Racism in Australia

Discuss all the events of the day

Moderator: GH Moderators

Green eyed Mick
Laurie Daley
Posts: 13410
Joined: February 26, 2010, 6:01 pm
Favourite Player: Brett Mullins
Location: Canberra :(

Re: Racism in Australia

Post by Green eyed Mick » February 6, 2012, 12:56 pm

Fuifui Bradbrad wrote:
Green eyed Mick wrote:Parrotting factually incorrect right-wing propaganda isn't passionate. It is ignorant. But I guess Dubs you ain't smart enough to tell the difference
Is your arguement to everything simply "I'm smart and if you disagree with me, you're dumb"?

Seems a bit primary school to me
That is not my argument but even if it was what exactly is the issue? Why is it that being dumb and ignorant is a virtue and something defensible? Some people work hard, study hard and get an education so they can learn how to critically analyse an issue and formulate sound, defensible opinion.

The issue with Nicks comment is it is factually incorrect. You are welcome to defend him but perhaps you might want to try defending him with a counter argument. Perhaps you can pass along the costings you or Nick have done on the Greens policies layed over the current federal budget projections? You might want to put a case forward that supports Nicks assertion the Greens would bankrupt to country?

Maybe you can explain the reasons you feel having to form a minority government should not in anyway impact on pre-election policy positions?

Green eyed Mick
Laurie Daley
Posts: 13410
Joined: February 26, 2010, 6:01 pm
Favourite Player: Brett Mullins
Location: Canberra :(

Re: Racism in Australia

Post by Green eyed Mick » February 6, 2012, 1:06 pm

Question wrote:Parrotting left wing rants made popular from having it forced down ones throat in the brain wash camps , is hardly passionate, just about attention seeking and boring the **** out of a nation.
Where are these brain washing camps you speak about? I would love to sign up. Sure beats having to read and formulate your own opinions.

Fuifui Bradbrad
Ruben Wiki
Posts: 5843
Joined: May 3, 2008, 10:23 pm
Favourite Player: Denan Kemp
Location: Penrith, Sydney, NSW, Australia

Re: Racism in Australia

Post by Fuifui Bradbrad » February 6, 2012, 1:14 pm

Green eyed Mick wrote:That is not my argument but even if it was what exactly is the issue? Why is it that being dumb and ignorant is a virtue and something defensible? Some people work hard, study hard and get an education so they can learn how to critically analyse an issue and formulate sound, defensible opinion.

The issue with Nicks comment is it is factually incorrect. You are welcome to defend him but perhaps you might want to try defending him with a counter argument. Perhaps you can pass along the costings you or Nick have done on the Greens policies layed over the current federal budget projections? You might want to put a case forward that supports Nicks assertion the Greens would bankrupt to country?

Maybe you can explain the reasons you feel having to form a minority government should not in anyway impact on pre-election policy positions?
The issue is that from what I've read in prior posts, while you do make your points, there are times when you question the other person's intelligence because they have an opinion different to your. In this case, Dubs made a comment on how he liked seeing Nick fired up, and you bring Dub's intelligence into question. I just fail to see why.

With regards to the Greens, and politicians in general I tend to go towards actions more than promises. This pic sums up my opinion.

Image

When it comes to the Greens, from what I've seen them do to my local area, they are disgusting, deplorable scum of the earth who I have no time in the world for. I would rather vote for the sex party than waste a vote on those clowns. But this is a thread about racism, and I think this is starting to move into the politics thread
Feel free to call me RickyRicky StickStick if you like. I will also accept Super Fui, King Brad, Kid Dynamite, Chocolate-Thunda... or Brad.

Green eyed Mick
Laurie Daley
Posts: 13410
Joined: February 26, 2010, 6:01 pm
Favourite Player: Brett Mullins
Location: Canberra :(

Re: Racism in Australia

Post by Green eyed Mick » February 6, 2012, 1:43 pm

Fuifui Bradbrad wrote:
Green eyed Mick wrote:That is not my argument but even if it was what exactly is the issue? Why is it that being dumb and ignorant is a virtue and something defensible? Some people work hard, study hard and get an education so they can learn how to critically analyse an issue and formulate sound, defensible opinion.

The issue with Nicks comment is it is factually incorrect. You are welcome to defend him but perhaps you might want to try defending him with a counter argument. Perhaps you can pass along the costings you or Nick have done on the Greens policies layed over the current federal budget projections? You might want to put a case forward that supports Nicks assertion the Greens would bankrupt to country?

Maybe you can explain the reasons you feel having to form a minority government should not in anyway impact on pre-election policy positions?
The issue is that from what I've read in prior posts, while you do make your points, there are times when you question the other person's intelligence because they have an opinion different to your. In this case, Dubs made a comment on how he liked seeing Nick fired up, and you bring Dub's intelligence into question. I just fail to see why.

With regards to the Greens, and politicians in general I tend to go towards actions more than promises. This pic sums up my opinion.

Image

When it comes to the Greens, from what I've seen them do to my local area, they are disgusting, deplorable scum of the earth who I have no time in the world for. I would rather vote for the sex party than waste a vote on those clowns. But this is a thread about racism, and I think this is starting to move into the politics thread
My crack at dubs was simple. He managed to confuse passion with ignorance. IMO that makes you just a little bit dumb.

I would be interested to know what the Greens did to your local area for you to refer to them in the manner you have. Perhaps you can start a thread on the topic so I can better appreciate the situation.

