “pressure release valve” for major cities.
These would be the first links of a longer-term very fast train network that would eventually run all the way from Melbourne to Brisbane.
To fund the multi-billion-dollar rail projects, including high-speed rail links and potentially the Melbourne Metro, the government will promote the use of “value capture” financing, which leverages the increase in land value resulting from new transport infrastructure to contribute to its cost.
In the lead-up to the May 3 budget, government officials are undertaking intensive policy work on the viability of using the financing model to pay for the high-speed rail network between Melbourne and Brisbane, a project that has been under consideration for more than 30 years and is estimated to cost between $60 billion and $114bn.
Government sources told The Australian the Coalition wanted the very fast train network to be built in stages by a private consortium that would be given access to a share of the potential uplift in land value resulting from the new infrastructure.
This would minimise the amount of taxpayer dollars needed to get the much-vaunted project off the ground, and ensure that the cost-benefit analysis for the project stacked up.
A similar approach was flagged by Mr Turnbull for the Melbourne Metro on Friday, when he said the government wanted infrastructure dollars to go further. “With this type of Metro rail infrastructure, it transforms the value of real estate. It transforms the amenity of cities and it is important to do your planning and analysis carefully so that you maximise the contribution that you can secure from that,” he said.
Anthony Albanese, the opposition transport spokesman, said the project would need some direct investment from taxpayers in addition to value capture.
“You need a combination of both (direct investment and value capture), that’s the truth. Anyone who comes and tells you you can do this for free is fantasising,” he told ABC radio.
Mr Albanese said a Labor-commissioned report into high-speed rail identified the need for 82km of tunnels – including 67km within Sydney – but projected an economic benefit of $2.15 for every dollar invested between Sydney and Melbourne.
He criticised the government for refusing to debate his draft law establishing a standalone High-Speed Rail Authority to spearhead the project.
“You need a structure,” he said. “It can’t just happen with a front-page splash once every year. You actually need a structure that will work to do the planning work, to preserve the corridor across the jurisdictions.”
Another option under consideration is to levy a so-called “betterment tax” on property owners, who would receive a substantial financial boost from the new transport infrastructure.
However, one Liberal MP familiar with the proposal said this would be an unlikely path for the government to pursue, given it would be politically unpopular. A betterment tax was used in the 1920s and 30s to pay for one-third of the Sydney Harbour Bridge, and has been used occasionally by state governments to cover transport project costs.
The new funding approach promoted by Mr Turnbull would end the practice of the federal government giving cash handouts to the states for big-ticket infrastructure projects while allowing all tiers of government to reap the economic benefits of major project spending.
The Coalition’s approach to funding the high-speed rail network differs from the conclusions of a 2013 Labor-commissioned report, which said taxpayers would have to fund most of the upfront capital costs.
Minister for Major Projects Paul Fletcher said Australia’s “substantial infrastructure needs” could not all be met through grant funding by government.
“Therefore, looking at innovative funding sources is very important, and one important source is tapping into the increase in land value from major transport infrastructure,” he said.
Assistant Minister to the Prime Minister for Cities Angus Taylor said Australia needed more investment in our cities and “in connections between our cities”, but public financial constraints meant new and innovative approaches were needed.
“There’s many projects that could fit this model, whether it is rail to Badgerys Creek, whether it’s the Melbourne Metro, or whether indeed it is high speed rail between regional cities and the capitals — they are all projects where we are interested in looking at innovative approaches to financing,” Mr Taylor told The Australian.
“Each project needs to be assessed on its own merits but I certainly see great opportunity to invest more and fund innovatively, and in the process address historical underinvestment in our cities.”
A parliamentary inquiry into value-capture models for high-speed rail infrastructure has heard that development of six regional centres between Sydney and Melbourne could accommodate a large proportion of the estimated eight million population growth forecast for the two cities by mid-century.
I bet the private sector is just falling over itself to take a 100 billion dollar risk.
