The Politics Thread 2024

[Sid]

Finished ep 1 of Nemesis last night, this line from Beetota sums it up pretty well.

Keen to do their best to show why their weaselling was justified, and everyone else's wasn't.

Sent from my SM-S911B using Tapatalk

[Mickey_Raider]

December annualised inflation data:

3.4%

If it is indeed the economy stupid, on current trends things are looking pretty good for a comfortable Labor reelection in 2025 I’d say.

Some experts forecast GDP expansion of less than one per cent this year, which is miserable given migration is still booming.

We are in a per-capita recession. Business investment is stalling.

It is certainly true that the eternal challenge is keeping GDP growth high and inflation low and steady.

Battling inflation is likely going to result in weaker GDP growth. In fact in terms of aggressive inflation it is more or less a corollary.

As for per capita recession, we were in a per capita recession in 2019 even prior to COVID and the resultant inflation, and yet those are looked upon as relatively good days for our economy.

Yes in an ideal world in regular times your economy is growing without migration propping it up.

However in an environment where we are battling an inflation shock and trying to restore normalcy (whatever that means), the per capita recession metric is probably quite trivial, and it is certainly an acceptable trade off for falling inflation and interest rates.

The other point to make is that the typical hallmark of a struggling economy in recession is a spiking unemployment rate. At the moment we are still at historically low levels of unemployment with a 3 in front of it.

I think that if unemployment remains at a relatively low level and inflation and interest rates are on the way down, the fundamentals of the economy will be looking quite sound for a government seeking re-election.

[greeneyed]

This has to be one of the most hilarious conspiracies coming out of the USA.

Trump allies pledge ‘Holy War’ against Taylor Swift

Former GOP presidential hopeful and current Trump hype man Vivek Ramaswamy took to Twitter following the latest Chiefs’ playoff win to claim that unnamed forces would rig the Super Bowl to give the as-yet nonexistent endorsement from the “artificially culturally propped-up couple” increased visibility.

Read more: https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/p ... 234956829/

[Dr Zaius]

Barking. Where do the GOP keep digging up these lunatics?

[gangrenous]

They advised what they were going to say by being a neo-nazi group. There’s nothing in that ideology that society cares to hear.

If they did have something to say they can assemble as part of a group whose ideology isn’t corrupt and they’ll be up on their crates.

If no one was listening there wouldnt be a group to begin with.

I am happy for any group no matter how despicable they are to assemble and yell at the clouds, if those yellings or some actions contravene a law by all means the full force of the law and all social consequences should be applied..

but if grouping together in and of itself is what is breaking the law its getting a bit tough isn't it.

There *shouldn’t* be a group to begin with!

It’s not the grouping together, it’s grouping together AS A NEO NAZI group! There is nothing worthwhile that comes of that.

It’s the equivalent of them ringing you beforehand and saying “we’re going to murder X” and you going “well let’s just wait and see if they do murder X and then we’ll punish them”!

No! They’re telling you they’re going to do something illegal - block it before people are affected.

[papabear]

Great news

If inflation keeps coming down labor would have to go full bill shorten to lose especially with Dutton there…

Will be interesting to see what the year brings with interest rates, inflation, tax cuts, house prices, immigration…

[papabear]

They advised what they were going to say by being a neo-nazi group. There’s nothing in that ideology that society cares to hear.

If they did have something to say they can assemble as part of a group whose ideology isn’t corrupt and they’ll be up on their crates.

If no one was listening there wouldnt be a group to begin with.

I am happy for any group no matter how despicable they are to assemble and yell at the clouds, if those yellings or some actions contravene a law by all means the full force of the law and all social consequences should be applied..

but if grouping together in and of itself is what is breaking the law its getting a bit tough isn't it.

There *shouldn’t* be a group to begin with!

It’s not the grouping together, it’s grouping together AS A NEO NAZI group! There is nothing worthwhile that comes of that.

It’s the equivalent of them ringing you beforehand and saying “we’re going to murder X” and you going “well let’s just wait and see if they do murder X and then we’ll punish them”!

No! They’re telling you they’re going to do something illegal - block it before people are affected.

So a group with disgusting beliefs grouping together is the same equivalent of planning and doing a murder?

HAMAS / ISIS / NAZIs arguably vladimir putins russians, all shouldnt exist.

So do you make them not exist by waving a ban stick at them / silencing or pushing back through education, argument, public shame etc. There is a point were tolerance is taking advantage of, but in my view its not taking advantage of it by grouping together and rallying - disturbing the peace bit much for me.

