Anything Political

[Brew 5,408]

A fairly lengthy and well written piece but most in the UK are aware of the setup over there. None of it to do with the situation in Kenosha mind, just a "please don't blame that nice man in the White House". 

 

Unfortunately it went to pieces with your recommended reading of the  Rabid right wing ..........(fill in your own expletive) purported news service. 

 

From Wikipedia:

'WorldNetDaily (WND) is an American news and opinion website and online news aggregator which has been described as "fringe" and far right as well as politically conservative. The website is known for promoting falsehoods and conspiracy theories'.

 

It also does a poor job of photoshopping Trump. 

 

The Canadian Free Press seems to be a sibling of WND. Neither are news reporters, they are aggregators, they take bits of other news streams that fit their far right diatribe, give it a bit of a twist and exaggerate it until they have a scurrilous headline that only the hard of thinking will believe. Wherever they can CFP also manage to in squeeze a good dose of religion to help the dogma on it's way. Strangely among all this quoting of constitutional and God given rights  there is no mention of the 7th commandment. 

 

It's all a bit like Mein Kampf don't you think?

 

[DJ360 6,721]

3 hours ago, Ayupmeducks said:

This was all started by the last Administration that caused division, race relations have gone backward 50 years.

 

Really?  If you don't want to expand on that yourself.. please at least point to a credible ( I.E. not CFP, WND or even Fox..) source to justify that statement.

 

 

[Oztalgian 3,271]

Meanwhile back at UK politics, I see that BJ has appointed our failed PM Tony Abbott as a trade advisor.

I would just like to point out a little of his history and some of his past "successes".

He was Prime Minister of Australia from Sept 2013 until September 2015, not even a full term. Fond of the three word slogans "Axe the Tax" "Stop the Boats" and his first cabinet contained only one woman Foreign Affairs Minister, Julie Bishop.

 

Late Sept 2013 begins "Operation Sovereign Borders", his only real "success" but at a terrible price to genuine asylum seekers which continues to this day.

Late Sept 2013 Two key front benchers had to pay pack travel expenses falsely claimed and he had to pay back AU$1600 too.

Sept 2013 Appoints who is probably Australia's most incompetent and gaffe prone Treasurer

Dec 2013 The Federal Government refused to reinstate support for the Australian Motor Industry thus ultimately led to the demise of the industry in Australia.

March 2014 Loses his Assistant Treasurer to allegations of corruption.

March 2014 Fond of "Captains' Calls he brings back Knights and Dames for pre-eminent Australians 30 years after it was scrapped by the Hawke labor government.

April 2014 Signed a Free Trade agreement with Japan originally began discussions in 2007.

July 2014 Repeals Labor's  Carbon Tax legislation.

Sept 2014 Repeals Labor's Mining Tax legislation and at the same time delays superannuation increases to Australian Workers.

Oct 2014 Threatens to "shirtfront" Russian President Vladimir Putin over the shooting down of MH17.

Nov 2014 Embarrasses Australia with his speech at the G20 summit.

Dec 2014 Australia's Free Trade agreement with South Korea takes effect.

Jan 2015 In another Captains Pick makes Prince Phillip a Knight.

Feb 2015 Dumps signature policy of paid parental leave and removes himself from selection of Order of Australia recipients.

Feb 2015 He survives a leadership spill after senior Liberals said he was doing damage to the government.

Jun 2015 Signs a free trade agreement with China. (given recent events this is not worth the paper it is written on)

Sept 2015 Immigration Minister and PM in major gaffe over fate of Pacific Islanders re rising sea levels due to climate change.

Sept 2105 Liberal Party ousts Tony Abbott and replaces him with Malcolm Turnbull.

 

Yes, he was the PM that signed 3 major trade agreements on behalf of Australia but not too many would say that they were of benefit to the average working Australian.

Is he a "Climate Change Denier'? Look at the actions of the government he led.

Is he a Mysogynist?  (Hatred of women or entrenched prejudice against women) Julia Gillard was definitely targeted by members of a Tony Abbott led opposition on the basis of her gender.

Good luck UK you are welcome to him. 

[Brew 5,408]

Without knowing the 'ins and outs' we can't make a judegment on his performance as PM and your opinion, though it may be valid is just that, your opinion - no doubt others will say different.

 

Looking at your list it can't be denied he got through quite a lot in 24 months.

 

He reduced taxes

Let go of a millstone by letting the car industry stand on its own feet

Reintroduced an archaic hounours system to reward prominent Aussies (if it costs nothing where's the harm).

Every governement has black sheep, doesn't mean the leader is aware of it.

