frank marriott Posted July 26, 2016 Share Posted July 26, 2016 AND?!! Huh? When things deteriorate to basic political dribble and individual opinions then it is not uncommon in many circles to use WITH - "Why is this here" - Maybe "off topic" but no need to comment further. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted July 26, 2016 Share Posted July 26, 2016 There was a Global Financial Crisis (courtesy of Wall st) in there somewhere. You don't get through that scott free. The Libs never mention it. (funny about that). Many countries still haven't recovered from it. So it DID happen. Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Koreelah Posted July 26, 2016 Share Posted July 26, 2016 Depends what these figures iclude, Bex. My post used the National Debt as announced in regular news bulletins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DonRamsay Posted July 31, 2016 Share Posted July 31, 2016 If I mention the NAZIS could this discussion be closed? I fear we should stick to aviation and the things that unite us and leave politics to other fora (and religion to the humour section.) Don p.s. can't help myself . . . Hockey's budget might have saved a few $$$ but for the unrepresentative swill in the red room. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coljones Posted July 31, 2016 Share Posted July 31, 2016 If I mention the NAZIS could this discussion be closed?I fear we should stick to aviation and the things that unite us and leave politics to other fora (and religion to the humour section.) Don p.s. can't help myself . . . Hockey's budget might have saved a few $$$ but for the unrepresentative swill in the red room. The swill in the red room are a hell of a lot more representative than the gerrymanders in the green. I'm not sure who George Christiansen is actually representative of - certainly not decent people with a sense of fair go nor of the Danish people living in Australia. He must have come over with Joe Bjelke-Petersen from New Zealand. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DonRamsay Posted July 31, 2016 Share Posted July 31, 2016 When you have a situation that three xenophobic wackos from Qld could hold the balance of power in the federal sphere then they are both swill and unrepresentative of the vast majority view. Col, I hope you understood that by red room I was not referring to the left (where I usually cast my aspersions) but to the bastard descendent of the House of Lords otherwise called the Senate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coljones Posted July 31, 2016 Share Posted July 31, 2016 Don, I understand the red room, which contains members elected in proportion to their support from the populace unlike the green room which is elected in a form of winner take all (although not as bad as the UK). One might even say that the country party, full of xenophobes and unrepresentative swill, are the wackos holding the balance of power, skewering Turnbull and the liberals on quite a few rational and progressive policies. I suggest you chuck some nasturtiums over your right shoulder to give yourself a little balance. Keep well!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DonRamsay Posted July 31, 2016 Share Posted July 31, 2016 Col, Leaving aside whether the "Christian" loonies on the far right of the coalition are as unhelpful as the (insert your own derogatory adjectives about the unbalanced power of the 15% unions) on the left, it comes down to a matter of arithmetic. I personally favour the UK "first past the post" system. For that community (electorate) there can be only one representative and that should be the person who gets the most votes. I can barely tolerate optional preferential but a system where I am required to indicate a preference for a political view that I abhor is, well, abhorrent. Back to the arithmetic. Surely the aim should be that government reflects the will of the majority of electors. How can it be representative of the majority will when 3 xenophobic nutters can have more say than 50 or more democratically elected persons? Of course it has always been at the disposal of the major parties to invoke a pairing arrangement like the one they use to allow for absent MPs to make the minority riff raff irrelevant. But, now that the ALP will never again have enough votes to govern in its own right, they would never agree to such an arrangement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Koreelah Posted July 31, 2016 Share Posted July 31, 2016 "...When you have a situation that three xenophobic wackos from Qld could hold the balance of power in the federal sphere then they are both swill and unrepresentative of the vast majority view...." Pretty soon that balance of power might be held by Islamic reps. The price of their support might be introducing Sharia Law for their section of our society. A slippery slope to start down... Don't scoff; community attitudes change fast- the rapid acceptance of gay marriage being a good example. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DonRamsay Posted July 31, 2016 Share Posted July 31, 2016 Canon law exists for Catholics everywhere and possibly for Church of England as well but I wouldn't count on a repetition of the Inquisition any time soon. There are people in Australia now who live now by Sharia Law by their choice but I'm fairly sure that 1% of the population who are Islamic will find a rather large amount of resistance to stoning adulterers and homosexuals or cutting off the hands of thieves. The NDIS would collapse trying to look after one-handed former thieves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coljones Posted August 1, 2016 Share Posted August 1, 2016 "...When you have a situation that three xenophobic wackos from Qld could hold the balance of power in the federal sphere then they are both swill and unrepresentative of the vast majority view...."Pretty soon that balance of power might be held by Islamic reps. The price of their support might be introducing Sharia Law for their section of our society. A slippery slope to start down... Don't scoff; community attitudes change fast- the rapid acceptance of gay marriage being a good example. The world currently has a lot of "sharia" law in place. In the Australian context it is "Judeo-Christian" canon law. It is gradually getting whittled down. I can remember Sundays in the country where not even a leaf was permitted to move because of the Sunday Observance Act. An eye for an eye was straight out of the Bible and the devine right of kings (just like a mediaeval mafia) was a perversion of the rules of religion. Been garrotted or had your eyes gouged out recently? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Methusala Posted August 1, 2016 Share Posted August 1, 2016 The answer is simple. Replace the present "representative democracy " model with a true "people power" arrangement which allows a number of citizens to put forward proposals which can then be put to a referendum of all interested electors. Forget the dumb mandatory voting concept and leave these matters to interested participants not football crowd crazies. Give free time on all media for candidates and turf them all at the end of 2 terms. Make any form of political lobbying public and threaten those that will corrupt the process with long periods of incarceration in the dungeon. There, try that for a discussion topic. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted August 1, 2016 Share Posted August 1, 2016 All written from individual perspectives. Well here's mine...Surely the house of LORDS is one of the most outdated and unjustifiable concepts in the Western World. Member by birth and a King/Queen by line of descent. If anything is offensive to me, It's that one. As Churchill said "Democracy is the worst system there is, except for ALL the others." If we take the concept of proportional representation as basic...The senate fails on the state based provisions. Tasmania has about the same number of people as Geelong or Central Newcastle. But more than the entire NT. IF you take the total green vote, It doesn't do well.( I'm not pushing the green bandwagon by the way. Just an example). Do we allow preferences? Essentially, if your person doesn't get up, your second vote counts, and so on till you exhaust the numbers if you want to. Or just the primary vote and first past the post?. Simple, but not at all sophisticated at getting a true voter intention. You should NEVER have to award a vote to someone you don't want to vote for to make a vote valid or any other reason someone might conjure up. All votes are equal? It's awful but what's the alternative? Someone decides the worthies, that suit the outcome THAT person wants. So if one tosses a coin it equals the vote of someone else who did years of research. OK. You just have to wear that. The boss could want you to work all day so you didn't get to vote. If he didn't think your vote would suit him. That is one of the reasons that COMPULSORY voting was the way it was done. It doesn't seem like a good idea but it actually achieves a reasonable result in so much as the more who vote the more valid the result can be seen to be. OK you can vote deliberately informal IF that's you passion, but what a wasted opportunity? Many people in the World, would LOVE the ability to freely vote for a candidate of their choice without fear of reprisal. We get rid of those we don't approve of without the loss of a SINGLE life. That doesn't happen in a lot of countries but we take it for granted OFTEN. Nev 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DonRamsay Posted August 1, 2016 Share Posted August 1, 2016 Theoretically, Australia is governed by the heir of the self-appointed head of the Church of England who was the conqueror of Wales, the scourge of Ireland and the patron saint of marriage and beheadings. The current heir happily acknowledges having been appointed by GOD to rule the United Kingdom of Britain. She also happens to claim to be the Queen of Australia. By a kindly inclination, this theocratic head of state (sound like the Ayatollah in Iran?) allows a form of self-government in Australia that was initiated by an Act of the UK parliament to which her forbears gave Royal Assent. In the 21st Century this is no way for Australia to exist. We need to dispense with the medieval and religious trappings and have Her Royal Majesty and her offspring confine their graciousness to Great Britain or, preferably, just England. While they are at it they should give Ireland back to the Irish and apologise for the genocide they inflicted on the Irish. The government of a democracy should not depend on the goodwill of one foreigner. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Koreelah Posted August 1, 2016 Share Posted August 1, 2016 ...I'm fairly sure that 1% of the population who are Islamic will find a rather large amount of resistance to stoning adulterers and homosexuals or cutting off the hands of thieves. All true Don, but your numbers are out of date; In the 2011 census Moslems were 2.2% of the population and growing faster than most groups. I doubt many will drift away from their faith; unlike other religions, there is no "get-out" mechanism. Having Sharia courts to settle disputes within the Islamic community would make sense to many, but once the precedent has been set, there's no going back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Koreelah Posted August 1, 2016 Share Posted August 1, 2016 Theoretically, Australia is governed by the heir of the self-appointed head of the Church of England who was the conqueror of Wales, the scourge of Ireland and the patron saint of marriage and beheadings.The current heir happily acknowledges having been appointed by GOD to rule the United Kingdom of Britain. She also happens to claim to be the Queen of Australia. By a kindly inclination, this theocratic head of state (sound like the Ayatollah in Iran?) allows a form of self-government in Australia that was initiated by an Act of the UK parliament to which her forbears gave Royal Assent. In the 21st Century this is no way for Australia to exist. We need to dispense with the medieval and religious trappings and have Her Royal Majesty and her offspring confine their graciousness to Great Britain or, preferably, just England. While they are at it they should give Ireland back to the Irish and apologise for the genocide they inflicted on the Irish. The government of a democracy should not depend on the goodwill of one foreigner. I totally agree Don, but she's such a nice lady... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ev17ifly2 Posted August 1, 2016 Share Posted August 1, 2016 How is this a "general discussion on recreational aviation" as per the Forum. I have an excuse for being grounded, weather however I am starting to suspect that the majority of habitual posters on this site fly from their Jason Recliner. Maybe a poll on who actually logs some hours. The results may surprise 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coljones Posted August 1, 2016 Share Posted August 1, 2016 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DonRamsay Posted August 1, 2016 Share Posted August 1, 2016 I totally agree Don, but she's such a nice lady... Oddly I have a great admiration for her devotion to what she sees as her duty. Trouble is she has children who will one day be entitled to call themselves King of Australia. We have to draw the line somewhere. Possibly her choice to be "nice" has something to do with the fate of Charles I. You have to give them that . . . they are quick learners. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DonRamsay Posted August 1, 2016 Share Posted August 1, 2016 . . . I doubt many will drift away from their faith; unlike other religions, there is no "get-out" mechanism. The protestants used to say that about the Catholics . . . until the pill was invented and the Catholic Church said no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Koreelah Posted August 1, 2016 Share Posted August 1, 2016 Oddly I have a great admiration for her devotion to what she sees as her duty. Trouble is she has children who will one day be entitled to call themselves King of Australia... Don't worry Don, once she's gone our republican movement will light up again. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted August 1, 2016 Share Posted August 1, 2016 There's a lot drifting away and many just losing faith. There are lots of non theist in ex-moslems too but they live very precariously, having to live in other countries generally, under fear of being killed. An atheist would have little or NO chance of being the President of the USA.. Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty_d Posted August 1, 2016 Share Posted August 1, 2016 "...When you have a situation that three xenophobic wackos from Qld could hold the balance of power in the federal sphere then they are both swill and unrepresentative of the vast majority view...."Pretty soon that balance of power might be held by Islamic reps. The price of their support might be introducing Sharia Law for their section of our society. A slippery slope to start down... Don't scoff; community attitudes change fast- the rapid acceptance of gay marriage being a good example. Cory Bernardi, is that you??? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Koreelah Posted August 1, 2016 Share Posted August 1, 2016 Crickey Marty, that hurts! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Koreelah Posted August 1, 2016 Share Posted August 1, 2016 ...I am starting to suspect that the majority of habitual posters on this site fly from their Jason Recliner.Maybe a poll on who actually logs some hours. The results may surprise Interesting point, ev17. Does this mean only regular fliers should post? What about pilots with most of their flying behind them? They contribute an awful lot of expertise and experience to this forum. I confess to being an habitual posters and would love to get more airtime, but spend too much time improving my plane. Meanwhile I quite enjoy the online discussions and debates. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now