That said, I agree with you that such fringe hate groups shouldnt exist and in my utopia they wouldnt because again everyone is so happy... arguably even vegans wouldnt exist because my utopias technology produces food at the molecular level taking out the need to harm plants and animals

[gangrenous]

It’s an analogy. I’m not saying the two things are equivalent. I’m saying the logic is equivalent.

[gerg]

Looks like Papa's utopia is falling apart right before our eyes. This fantasy that everybody can be happy is pure fantasy.

Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk

[The Nickman]

[gangrenous]

Neo-Nazis: we’re here to protest!

Papabear: Oh, good for you boys. It’s nice to have a hobby. Now you’ve been known to be abusive, intimidating and incite hatred and ask for genocide before, but maybe this time you’ll be talking about your love of baking cookies…

*Nazis do what Nazis do*

Papabear:

[Sid]

What is the Neo-Nazi's stance on single use plastics?

Sent from my SM-S911B using Tapatalk

[T_R]

I'm not watching as closely as I normally would but it looks like the usual negative politics from any opposition.

No matter what action the ALP took I'm sure there was pre-prepared talking points ready to go.
Stick to the election promise and they are just fueling inflation.
Modify the tax cuts, broken promise.
Do nothing, broken promise.

Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk

Modifying the tax cuts as they have they are probably going to fuel inflation more then the original ones were going too in an attempt to win more middle australia votes.

As I said I would have left them or removed them entirely. In going for the best of both worlds, imo could get you the worst of both worlds of political pain from broken promise and economic / inflation pain.

So ISIS protesting in a park in Papa's utopia is okay? Or how about on the nature strip in front of Papa's house?

Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk

In my utopia no one’s protesting because everyone is happy.

If someone identifies as a supporter of isis and wants to rally support for an ideology of Islam fundamentalism or whatever else they can.

If they commit terror acts or break the law they should be locked up :p

As gangers suggested your utopia will quickly turn into something resembling the real world after that Isis group on your nature strip beheads a couple of people you know or love.

Same as your ideals of Free speech. How long will you let those nazi lads get in the face of your loved ones and verbally abuse them?

Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk

Quite an interesting conversation.

Im sure if asked, most people here would say "I believe in free speech". It's interesting to see at what point they stop believing in it.

I agree that there is not and should not be an absolute right in this regard, but it should be as absolute as possible. The idea that the line should be drawn at 40 middle aged guys who want to spend their day off cosplaying as 1940s Germans I think is an alarming one.

We have remedies where people step over the line - as has been said here, free speech does not mean speech without consequence. But the idea that people should not have a right to express a view - no matter how abhorrent - is a seriously dangerous one, in my opinion.

[The Nickman]

TR's a nazi!

I always knew it!

[T_R]

TR's a nazi!

I always knew it!

I just like dressing up.

[Dr Zaius]

Modifying the tax cuts as they have they are probably going to fuel inflation more then the original ones were going too in an attempt to win more middle australia votes.

As I said I would have left them or removed them entirely. In going for the best of both worlds, imo could get you the worst of both worlds of political pain from broken promise and economic / inflation pain.

So ISIS protesting in a park in Papa's utopia is okay? Or how about on the nature strip in front of Papa's house?

Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk

In my utopia no one’s protesting because everyone is happy.

If someone identifies as a supporter of isis and wants to rally support for an ideology of Islam fundamentalism or whatever else they can.

If they commit terror acts or break the law they should be locked up :p

As gangers suggested your utopia will quickly turn into something resembling the real world after that Isis group on your nature strip beheads a couple of people you know or love.

Same as your ideals of Free speech. How long will you let those nazi lads get in the face of your loved ones and verbally abuse them?

Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk

Quite an interesting conversation.

Im sure if asked, most people here would say "I believe in free speech". It's interesting to see at what point they stop believing in it.

I agree that there is not and should not be an absolute right in this regard, but it should be as absolute as possible. The idea that the line should be drawn at 40 middle aged guys who want to spend their day off cosplaying as 1940s Germans I think is an alarming one.

We have remedies where people step over the line - as has been said here, free speech does not mean speech without consequence. But the idea that people should not have a right to express a view - no matter how abhorrent - is a seriously dangerous one, in my opinion.

Why in your opinion is it a seriously dangerous one?

[dubby]

TR's a nazi!

I always knew it!

I just like dressing up.

I knew you were Batman!!

[The Nickman]

TR's a nazi!

I always knew it!