User avatar
Albi
David Furner
Posts: 3785
Joined: June 6, 2005, 11:26 am
Favourite Player: Laurie Daley
Location: Bundaberg, QLD

Racism in Australia

Post by Albi » February 6, 2012, 2:50 pm

dubby wrote:
Nick wrote:Yeah but your a **** greenie, and anyone with an ounce of intelligence would read their policies and conclude that anyone who openly backed them on the basis of policy, are bat **** insane and should be stripped of their vote.

A vote for the Greens is a vote for insanity. Anyone who reads the greens policy and still registers their vote for them is an idiot. Given the chance, they would bankrupt this country and plunge us in to 2-3rd world country status

FWIW, Abbott said something stupid and the only thing stupider than what he said given the circumstance was the Gillard government trying to pull a cheap political stunt, and it's back fired big time, rightfully so. Its a total beat up. But so is everything political in this country.

Not many PMs could lose an election to Tony Abbott, Gillard will do exactly that which says a lot about the trust the general public have in Gillard and her ability to sell policy. She lied to get elected (carbon tax), she lied to secure a minority government (pokie tax) and the people dont trust her. If John Howard ran, he would beat her in an election with close to a 60-65% majority, he'd embarrass her, as would Malcomn Turnbull or Joe Hockey. The only thing giving her hope of an election night blood bath is the fact that Abbott is so unlikable.
Nicks fired up!

I love a fired up Nick, he exudes passion better than anyone on the forums :thumbsup

Thanks Nick, first time all year I've seen you launch into someone. Now that bay56 has gone, you have a new target in GEM
Dubs, I genuinely like you; really do..But Nick isn't the guy you want to be backing even if you share the same opinion as him..
Canberra Raiders Bronze Member

Image
Banner courtesy of the very talented, fistinz.

User avatar
greeneyed
Don Furner
Posts: 127417
Joined: January 7, 2005, 4:21 pm

Re: Racism in Australia

Post by greeneyed » February 6, 2012, 2:53 pm

I thought I asked for the personal abuse to be cut?
Image

User avatar
Albi
David Furner
Posts: 3785
Joined: June 6, 2005, 11:26 am
Favourite Player: Laurie Daley
Location: Bundaberg, QLD

Racism in Australia

Post by Albi » February 6, 2012, 2:55 pm

Green eyed Mick wrote:
Question wrote:Parrotting left wing rants made popular from having it forced down ones throat in the brain wash camps , is hardly passionate, just about attention seeking and boring the **** out of a nation.
Where are these brain washing camps you speak about? I would love to sign up. Sure beats having to read and formulate your own opinions.
At one point I thought 'Question' was an actual person.. I've now come to realise that he's really someone's pet retarded orang-utan let loose at a keyboard
Canberra Raiders Bronze Member

Image
Banner courtesy of the very talented, fistinz.

User avatar
Question
Laurie Daley
Posts: 13747
Joined: May 20, 2007, 5:13 pm

Re: Racism in Australia

Post by Question » February 6, 2012, 2:56 pm

correct.

Fuifui Bradbrad
Ruben Wiki
Posts: 5843
Joined: May 3, 2008, 10:23 pm
Favourite Player: Denan Kemp
Location: Penrith, Sydney, NSW, Australia

Re: Racism in Australia

Post by Fuifui Bradbrad » February 6, 2012, 2:56 pm

At 3:53
greeneyed wrote:I thought I asked for the personal abuse to be cut?
At 3:55
Albi wrote:At one point I thought 'Question' was an actual person.. I've now come to realise that he's really someone's pet retarded orang-utan let loose at a keyboard
Love it
Feel free to call me RickyRicky StickStick if you like. I will also accept Super Fui, King Brad, Kid Dynamite, Chocolate-Thunda... or Brad.

User avatar
Albi
David Furner
Posts: 3785
Joined: June 6, 2005, 11:26 am
Favourite Player: Laurie Daley
Location: Bundaberg, QLD

Racism in Australia

Post by Albi » February 6, 2012, 3:15 pm

Fuifui Bradbrad wrote:At 3:53
greeneyed wrote:I thought I asked for the personal abuse to be cut?
At 3:55
Albi wrote:At one point I thought 'Question' was an actual person.. I've now come to realise that he's really someone's pet retarded orang-utan let loose at a keyboard
Love it
In my defence, I was actually typing my message at the same time GE was.. :)
Canberra Raiders Bronze Member

Image
Banner courtesy of the very talented, fistinz.

User avatar
dubby
Don Furner
Posts: 30750
Joined: May 16, 2006, 12:14 pm
Favourite Player: Mal Meninga
Location: Western Sydney

Re: Racism in Australia

Post by dubby » February 6, 2012, 3:29 pm

Albi wrote:
dubby wrote:
Nick wrote:Yeah but your a **** greenie, and anyone with an ounce of intelligence would read their policies and conclude that anyone who openly backed them on the basis of policy, are bat **** insane and should be stripped of their vote.

A vote for the Greens is a vote for insanity. Anyone who reads the greens policy and still registers their vote for them is an idiot. Given the chance, they would bankrupt this country and plunge us in to 2-3rd world country status

FWIW, Abbott said something stupid and the only thing stupider than what he said given the circumstance was the Gillard government trying to pull a cheap political stunt, and it's back fired big time, rightfully so. Its a total beat up. But so is everything political in this country.

Not many PMs could lose an election to Tony Abbott, Gillard will do exactly that which says a lot about the trust the general public have in Gillard and her ability to sell policy. She lied to get elected (carbon tax), she lied to secure a minority government (pokie tax) and the people dont trust her. If John Howard ran, he would beat her in an election with close to a 60-65% majority, he'd embarrass her, as would Malcomn Turnbull or Joe Hockey. The only thing giving her hope of an election night blood bath is the fact that Abbott is so unlikable.
Nicks fired up!