IMHO they should be reserving the corridor, but the technology to make a high speed train from Sydney to Melbourne competitive with air travel is still a few decades away. Once Japan/China/Europe have 500km/h trains for sale then they should start thinking about actually building it.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2016 01:23
|
|
- Adbot
-
ADBOT LOVES YOU
|
|
|
#
¿
May 11, 2024 18:30
|
|
- open24hours
- Jan 7, 2001
-
|
Uh, yeah, it is.
quote:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/mar/05/eye-for-an-eye-iran-blinds-man-who-carried-out-acid-attack
In a literal application of the sharia law of an eye for an eye, an Iranian man convicted of blinding another man in an acid attack has been blinded in one eye, marking the first time Iran has carried out such a punishment.
The convicted acid attacker, who has not been identified, was rendered unconscious in Rajai-Shahr prison in the city of Karaj on Tuesday as medics gouged out his left eye, according to the state-owned Hamshahri newspaper.
Mahmood Amiry-Moghaddam, from Iran Human Rights (IHR), an independent NGO based in Norway, condemned the blinding as barbaric. “Medical staff who cooperate with the Iranian authorities in this act have broken the Hippocratic oath and cannot call themselves doctors,” he said.
The man had been found guilty of throwing acid in the face of his unnamed victim five years ago in the city of Qom, blinding and disfiguring him for life. He was subsequently sentenced to be blinded in both eyes, paying a fine and 10 years imprisonment.
Although the convict was sentenced to lose sight in both eyes on Tuesday, the victim – who, under Iranian law, has the final say in the punishment – decided at the last minute to postpone the blinding of his right eye for six months. The attacker will be able to plead with the plaintiff to spare him from being blinded fully.
Acid attacks have been rife in Iran in recent years, usually driven by family feuds. Hamshahri reported that the man in this case had been hired by the relatives of his victim’s wife to take revenge on their behalf. It was not clear if he had carried out the attack for financial gain or whether he was related to the wife’s family.
Iranian officials, worried about the increase in the rate of acid attacks, have endorsed retribution, but human rights activists condemn it as inhumane.
Islam’s Sharia law allows for qisas (retribution) but it also advises clemency. Under Iranian law, victims or their families have the final say in such cases and can halt the punishment at any time.
Other acid attackers have also been sentenced to be blinded in Iran, but this is the first known case where the punishment has been carried out. In most previous cases doctors had refused to cooperate with the officials.
Raha Bahreini, a researcher with Amnesty International’s Iran team, said that punishing someone by deliberately blinding them is “an unspeakably cruel and shocking act”.
She told the Guardian: “Blinding is totally prohibited under international law, along with stoning, flogging, amputation and other forms of corporal punishment provided in Iran’s Islamic penal code and must not be carried out under any circumstances.”
Instead of meting out such macabre punishments, Bahreini said Iranian authorities “should raise awareness about violence including root causes, ensure that perpetrators of acid attacks are punished with appropriate and proportionate penalties consistent with international human rights norms, and survivors are provided with effective remedies, including compensation and psychosocial and medical rehabilitation.”
Another man, identified only as Hamid, was also scheduled to be blinded in Karaj on Tuesday, but his punishment was postponed at the request of his victim, Davoud Roshanaei.
“Hamid was about to be rendered unconscious on the bed when his father entered the room and asked me for more time,” said Roshanaei, who has been disfigured and lost sight in one eye as the result of the assault. “I gave them two more months to provide me with compensation for my treatment.”
In a highly publicised case in 2011, Ameneh Bahrami, a victim of an acid attack, received international praise after pardoning her attacker hours before surgeons prepared to blind the man with acid. Bahrami was disfigured and blinded in both eyes because she had repeatedly spurned her attacker’s offer for marriage.
Last year, a spate of acid attacks on young women in Iran’s top tourist destination, Isfahan, caused national horror and outrage. Activists claimed that unlike other cases across the country, victims in Isfahan had been targeted by hardliners for wearing clothes deemed inappropriate. The authorities have vehemently denied this charge.
{edit: better source}
|
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2016 02:30
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2016 00:22