I just like dressing up.

Any excuse to be the best looking guy in the bunch, I guess.

[T_R]

TR's a nazi!

I always knew it!

I just like dressing up.

Any excuse to be the best looking guy in the bunch, I guess.

Look, I'm not saying they were right, and I get the whole Jews and Gypsies and Gays things, but you know....you've got to admit, they were pretty snappy dressers.

[T_R]

So ISIS protesting in a park in Papa's utopia is okay? Or how about on the nature strip in front of Papa's house?

Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk

In my utopia no one’s protesting because everyone is happy.

If someone identifies as a supporter of isis and wants to rally support for an ideology of Islam fundamentalism or whatever else they can.

If they commit terror acts or break the law they should be locked up :p

As gangers suggested your utopia will quickly turn into something resembling the real world after that Isis group on your nature strip beheads a couple of people you know or love.

Same as your ideals of Free speech. How long will you let those nazi lads get in the face of your loved ones and verbally abuse them?

Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk

Quite an interesting conversation.

Im sure if asked, most people here would say "I believe in free speech". It's interesting to see at what point they stop believing in it.

I agree that there is not and should not be an absolute right in this regard, but it should be as absolute as possible. The idea that the line should be drawn at 40 middle aged guys who want to spend their day off cosplaying as 1940s Germans I think is an alarming one.

We have remedies where people step over the line - as has been said here, free speech does not mean speech without consequence. But the idea that people should not have a right to express a view - no matter how abhorrent - is a seriously dangerous one, in my opinion.

Why in your opinion is it a seriously dangerous one?

For the obvious reason that when lines start being drawn, they end up being very, very moveable.

I do not feel that society is under threat from a bunch of paunchy middle aged guys in black skivvies chanting in a park in a Sydney suburb somewhere. i do believe it starts looking a bit concerning when we are arbitrarily telling groups what they can and cannot say in public.

[Off]

Unless it is woke of course.

Sent from my SM-A536E using Tapatalk

[Dr Zaius]

In my utopia no one’s protesting because everyone is happy.

If someone identifies as a supporter of isis and wants to rally support for an ideology of Islam fundamentalism or whatever else they can.

If they commit terror acts or break the law they should be locked up :p

As gangers suggested your utopia will quickly turn into something resembling the real world after that Isis group on your nature strip beheads a couple of people you know or love.

Same as your ideals of Free speech. How long will you let those nazi lads get in the face of your loved ones and verbally abuse them?

Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk

Quite an interesting conversation.

Im sure if asked, most people here would say "I believe in free speech". It's interesting to see at what point they stop believing in it.

I agree that there is not and should not be an absolute right in this regard, but it should be as absolute as possible. The idea that the line should be drawn at 40 middle aged guys who want to spend their day off cosplaying as 1940s Germans I think is an alarming one.

We have remedies where people step over the line - as has been said here, free speech does not mean speech without consequence. But the idea that people should not have a right to express a view - no matter how abhorrent - is a seriously dangerous one, in my opinion.

Why in your opinion is it a seriously dangerous one?

For the obvious reason that when lines start being drawn, they end up being very, very moveable.

I do not feel that society is under threat from a bunch of paunchy middle aged guys in black skivvies chanting in a park in a Sydney suburb somewhere. i do believe it starts looking a bit concerning when we are arbitrarily telling groups what they can and cannot say in public.

But by your own admission a line needs to be drawn somewhere. Why not there? I think that we both know these are more than just a bunch of middle aged guys chanting in the park. They had mobilised all around the country and have history of insighting violence.

[gangrenous]

I agree that there is not and should not be an absolute right in this regard, but it should be as absolute as possible. The idea that the line should be drawn at 40 middle aged guys who want to spend their day off cosplaying as 1940s Germans I think is an alarming one.

We have remedies where people step over the line - as has been said here, free speech does not mean speech without consequence. But the idea that people should not have a right to express a view - no matter how abhorrent - is a seriously dangerous one, in my opinion.

I know you’re being tongue in cheek with that. But that characterisation is not reality, and is obviously not where it’s being argued the line is drawn.

If you’re serious with this line of argument, I’m keen to understand why the line should extend to professing ideologies of genocide?

By all means we shouldn’t stop awkward conversations about things people find distasteful. But I think as society we can agree that genocide and extreme racism can be over the other side of the line.

[Botman]

I think next time these guys want to meet and spew their nonsense, rather than use resources to break it up and prevent them talking, maybe a better deterent would be to name and shame them.