I love a fired up Nick, he exudes passion better than anyone on the forums :thumbsup

Thanks Nick, first time all year I've seen you launch into someone. Now that bay56 has gone, you have a new target in GEM
Dubs, I genuinely like you; really do..But Nick isn't the guy you want to be backing even if you share the same opinion as him..
Thanks Albi, the feeling is mutual.

Part of the reason for my respect of you is that you generally show respect of others and can agree to disagree without resorting to insults or derogatory remarks. Even though you and I hold entirely different world views and philosophies we can get along, and I love that. :)

Meanwhile, other posters cannot refrain from their megalomananiac behaviour.
Image

User avatar
T_R
Don Furner
Posts: 15829
Joined: August 4, 2006, 9:41 am
Location: Noosa

Re: Racism in Australia

Post by T_R » February 6, 2012, 4:15 pm

Green eyed Mick wrote:http://greens.org.au/policies

Are you talking about these policies?

From your post it is pretty obvious you don't have a ****ing clue about the political climate in this country and I am not going to waste my time responding to a ****ing simpleton.
Have you actually read these policies,GEM? Look at their industrial relations policies and then apply them to, say, Woolies. Run a slide rule over it and tell me what your grocery prices are going to do.

Seriously, try it.

Before the last election, I sat down with my raving loony far left wing children of the 60's tree hugging parents and, just for interest worked through some of the Greens policies. I couldn't get my parents over to the Libs, but dragged them as far as Labor at least. Even they had to concede that there was serious madness afoot.

The Greens 'policies' are the rantings of the deranged.
Image

Son, we live in a world that has forums, and those forums have to be guarded by Mods. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Nickman? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Lucy, and you curse GE. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know -- that GE’s moderation, while tragic, probably saved lives; and my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, keeps threads on track and under the appropriately sized, highlighted green headings.
You want moderation because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that forum -- you need me on that forum. We use words like "stay on topic," "use the appropriate forum," "please delete." We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very moderation that I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather that you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you get a green handle and edit a post. Either way, I don't give a DAMN what you think about moderation.

User avatar
Albi
David Furner
Posts: 3785
Joined: June 6, 2005, 11:26 am
Favourite Player: Laurie Daley
Location: Bundaberg, QLD

Re: Racism in Australia

Post by Albi » February 6, 2012, 4:53 pm

T_R wrote:
Green eyed Mick wrote:http://greens.org.au/policies

Are you talking about these policies?

From your post it is pretty obvious you don't have a ****ing clue about the political climate in this country and I am not going to waste my time responding to a ****ing simpleton.
Have you actually read these policies,GEM? Look at their industrial relations policies and then apply them to, say, Woolies. Run a slide rule over it and tell me what your grocery prices are going to do.

Seriously, try it.

Before the last election, I sat down with my raving loony far left wing children of the 60's tree hugging parents and, just for interest worked through some of the Greens policies. I couldn't get my parents over to the Libs, but dragged them as far as Labor at least. Even they had to concede that there was serious madness afoot.

The Greens 'policies' are the rantings of the deranged.
I'm certainly no economist, but i've spoken to many who disagree strongly with your assertion that grocery prices will skyrocket.. Any modest increases will be the result of environmental impact levies and measures to stop the coles/woollies duopoly from screwing farmers (who ironically vote for the nats :roflmao ).

You seem to have some special insight though, and so this loony left 'deranged' idiot would love you to share it. :)
Canberra Raiders Bronze Member

Image
Banner courtesy of the very talented, fistinz.

Green eyed Mick
Laurie Daley
Posts: 13410
Joined: February 26, 2010, 6:01 pm
Favourite Player: Brett Mullins
Location: Canberra :(

Re: Racism in Australia

Post by Green eyed Mick » February 6, 2012, 6:10 pm

T_R wrote:
Green eyed Mick wrote:http://greens.org.au/policies

Are you talking about these policies?

From your post it is pretty obvious you don't have a ****ing clue about the political climate in this country and I am not going to waste my time responding to a ****ing simpleton.
Have you actually read these policies,GEM? Look at their industrial relations policies and then apply them to, say, Woolies. Run a slide rule over it and tell me what your grocery prices are going to do.

Seriously, try it.

Before the last election, I sat down with my raving loony far left wing children of the 60's tree hugging parents and, just for interest worked through some of the Greens policies. I couldn't get my parents over to the Libs, but dragged them as far as Labor at least. Even they had to concede that there was serious madness afoot.

The Greens 'policies' are the rantings of the deranged.
Yes I have read their policies and I don't have any idea how you have managed to draw the conclusions you have. So serious question do you actually have a good understanding of economics and industrial relations and the relationship between IR reform and productivity? I have experience in both so would be very interested to see which of the 53 points in the Greens IR policy you take issue with and what you feel would be the economic impact of the proposed changes if implemented?

@ Albi that is one of the greatest tricks in politics. I understand exactly how the right is able to consistently get people to vote against their own self interest but I struggle to see why they (Nat voters) can't see it.

User avatar
Question
Laurie Daley
Posts: 13747
Joined: May 20, 2007, 5:13 pm

Re: Racism in Australia

Post by Question » February 6, 2012, 6:31 pm

Unless you are a business owner/employer your opinion of IR laws are pretty meaningless

Green eyed Mick
Laurie Daley
Posts: 13410
Joined: February 26, 2010, 6:01 pm
Favourite Player: Brett Mullins
Location: Canberra :(

Re: Racism in Australia

Post by Green eyed Mick » February 6, 2012, 6:38 pm

Question wrote:Unless you are a business owner/employer your opinion of IR laws are pretty meaningless
What an absurd thing to say. Every single person who works in this country has a stake in Industrial Relations.