He made an off the cuff comment that a micrpphone picked up. Looking at the transcripit it showed lack of empathy but was hardly a hanging offence.

The rest is just political puffery.

 

Is he the mysogynistc homphobe the media claim? I don't know but does that preclude him from the job? Abbot will have no power, he's an advisor and here to bolster Boris in his desperate scramble to secure agreements post Brexit. We're not paying him for his good looks and being Mr Nice Guy, we're buying his knowledge and who has more insider information than an ex PM? Much like Blair (a man accused of war crimes), is 'advisor' to whoever pays his price...

 

[Stuart.C 491]

From the articles I've seen U.K Gov aren't paying him

He's classed as an unpaid advisor to the Board of Trade.

 

 

So it shouldn't cost anything to get rid of him if he proves to be a problem

 

[Oztalgian 3,271]

His party thought he was a dud, so they dumped him.

Fact Check

Based on available treasury data the tax to GDP ratio under Abbott was the highest since 2008/9

The main reason for the growth in taxation was personal income tax due to the government failing to index the tax brackets resulting in fiscal creep and the average Joe Public facing higher marginal income tax rates.

[Oztalgian 3,271]

6 minutes ago, Stuart.C said:

So it shouldn't cost anything to get rid of him if he proves to be a problem

It may well cost nothing to get rid of him but it may cost dearly in the long run

[Brew 5,408]

4 hours ago, Oztalgian said:

Based on available treasury data the tax to GDP ratio under Abbott was the highest since 2008/9

 

Only marginally at around 22%.  The ratio was barely 0.4 more than Gillards and may even be the result of her policies rather than anything Abbot did or didn't do.

It was much less than ALL the Howard years - less than the OECD average (34%) - less than the EU average (40%) and less than the predicted rise to 24% under Turnbull in the near future.

Hardly worth getting exited about Oz...

We should also remember that the firgures are attributed to the incumbent reporting and take no account of possible historic reasons for the changes.

 

The media here seem out to blacken him but only because at the moment misogyny and homophobia are fashionable  - and the fact he's Australian of course.

I accept you dislike him and have  better insight than I but viewed from a distance I've seen worse..

[Oztalgian 3,271]

Brew,

He was born in Lambeth London, his parents were Ten Pound Poms and he came to Australia at the age of 2

Interestingly he only renounced his British citizenship in 1993 to become eligible to run for parliament and not fall foul of Section 44 of the constitution as so many others have done since.

Re Taxation When he came to power the take from income tax was 15.3% of GDP when he was unseated it was 16.5%

Individual tax take rose from 10.3% of GDP to 11.4% whilst company and indirect taxes remained pretty much the same.

Whilst he may not be being paid what expenses and perks will he be getting? I strongly suspect that he is not being paid is more about the fact that a former prime minister should not be claiming a very lucrative parliamentary pension whilst "advising" a foreign government. 

Not to mention potential conflict of interest with on-going trade talks between the UK and Australia on a Free Trade Agreement.

Data from "The Conversation"

 

[DJ360 6,721]

Err.. hang on...  If I've got this right.. this bloke is appointed as an adviser to Boris.  He is not paid.

So.. he's doing it out of the goodness of his heart?

Really?

 

And I'm afraid that Boris' 'scramble for agreements' is down entirely to the incompetence of his Govt. and his continuing allegiance to the self seeking disaster capitalists who put him front and centre in the first place.

 

Time for Boris and his crooked mates to both 'own' and 'own up to' the disastrous Brexit shambles they have created.

[philmayfield 6,115]

I would imagine Abbott receives ‘expenses’ which would cover a multitude of things.

[Stuart.C 491]

As long as they don't include trips home at the weekends.

[Oztalgian 3,271]

Breaking News

Malcolm Turnbull, the man that ousted Abbott has speculated that Tony Abbott may reclaim his British citizenship and stand as an MP in the UK.

[radfordred 6,284]

The only reason Tony Abbott is being hounded, because he like many of us, he holds traditional views on sex, marriage & traditional family values, I'm liking old Tony we have been to PC tolerant for too long, time to crack a few leftie skulls. 

 

[Brew 5,408]

To use an Aussie expression, ‘give him a fair go mate’

 

 No one is naive enough to think he’s doing it as a favour, there will be some form of remuneration and I don’t doubt a lucrative job post Brexit.

Leaving Europe has seemed far away for so long  and Covid has pushed it to the back of people’s minds,  in reality though  it’s now a matter of 100 days. Even if Abbot is doing it for ‘nowt’ it won’t be for long.

 

The rest is just Col’s famous anti-Tory rhetoric – it takes two sides to make an agreement and no doubt any deal will be vilified regardless.