They're wearing masks for a reason, they know there will be consequences is people find out who they are. Well, lets find out i say.

[T_R]

As gangers suggested your utopia will quickly turn into something resembling the real world after that Isis group on your nature strip beheads a couple of people you know or love.

Same as your ideals of Free speech. How long will you let those nazi lads get in the face of your loved ones and verbally abuse them?

Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk

Quite an interesting conversation.

Im sure if asked, most people here would say "I believe in free speech". It's interesting to see at what point they stop believing in it.

I agree that there is not and should not be an absolute right in this regard, but it should be as absolute as possible. The idea that the line should be drawn at 40 middle aged guys who want to spend their day off cosplaying as 1940s Germans I think is an alarming one.

We have remedies where people step over the line - as has been said here, free speech does not mean speech without consequence. But the idea that people should not have a right to express a view - no matter how abhorrent - is a seriously dangerous one, in my opinion.

Why in your opinion is it a seriously dangerous one?

For the obvious reason that when lines start being drawn, they end up being very, very moveable.

I do not feel that society is under threat from a bunch of paunchy middle aged guys in black skivvies chanting in a park in a Sydney suburb somewhere. i do believe it starts looking a bit concerning when we are arbitrarily telling groups what they can and cannot say in public.

But by your own admission a line needs to be drawn somewhere. Why not there? I think that we both know these are more than just a bunch of middle aged guys chanting in the park. They had mobilised all around the country and have history of insighting violence.

There are both civil and legal remedies in place for the incitement of violence. As I said, you should be allowed to say it, and you should then accept the consequences of that up to the limit of the law.

When I talk about 'drawing a line' it would be much closer to the point of the actual act of physical violence.

These guys are dicks, what they are saying is dangerous and hurtful, but I don't get to tell other people what they should say or think, and that's how it should be.

[gangrenous]

I think next time these guys want to meet and spew their nonsense, rather than use resources to break it up and prevent them talking, maybe a better deterent would be to name and shame them.

They're wearing masks for a reason, they know there will be consequences is people find out who they are. Well, lets find out i say.

[T_R]

I think next time these guys want to meet and spew their nonsense, rather than use resources to break it up and prevent them talking, maybe a better deterent would be to name and shame them.

They're wearing masks for a reason, they know there will be consequences is people find out who they are. Well, lets find out i say.

Absolutely. You should be allowed to express an opinion, but if people take that and later faithfully share it with your family, employer and society in general...well, that's on you.

[T_R]

Unless it is woke of course.

Sent from my SM-A536E using Tapatalk

My son is going into first year uni this month. He's been invited by the uni to attend a Self Love Vision Board Development Workshop during O Week. I can see if I can get you in, if you'd like....?

[gangrenous]

There are both civil and legal remedies in place for the incitement of violence. As I said, you should be allowed to say it, and you should then accept the consequences of that up to the limit of the law.

I’d argue assembling under an ideology of genocide is inciting violence by default.

It is not fair to ask the people affected by that to be forced to challenge that civilly or complaining legally, putting them at risk of retribution and costing them resources just to exist and not be threatened in daily society.

[Dr Zaius]

Quite an interesting conversation.

Im sure if asked, most people here would say "I believe in free speech". It's interesting to see at what point they stop believing in it.

I agree that there is not and should not be an absolute right in this regard, but it should be as absolute as possible. The idea that the line should be drawn at 40 middle aged guys who want to spend their day off cosplaying as 1940s Germans I think is an alarming one.

We have remedies where people step over the line - as has been said here, free speech does not mean speech without consequence. But the idea that people should not have a right to express a view - no matter how abhorrent - is a seriously dangerous one, in my opinion.

Why in your opinion is it a seriously dangerous one?

For the obvious reason that when lines start being drawn, they end up being very, very moveable.

I do not feel that society is under threat from a bunch of paunchy middle aged guys in black skivvies chanting in a park in a Sydney suburb somewhere. i do believe it starts looking a bit concerning when we are arbitrarily telling groups what they can and cannot say in public.

But by your own admission a line needs to be drawn somewhere. Why not there? I think that we both know these are more than just a bunch of middle aged guys chanting in the park. They had mobilised all around the country and have history of insighting violence.

There are both civil and legal remedies in place for the incitement of violence. As I said, you should be allowed to say it, and you should then accept the consequences of that up to the limit of the law.

When I talk about 'drawing a line' it would be much closer to the point of the actual act of physical violence.