If only they made corrective lenses for figurative myopia :hmmm

User avatar
Question
Laurie Daley
Posts: 13747
Joined: May 20, 2007, 5:13 pm

Re: Racism in Australia

Post by Question » February 6, 2012, 7:00 pm

Excellent you can sit around and talk about IR laws with the 17 blokes over the course of the next 12 months I let go and take all the business to china. Can I get them to pm you to explain how good its is?

User avatar
T_R
Don Furner
Posts: 15829
Joined: August 4, 2006, 9:41 am
Location: Noosa

Re: Racism in Australia

Post by T_R » February 6, 2012, 7:03 pm

Green eyed Mick wrote:
Yes I have read their policies and I don't have any idea how you have managed to draw the conclusions you have. So serious question do you actually have a good understanding of economics and industrial relations and the relationship between IR reform and productivity? I have experience in both so would be very interested to see which of the 53 points in the Greens IR policy you take issue with and what you feel would be the economic impact of the proposed changes if implemented?

I am certainly no expert on IR, but I have a law degree with an IR major, I've studied economics from BCom through MBA level and, probably most relevantly, I employ a couple of hundred people across various state and federal awards, so I think it would be reasonable to say that I have a reasonable working knowledge of these things. I've also spent waaaaaaaay too many billable hours of time sitting in arbitration and court rooms full of lawyers and union officials arguing over obscure points of law in recent times, too.

I'm on a train in the back blocks of Korea as I type, and the Internet connection is dodgy enough that I dont really want to start wading through pages of policy documents, but just citing from memory, and assuming that there have been no changes since the last election, I'd be interested in hearing your thought on the policies relating to de-casualisation of workplaces. Why not relate it to some of the big employers, such as the supermarkets or fast food chains, and let me know what you think the impat would be.
Image

Son, we live in a world that has forums, and those forums have to be guarded by Mods. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Nickman? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Lucy, and you curse GE. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know -- that GE’s moderation, while tragic, probably saved lives; and my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, keeps threads on track and under the appropriately sized, highlighted green headings.
You want moderation because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that forum -- you need me on that forum. We use words like "stay on topic," "use the appropriate forum," "please delete." We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very moderation that I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather that you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you get a green handle and edit a post. Either way, I don't give a DAMN what you think about moderation.

Green eyed Mick
Laurie Daley
Posts: 13410
Joined: February 26, 2010, 6:01 pm
Favourite Player: Brett Mullins
Location: Canberra :(

Re: Racism in Australia

Post by Green eyed Mick » February 6, 2012, 7:31 pm

I think you are referring to point 17. protection against the forced casualisation of work and greater protection for existing casual workers.

I don't think it says anything about de-casualisation. Perhaps you mis-read it or interpretted it incorrectly? It is simply a return to the pre-work choices policies which protected permanent employees from being sacked and re-hired as casuals without the conditions and safety nets (unfair dismissal, etc) provided by permanancy.

I don't think that policy is crazy It is similar to the policy position of the commonwealth prior to workchoices

User avatar
T_R
Don Furner
Posts: 15829
Joined: August 4, 2006, 9:41 am
Location: Noosa

Re: Racism in Australia

Post by T_R » February 6, 2012, 7:58 pm

No, I am not thinking of that. Again, I don't have it in front of me, but there was s provision to increae the casual loading significantly and then offer casual employees the unilateral right to move to permanent part time employment after a brief qualifying period. Lovey in theory, but put numbers to it and it gets scary. I think they were offering another week annual leave to everyone in the country, too, as well as significantly increasing company tax.

We applied a few policies of theirs to our own business and punched some numbers. Then the room got really, really quiet for a while.
Image

Son, we live in a world that has forums, and those forums have to be guarded by Mods. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Nickman? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Lucy, and you curse GE. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know -- that GE’s moderation, while tragic, probably saved lives; and my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, keeps threads on track and under the appropriately sized, highlighted green headings.
You want moderation because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that forum -- you need me on that forum. We use words like "stay on topic," "use the appropriate forum," "please delete." We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very moderation that I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather that you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you get a green handle and edit a post. Either way, I don't give a DAMN what you think about moderation.

User avatar
T_R
Don Furner
Posts: 15829
Joined: August 4, 2006, 9:41 am
Location: Noosa

Re: Racism in Australia

Post by T_R » February 6, 2012, 8:04 pm

There was another one that made me laugh, too. Again just from memory but I recall these clowns were planning to remove tax deductabity on company motor vehicles. If there is a single measure designed as the final coup de grace on the Australian automobile manufacturing industry, that would be it.

And don't get me started on the new 50% top marginal tax rate....
Image

Son, we live in a world that has forums, and those forums have to be guarded by Mods. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Nickman? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Lucy, and you curse GE. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know -- that GE’s moderation, while tragic, probably saved lives; and my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, keeps threads on track and under the appropriately sized, highlighted green headings.
You want moderation because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that forum -- you need me on that forum. We use words like "stay on topic," "use the appropriate forum," "please delete." We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very moderation that I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather that you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you get a green handle and edit a post. Either way, I don't give a DAMN what you think about moderation.