 

The tax tables Oz put up are hardly a damning indictment.  Indirect tax went down, Corporate remained the same and income saw a very slight rise. Remember these are ratios not rates of taxation.

The individual figure you concentrate on rose under Abbot and continues to do so under Turnbull. Without an in depth knowledge of Australian economic policy causation is difficult to demonstrate, indeed it can even be argued that it’s a measure of success that the tax take is increasing.

There is, as I said in an earlier post, no historical data. We cannot therefore determine if the rise was due to higher earnings or an increase in the tax rate.

 

Can’t really see any conflict of interest...

 

[Brew 5,408]

50 minutes ago, radfordred said:

time to crack a few leftie skulls. 

 

 

Not too sure about this bit though RR...

[DJ360 6,721]

3 hours ago, radfordred said:

The only reason Tony Abbott is being hounded, because he like many of us, he holds traditional views on sex, marriage & traditional family values, I'm liking old Tony we have been to PC tolerant for too long, time to crack a few leftie skulls. 

 

 

Nobody that I know of is preventing you from holding your 'traditional' views.

However.. you and a few others here seem to take great exception to (socially) liberal views and behaviours which you like to wrongly classify as somehow 'politically correct'.   It is equally true that none of those behaviours is compulsory..so no need to worry.

[DJ360 6,721]

2 hours ago, Brew said:

The rest is just Col’s famous anti-Tory rhetoric – it takes two sides to make an agreement and no doubt any deal will be vilified regardless.

 

Jim.. just because my 'rhetoric' is 'anti-Tory'..doesn't make it wrong. However it is more anti Johnson than anti Tory.

You know full well that Boris Johnson is an incompetent lying corrupt oaf.. in thrall to the bunch of ultra rich crooks who comprise the ERG, and to that weirdo Cummings.

Whatever your views, or my views, on Brexit.. it is very clear to anyone who cares to look..that Johnson and his bunch are engaging in  dangerous 'Brinkmanship' at best and deliberate obfuscation and in all likelihood deliberately seeking 'No Deal'... at worst.

Johnsons latest proposed Legislation is in reality just another U Turn.

 

They are the worst, most corrupt Govt this country has seen since the 18thC and you know it.

[Brew 5,408]

30 minutes ago, DJ360 said:

It is equally true that none of those behaviours is compulsory..so no need to worry.

 

The problems arise when it becomes compulsory to NOT voice objections or protest at the 'liberal views and behaviours'. When it becomes compulsory to keep gob firmly shut for fear of persecution and reprisals, when your sincerely held beliefs see you hounded and punished for simply saying, "I believe that's wrong".

[DJ360 6,721]

So give me examples?

 

Nobody can stop you from..for e.g., saying that you think homosexuality is wrong. They can however stop you from actively discriminating against homosexuals.  That seems reasonable to me.

 

Please give real examples of how 'Traditional Values' are threatened.

[Brew 5,408]

8 minutes ago, DJ360 said:

Jim.. just because my 'rhetoric' is 'anti-Tory'..doesn't make it wrong.

 

I didn't say you were wrong, though I believe you to be so, equally it doesn't mean you're right. You know I'm not a fan of Boris but the diatribe about the ERG etc are way too left field for me to accept as valid argument. 

 

Playing brinkmanship is just another way of saying negotiate. Buying a car, shopping around... we all do it. It is praised for its foresight and courage when it comes off, damned for its stupidity when it doesn't. The alternative is lay down have our tummy tickled and say yes to everything the EU proposes.

 

As for the most corrupt for almost two hundred years that's just unknowable and unproveable hyperbole...

[Brew 5,408]

29 minutes ago, DJ360 said:

So give me examples?

 

Nobody can stop you from..for e.g., saying that you think homosexuality is wrong. They can however stop you from actively discriminating against homosexuals.  That seems reasonable to me.

 

Please give real examples of how 'Traditional Values' are threatened.

 

Oh dear, where to start... I'm not going go all thatched cottage and roses round the door for traditional vales, you really don't need me to explain. There are moral codes and mores, behaviours and expectations passed from generation to generation without needing to be written down,  they are historically part of a culture  stretching back hundreds, if not thousands of years.

 

Nobody can stop you from..for e.g., saying that you think homosexuality is wrong.

 

You really believe that?

In the 60's part of my Sunday was listening to the speakers in Slab Square, the opinions expressed ranged far and wide - so did the heckling. Today if you stood there and said homosexuality was wrong you would stopped, to think otherwise is naive in the extreme, the same goes for the hellfire preachers that stood there and said all who did not believe were in league with the devil. Even back then there were those who protested at immigration. All were expressing a prejudice about something. Everyone could be accused of hate speech.