These guys are dicks, what they are saying is dangerous and hurtful, but I don't get to tell other people what they should say or think, and that's how it should be.

I think that we'll need to agree to disagree here. You seem to be appealing to a slippery slope fallacy. If these guys were dressing like that and heading to Hyde Park to recite Shakespeare, then all good. But you know and I know that is not what was going to happen, and that violence inevitably follows these clowns. Why do we need to wait for the inevitable? I've got no problem with drawing a line in front of a group that 99% of Australians find abhorrent. And I've no concern that doing so will inevitably lead to people being thrown in gaol for criticising our dear leader.

[gangrenous]

[T_R]

Why in your opinion is it a seriously dangerous one?

For the obvious reason that when lines start being drawn, they end up being very, very moveable.

I do not feel that society is under threat from a bunch of paunchy middle aged guys in black skivvies chanting in a park in a Sydney suburb somewhere. i do believe it starts looking a bit concerning when we are arbitrarily telling groups what they can and cannot say in public.

But by your own admission a line needs to be drawn somewhere. Why not there? I think that we both know these are more than just a bunch of middle aged guys chanting in the park. They had mobilised all around the country and have history of insighting violence.

There are both civil and legal remedies in place for the incitement of violence. As I said, you should be allowed to say it, and you should then accept the consequences of that up to the limit of the law.

When I talk about 'drawing a line' it would be much closer to the point of the actual act of physical violence.

These guys are dicks, what they are saying is dangerous and hurtful, but I don't get to tell other people what they should say or think, and that's how it should be.

I think that we'll need to agree to disagree here. You seem to be appealing to a slippery slope fallacy. If these guys were dressing like that and heading to Hyde Park to recite Shakespeare, then all good. But you know and I know that is not what was going to happen, and that violence inevitably follows these clowns. Why do we need to wait for the inevitable? I've got no problem with drawing a line in front of a group that 99% of Australians find abhorrent. And I've no concern that doing so will inevitably lead to people being thrown in gaol for criticising our dear leader.

And one day my wife will almost certainly smother me in my sleep. But we can't charge her with Probably Murder. I'll almost definitely speed on the way to work tomorrow, but until I hit that speed camera you can't do anything. We don't punish people for what they'll probably do, and it's not up to you or I to decide what we think will happen.

Maybe they were going to recite the Bard. Our legal system provides the benefit of the doubt, and even then you need to have been accused of actually doing something, not just thinking about doing something.

[Dr Zaius]

For the obvious reason that when lines start being drawn, they end up being very, very moveable.

I do not feel that society is under threat from a bunch of paunchy middle aged guys in black skivvies chanting in a park in a Sydney suburb somewhere. i do believe it starts looking a bit concerning when we are arbitrarily telling groups what they can and cannot say in public.

But by your own admission a line needs to be drawn somewhere. Why not there? I think that we both know these are more than just a bunch of middle aged guys chanting in the park. They had mobilised all around the country and have history of insighting violence.

There are both civil and legal remedies in place for the incitement of violence. As I said, you should be allowed to say it, and you should then accept the consequences of that up to the limit of the law.

When I talk about 'drawing a line' it would be much closer to the point of the actual act of physical violence.

These guys are dicks, what they are saying is dangerous and hurtful, but I don't get to tell other people what they should say or think, and that's how it should be.

I think that we'll need to agree to disagree here. You seem to be appealing to a slippery slope fallacy. If these guys were dressing like that and heading to Hyde Park to recite Shakespeare, then all good. But you know and I know that is not what was going to happen, and that violence inevitably follows these clowns. Why do we need to wait for the inevitable? I've got no problem with drawing a line in front of a group that 99% of Australians find abhorrent. And I've no concern that doing so will inevitably lead to people being thrown in gaol for criticising our dear leader.

And one day my wife will almost certainly smother me in my sleep. But we can't charge her with Probably Murder. I'll almost definitely speed on the way to work tomorrow, but until I hit that speed camera you can't do anything. We don't punish people for what they'll probably do, and it's not up to you or I to decide what we think will happen.

Maybe they were going to recite the Bard. Our legal system provides the benefit of the doubt, and even then you need to have been accused of actually doing something, not just thinking about doing something.

But they weren't arrested for something that they may do. There were no charges, no one is in the lock up for violence. It's a false argument. They were simply moved along.

[T_R]

Well, I'm allowed to make false arguments. Others are allowed to write bad 'haiku'.

Great to live in Australia.

[Botman]

And one day my wife will almost certainly smother me in my sleep.

Hope springs eternal