Green eyed Mick
Laurie Daley
Posts: 13410
Joined: February 26, 2010, 6:01 pm
Favourite Player: Brett Mullins
Location: Canberra :(

Re: Racism in Australia

Post by Green eyed Mick » February 6, 2012, 8:22 pm

Point 44. increase casual loadings to a minimum of 30% and introduce the ability for casual employees to convert to permanent part time work after 3 months of continuous employment, where employment is on a continuous ongoing basis.

I used to work at a place where 30% of the workforce were casual. Many worked 72 plus hours a fortnight continuously for years. This provision is designed for people like that. Again this wouldn't have a significant impact on most companies.

They also have provisions to limit the deductablity of obscene executive salaries something I have no issues with.

TR what you have to keep in mind is the Greens are fully aware they will never hold a majority government. Their policies are a little extreme because they know if they ever form a coalition government they will have to sacrifice on their positions to get some of the more important things through.

Besides if the Greens policies on IR are geared towards the working class it is no different to many within the Libs who believe WorkChoices didn't go far enough.

What is important is that IR reform balances worker protections without seriously impacting innovation, profitability and productivity. Workchoices wasn't that balance and IMO the Greens policies if implemented wouldn't be that balance. Still the Greens and their supporters aren't silly enough to think they will ever see their policies implemented in full. Just like the Nats are kidding themselves if they think the Libs would let them bring in the kind of protections they want for farmers.

User avatar
T_R
Don Furner
Posts: 15829
Joined: August 4, 2006, 9:41 am
Location: Noosa

Re: Racism in Australia

Post by T_R » February 6, 2012, 10:21 pm

Green eyed Mick wrote:Point 44. increase casual loadings to a minimum of 30% and introduce the ability for casual employees to convert to permanent part time work after 3 months of continuous employment, where employment is on a continuous ongoing basis.

I used to work at a place where 30% of the workforce were casual. Many worked 72 plus hours a fortnight continuously for years. This provision is designed for people like that. Again this wouldn't have a significant impact on most companies.

They also have provisions to limit the deductablity of obscene executive salaries something I have no issues with.

TR what you have to keep in mind is the Greens are fully aware they will never hold a majority government. Their policies are a little extreme because they know if they ever form a coalition government they will have to sacrifice on their positions to get some of the more important things through.

Besides if the Greens policies on IR are geared towards the working class it is no different to many within the Libs who believe WorkChoices didn't go far enough.

What is important is that IR reform balances worker protections without seriously impacting innovation, profitability and productivity. Workchoices wasn't that balance and IMO the Greens policies if implemented wouldn't be that balance. Still the Greens and their supporters aren't silly enough to think they will ever see their policies implemented in full. Just like the Nats are kidding themselves if they think the Libs would let them bring in the kind of protections they want for farmers.
I love statements like this... "Again, this wouldn't have a significant impact on most companies'. It's not actually based on anything. You haven't run any numbers. I sincerely, sincerely doubt that you've ever had to make payroll, I sincerely doubt you've ever even had to sit down and work out who to keep and who to cut (and HOW) in a downturn. Yet you feel completely comfortable announcing to the world that 'this won't have a significant impact'. GEM, I don't want to be rude, but Bull mate. Your cred is zero on this. Show me evidence for your statement...anything. Or rather, don't bother, 'cause I'll trump you on every point. Not because I'm clever, and not because you're not, but because that is BAD policy written by ideological fanatics with zip real world experience.

And then I find out that you support the limiting of tax provisions related to executive salaries. You lost me at 'obscene', by the way. I am sure this is an informed opinion based upon years of observation of the million-plus category of earners. So, GEM, WHAT precisely will be limited under the policies? What impact will this have on the ability of Australia to retain executive talent? What impact will this have on the ability of Australia to attract entrepreneurial investment? I am looking forward to hearing your thoughts on this.

And then we find out that it doesn't matter anyway, because none of this will happen. Then why have the policies? Why establish clearly that you have NO credible ability to form a government in our country?

Sorry, but this post just seems ill-considered and poorly informed to me. But then, I've had 4 beers (and the cans are huuuuuuuge in this country), this train trip is taking forever, I've had to type this whole thing out on an ipad and the guy next to me stinks of kimchi. So, I'm a bit cranky.
Image

Son, we live in a world that has forums, and those forums have to be guarded by Mods. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Nickman? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Lucy, and you curse GE. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know -- that GE’s moderation, while tragic, probably saved lives; and my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, keeps threads on track and under the appropriately sized, highlighted green headings.
You want moderation because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that forum -- you need me on that forum. We use words like "stay on topic," "use the appropriate forum," "please delete." We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very moderation that I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather that you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you get a green handle and edit a post. Either way, I don't give a DAMN what you think about moderation.

Green eyed Mick
Laurie Daley
Posts: 13410
Joined: February 26, 2010, 6:01 pm
Favourite Player: Brett Mullins
Location: Canberra :(

Re: Racism in Australia

Post by Green eyed Mick » February 7, 2012, 6:51 am

T_R wrote:
Green eyed Mick wrote:Point 44. increase casual loadings to a minimum of 30% and introduce the ability for casual employees to convert to permanent part time work after 3 months of continuous employment, where employment is on a continuous ongoing basis.

I used to work at a place where 30% of the workforce were casual. Many worked 72 plus hours a fortnight continuously for years. This provision is designed for people like that. Again this wouldn't have a significant impact on most companies.

They also have provisions to limit the deductablity of obscene executive salaries something I have no issues with.

TR what you have to keep in mind is the Greens are fully aware they will never hold a majority government. Their policies are a little extreme because they know if they ever form a coalition government they will have to sacrifice on their positions to get some of the more important things through.

Besides if the Greens policies on IR are geared towards the working class it is no different to many within the Libs who believe WorkChoices didn't go far enough.

What is important is that IR reform balances worker protections without seriously impacting innovation, profitability and productivity. Workchoices wasn't that balance and IMO the Greens policies if implemented wouldn't be that balance. Still the Greens and their supporters aren't silly enough to think they will ever see their policies implemented in full. Just like the Nats are kidding themselves if they think the Libs would let them bring in the kind of protections they want for farmers.
I love statements like this... "Again, this wouldn't have a significant impact on most companies'. It's not actually based on anything. You haven't run any numbers. I sincerely, sincerely doubt that you've ever had to make payroll, I sincerely doubt you've ever even had to sit down and work out who to keep and who to cut (and HOW) in a downturn. Yet you feel completely comfortable announcing to the world that 'this won't have a significant impact'. GEM, I don't want to be rude, but Bull mate. Your cred is zero on this. Show me evidence for your statement...anything. Or rather, don't bother, 'cause I'll trump you on every point. Not because I'm clever, and not because you're not, but because that is BAD policy written by ideological fanatics with zip real world experience.

And then I find out that you support the limiting of tax provisions related to executive salaries. You lost me at 'obscene', by the way. I am sure this is an informed opinion based upon years of observation of the million-plus category of earners. So, GEM, WHAT precisely will be limited under the policies? What impact will this have on the ability of Australia to retain executive talent? What impact will this have on the ability of Australia to attract entrepreneurial investment? I am looking forward to hearing your thoughts on this.

And then we find out that it doesn't matter anyway, because none of this will happen. Then why have the policies? Why establish clearly that you have NO credible ability to form a government in our country?

Sorry, but this post just seems ill-considered and poorly informed to me. But then, I've had 4 beers (and the cans are huuuuuuuge in this country), this train trip is taking forever, I've had to type this whole thing out on an ipad and the guy next to me stinks of kimchi. So, I'm a bit cranky.
It wouldn't have an impact on most companies because most companies don't utilise an ongoing casual workforce. That is what that statement meant. Maybe the 4 beers or the train made you miss the context ;)

It would of course impact on the companies that operate lots of casuals in the manner mentioned in the policy. My experience with this kind of situation was the development of a roster variation and relief roster system. Essentially the workplace employed a large pool of casuals for covering absenteeism and annual leave. Many worked FTE hours which cost considerably more than permanency. It worked out to be a better financial move to forcast leave and absenteeism and create permanency for a number of long term casual staff to fill these vacancies on a rotational roster. It was a cost cutting measure in that workplace. It also reduced casual turn-over which inturn reduced some of the training costs associated with new hires. As with any policy there are going to be people that benefit and those that don't. The problem with too many Australians is they think they are entitled to always be on the winning side of any new policy position from whatever government is in power.

I am not saying that these kinds of policies wouldn't have negative impacts for certain people or industries. In the same way workchoices had it's fair share of negative impacts and would have continued to do so if they remained. FTR I vote Green but I don't agree with ALL their policies. I assume you vote Liberal but I would hope that you don't support their racist policies on Asylum seekers, their reluctance to apologise to stolen generations under Howard or their homophobic policies on gay rights. Not to mention their cosy position with the mining sector which is a strong contributor to wage growth in this country.

FTR I don't care if small business goes belly up or if jobs go overseas. My biggest priority at election time is social reform and environmental reform.

User avatar
Manbush
Mal Meninga
Posts: 24636
Joined: March 14, 2008, 6:55 pm
Favourite Player: Luke Turner

Re: Racism in Australia

Post by Manbush » February 7, 2012, 8:34 am

Green eyed Mick wrote:
That is not my argument but even if it was what exactly is the issue? Why is it that being dumb and ignorant is a virtue and something defensible? Some people work hard, study hard and get an education so they can learn how to critically analyse an issue and formulate sound, defensible opinion.
Mate what you seem to ignore is that 2 different people with the same intelligence and eduction can interpret the same information differently, just because someone disagrees with you doesn't make them dumber or uneducated
"My own opinion is enough for me and I claim the right to have it defended against any consensus, any majority, anywhere, any place, any time, and anyone who disagrees with this can pick a number, get in line and kiss my ass" Christopher Hitchens

Green eyed Mick
Laurie Daley
Posts: 13410
Joined: February 26, 2010, 6:01 pm
Favourite Player: Brett Mullins
Location: Canberra :(

Re: Racism in Australia

Post by Green eyed Mick » February 7, 2012, 10:01 am

manbush wrote:
Green eyed Mick wrote:
That is not my argument but even if it was what exactly is the issue? Why is it that being dumb and ignorant is a virtue and something defensible? Some people work hard, study hard and get an education so they can learn how to critically analyse an issue and formulate sound, defensible opinion.
Mate what you seem to ignore is that 2 different people with the same intelligence and eduction can interpret the same information differently, just because someone disagrees with you doesn't make them dumber or uneducated
I don't ignore it at all. AND if people disagree with me on things like religion and climate change it absolutely makes them dumber. I am an incredibly intolerant person when it comes to ignoring facts that are well past interpretation. There is a 99.999999% chance that there is no God and there is 100% chance the supporting evidence for a god (the bible) is factually, incorrect and scientifically impossible.

However back to the topic of the thread.

In France and Germany it is a crime to deny things like the holocaust and the Armenian genocide. The reason is that this denial perpetuates negativity, racism and indifference. It is also in indisputable fact that these things happened. The facts on racism in this country are not as black and whaite as the holocaust but they are still pretty clear cut for anyone who takes a good long and objective view of our history. The wounds from 200 odd years of systematic racism, attempted genocide and the forced destruction of a culture will take years to heal and IMO when people deny or trivialise the reasons Indigenous people suffer disadvantage they are not helping and in fact are hindering progress.

User avatar
T_R
Don Furner
Posts: 15829
Joined: August 4, 2006, 9:41 am
Location: Noosa

Re: Racism in Australia

Post by T_R » February 7, 2012, 10:09 am

Green eyed Mick wrote:
It would of course impact on the companies that operate lots of casuals in the manner mentioned in the policy. My experience with this kind of situation was the development of a roster variation and relief roster system. Essentially the workplace employed a large pool of casuals for covering absenteeism and annual leave. Many worked FTE hours which cost considerably more than permanency. It worked out to be a better financial move to forcast leave and absenteeism and create permanency for a number of long term casual staff to fill these vacancies on a rotational roster.
And companies with significant seasonality (think most hotels and resorts in Australia, for a start) are now stuck with a workforce that they can't provide work for and who they can't move on. That means they go down.
Green eyed Mick wrote:I am not saying that these kinds of policies wouldn't have negative impacts for certain people or industries. In the same way workchoices had it's fair share of negative impacts and would have continued to do so if they remained. FTR I vote Green but I don't agree with ALL their policies. I assume you vote Liberal but I would hope that you don't support their racist policies on Asylum seekers, their reluctance to apologise to stolen generations under Howard or their homophobic policies on gay rights. Not to mention their cosy position with the mining sector which is a strong contributor to wage growth in this country.
I've never voted Liberal in my life. I think you make a lot of assumptions without a whole lot of evidence. On social issues, I am probably as far to the left as anyone on this page.
Green eyed Mick wrote: FTR I don't care if small business goes belly up or if jobs go overseas.
And then you go and make a complete cock of yourself. You don't care? The bleeding heart small l liberal of the previous paragraph doesn't care that people lose their homes, can't educate their kids and can't find work. You don't see a touch of hypocrisy here? "The big companies are all evil because they don't care about their employees, who I also do not care about".

Well mate, I DO care. I care about each and every person I employ and I work bloody hard to make sure that I keep them employed. These are real people with real lives, mate. That last line makes me completely sick, and I think says a lot about you as a person.
Image

Son, we live in a world that has forums, and those forums have to be guarded by Mods. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Nickman? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Lucy, and you curse GE. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know -- that GE’s moderation, while tragic, probably saved lives; and my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, keeps threads on track and under the appropriately sized, highlighted green headings.
You want moderation because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that forum -- you need me on that forum. We use words like "stay on topic," "use the appropriate forum," "please delete." We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very moderation that I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather that you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you get a green handle and edit a post. Either way, I don't give a DAMN what you think about moderation.

User avatar
Question
Laurie Daley
Posts: 13747
Joined: May 20, 2007, 5:13 pm

Re: Racism in Australia

Post by Question » February 7, 2012, 10:57 am

That's why I dissed his opinion on IR almost immeadiately.

User avatar
Question
Laurie Daley
Posts: 13747
Joined: May 20, 2007, 5:13 pm

Re: Racism in Australia

Post by Question » February 7, 2012, 11:04 am

When the "Fat Boys" no longer want to do business in Australia and take their cash cow o/s, What a fantastic place it will be to live, lucky I can hunt and watch plenty of bear grylls.

We could all sing songs, and listen to tales of bravado from Union heads and Bobby brown.

Green eyed Mick
Laurie Daley
Posts: 13410
Joined: February 26, 2010, 6:01 pm
Favourite Player: Brett Mullins
Location: Canberra :(

Re: Racism in Australia

Post by Green eyed Mick » February 7, 2012, 11:24 am

T_R wrote:
Green eyed Mick wrote:
It would of course impact on the companies that operate lots of casuals in the manner mentioned in the policy. My experience with this kind of situation was the development of a roster variation and relief roster system. Essentially the workplace employed a large pool of casuals for covering absenteeism and annual leave. Many worked FTE hours which cost considerably more than permanency. It worked out to be a better financial move to forcast leave and absenteeism and create permanency for a number of long term casual staff to fill these vacancies on a rotational roster.
And companies with significant seasonality (think most hotels and resorts in Australia, for a start) are now stuck with a workforce that they can't provide work for and who they can't move on. That means they go down.
Green eyed Mick wrote:I am not saying that these kinds of policies wouldn't have negative impacts for certain people or industries. In the same way workchoices had it's fair share of negative impacts and would have continued to do so if they remained. FTR I vote Green but I don't agree with ALL their policies. I assume you vote Liberal but I would hope that you don't support their racist policies on Asylum seekers, their reluctance to apologise to stolen generations under Howard or their homophobic policies on gay rights. Not to mention their cosy position with the mining sector which is a strong contributor to wage growth in this country.
I've never voted Liberal in my life. I think you make a lot of assumptions without a whole lot of evidence. On social issues, I am probably as far to the left as anyone on this page.
Green eyed Mick wrote: FTR I don't care if small business goes belly up or if jobs go overseas.
And then you go and make a complete cock of yourself. You don't care? The bleeding heart small l liberal of the previous paragraph doesn't care that people lose their homes, can't educate their kids and can't find work. You don't see a touch of hypocrisy here? "The big companies are all evil because they don't care about their employees, who I also do not care about".

Well mate, I DO care. I care about each and every person I employ and I work bloody hard to make sure that I keep them employed. These are real people with real lives, mate. That last line makes me completely sick, and I think says a lot about you as a person.
I vote entirely on social policy. What is the point of money when the planet is dying?

User avatar
T_R
Don Furner
Posts: 15829
Joined: August 4, 2006, 9:41 am
Location: Noosa

Re: Racism in Australia

Post by T_R » February 7, 2012, 11:26 am

Wow.

Just wow.

And this from the guy who complains that corporate big wigs don't care about people.
Image

Son, we live in a world that has forums, and those forums have to be guarded by Mods. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Nickman? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Lucy, and you curse GE. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know -- that GE’s moderation, while tragic, probably saved lives; and my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, keeps threads on track and under the appropriately sized, highlighted green headings.
You want moderation because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that forum -- you need me on that forum. We use words like "stay on topic," "use the appropriate forum," "please delete." We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very moderation that I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather that you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you get a green handle and edit a post. Either way, I don't give a DAMN what you think about moderation.

User avatar
Question
Laurie Daley
Posts: 13747
Joined: May 20, 2007, 5:13 pm

Re: Racism in Australia

Post by Question » February 7, 2012, 11:30 am

EXPOSED, GREEN DIEHARD!!!!!!!.. given up on society little fella.

Green eyed Mick
Laurie Daley
Posts: 13410
Joined: February 26, 2010, 6:01 pm
Favourite Player: Brett Mullins
Location: Canberra :(

Re: Racism in Australia

Post by Green eyed Mick » February 7, 2012, 12:53 pm

T_R wrote:Wow.

Just wow.

And this from the guy who complains that corporate big wigs don't care about people.
So tell me as a champion of the working man are you a strong supporter of the union movement? After all the unions are all about protecting jobs, even if they are in industries that are no longer economically viable.

Do you think that the Government should step in to protect industries that are no longer viable? Or do you think that if a Business is not longer able to survive due to technological changes or changes in consumption habits the business should be allowed to fail in accordance with the natural economic cycle?

Do you support protectionism for sectors who can't compete with foreign Labor? Do you support free trade agreements, even if they put the livlihoods of Farmers at risk? Do you agree that companies like woolworths should be allowed to continue to exert pressure on suppliers and consumers without government interference?

I think government has a role to play I also think business and individuals need to take responsibility for their own actions.
Question wrote:EXPOSED, GREEN DIEHARD!!!!!!!.. given up on society little fella.

I gave up on society long ago. When the biggest health concern in your society is having too much there is seriously something wrong. Yet all most people are concerned about is me, me, me and more, more, more.

Fuifui Bradbrad
Ruben Wiki
Posts: 5843
Joined: May 3, 2008, 10:23 pm
Favourite Player: Denan Kemp
Location: Penrith, Sydney, NSW, Australia

Re: Racism in Australia

Post by Fuifui Bradbrad » February 7, 2012, 12:58 pm

So... racism...
Feel free to call me RickyRicky StickStick if you like. I will also accept Super Fui, King Brad, Kid Dynamite, Chocolate-Thunda... or Brad.

User avatar
T_R
Don Furner
Posts: 15829
Joined: August 4, 2006, 9:41 am
Location: Noosa

Re: Racism in Australia

Post by T_R » February 7, 2012, 1:08 pm

Green eyed Mick wrote:
T_R wrote:Wow.

Just wow.

And this from the guy who complains that corporate big wigs don't care about people.
So tell me as a champion of the working man are you a strong supporter of the union movement? After all the unions are all about protecting jobs, even if they are in industries that are no longer economically viable.

Do you think that the Government should step in to protect industries that are no longer viable? Or do you think that if a Business is not longer able to survive due to technological changes or changes in consumption habits the business should be allowed to fail in accordance with the natural economic cycle?

Do you support protectionism for sectors who can't compete with foreign Labor? Do you support free trade agreements, even if they put the livlihoods of Farmers at risk? Do you agree that companies like woolworths should be allowed to continue to exert pressure on suppliers and consumers without government interference?

I think government has a role to play I also think business and individuals need to take responsibility for their own actions.
Question wrote:EXPOSED, GREEN DIEHARD!!!!!!!.. given up on society little fella.

I gave up on society long ago. When the biggest health concern in your society is having too much there is seriously something wrong. Yet all most people are concerned about is me, me, me and more, more, more.
You know GEM, I'm not really interested in continuing this discussion. I don't think there's any chance to a meeting of minds, and when you come up with comments like 'as a champion of the working man' it's clear that all you're about is (trying to) score points. I've never claimed to be out there to defend worker rights, I'm in business to make a profit. That does not mean you have to be completely morally bankrupt, however. Most people seem to manage to handle this kind of shade of grey in their life. You seem to struggle with this - I express opinions of economic matters, so you assume that I vote in a certain way and hold certain far-right wing social ideals. I suggest that people can show an element of care about their employees and colleagues in an environment of fiscal responsibility, and I get some tirade about free trade agreements and support of protectionism. How about in future you discuss what I actually say, rather than what you would have liked me to have said?
Image

Son, we live in a world that has forums, and those forums have to be guarded by Mods. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Nickman? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Lucy, and you curse GE. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know -- that GE’s moderation, while tragic, probably saved lives; and my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, keeps threads on track and under the appropriately sized, highlighted green headings.
You want moderation because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that forum -- you need me on that forum. We use words like "stay on topic," "use the appropriate forum," "please delete." We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very moderation that I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather that you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you get a green handle and edit a post. Either way, I don't give a DAMN what you think about moderation.

Post Reply