 

Freedom of speech has never really existed but we were freer than most. The freedom to say what you like apart from treason and sedition has gone. We can no longer go where we like, say what we like. like who we like or dislike who we dislike without fear of reprisals. Fear rules society and that fear grows every time someone screams 'racist'. 'homophobe' or  Islamophobia.

 

Personally I am at a loss why the LBG whatever, feel the need to announce and flaunt their sexuality. We don't, why should they knowing full well it's controversial and will cause upset? It's a private matter, why shout about it? All discrimination is wrong but you can't discriminate against something you don't know about!

 

Traditional values are just that, traditional, and have become so over time because they are proven to work. Honesty, openness, fairness, manners....... the list goes on and on and we are slowly losing them through fringe groups, minorities and populist authoritarians etc. applying pressure and punishing anyone who does not conform.

 

Give me an example of a traditional value that is not under threat.

[DJ360 6,721]

3 hours ago, Brew said:

Oh dear, where to start... I'm not going go all thatched cottage and roses round the door for traditional vales, you really don't need me to explain. There are moral codes and mores, behaviours and expectations passed from generation to generation without needing to be written down,  they are historically part of a culture  stretching back hundreds, if not thousands of years.

 

 

That is of course (mostly) true.  However.. the bit you miss out is that social attitudes and prevailing values change over time. They always have and always will. So all those moral codes, mores, behaviours and expectations are not fixed.  Take a look back at child marriages amongst the 'upper' classes in mediaeval times. Look to the lunacy and double standards of Victorian times.. when the ankles and even the Table Legs were covered up at home.. while the upright Patriarch was out in the evening keeping the brothels in business.

Morality was pretty 'lax' in much of the 18thC..and the Victorian backlash reversed that.. only for a rather more universal and proletarian backlash in the 20thC

 

Dress codes ..  Once very rigid.  I still recall the days when 'City Gents' wore Bowlers and carried Brollies.  That has all gone.

My parents were essentially brought up by parents who were socialised by Victorians.  They slowly adapted to changing times, but also mourned the passing of the 'Good Old Days'.

 

We all mourn the passing of aspects of the 'good old days'. 

 

But we cannot stop time.

3 hours ago, Brew said:

You really believe that?

In the 60's part of my Sunday was listening to the speakers in Slab Square, the opinions expressed ranged far and wide - so did the heckling. Today if you stood there and said homosexuality was wrong you would stopped, to think otherwise is naive in the extreme

 

I contend it would depend how you said it.  Christians of a certain persuasion say it all of the time and get away with it. They do do by not suggesting that homosexuals should be executed.. attacked, etc.  If you said you thought it was wrong.. but were content to allow 'God' to judge...

3 hours ago, Brew said:

We can no longer go where we like, say what we like. like who we like or dislike who we dislike without fear of reprisals. Fear rules society and that fear grows every time someone screams 'racist'. 'homophobe' or  Islamophobia.

 

I disagree.  The Law allows you an opinion on anything.  It does NOT allow you to preach hate or discrimination.

 

3 hours ago, Brew said:

Personally I am at a loss why the LBG whatever, feel the need to announce and flaunt their sexuality. We don't, why should they knowing full well it's controversial and will cause upset? It's a private matter, why shout about it? All discrimination is wrong but you can't discriminate against something you don't know about!

 

I have some sympathy with that view.  I find what I might term 'sexual fascism'.. just as repellent as homophobia. I'm very much a live and let live sort of bloke.

However.. and equally.. I do not believe that homosexuality should be forced back into the shadows.

 

3 hours ago, Brew said:

Traditional values are just that, traditional, and have become so over time because they are proven to work. Honesty, openness, fairness, manners....... the list goes on and on and we are slowly losing them through fringe groups, minorities and populist authoritarians etc. applying pressure and punishing anyone who does not conform.

 

No no no!!!  The vast bulk of the population ..Gay, Straight, Right Left and Centre. Atheist, Muslim, Jew, Christian etc.. will all happily ascribe to those basic values.

Please give CONCRETE, rather than anecdotal..or 'supposed' examples of 'fringe groups' etc.'punishing anyone who does not conform'.

 

The reality is that until very recently ..it was 'society' which punished nonconformists.

[Brew 5,408]

10 hours ago, DJ360 said:

However.. the bit you miss out is that social attitudes and prevailing values change over time. They always have and always will. So all those moral codes, mores, behaviours and expectations are not fixed.

 

True but the changes were  not forced upon a reluctant population by a radical few, it was as you say a slow adaption. Education and changes in economic circumstance, better infrastructure and facilities made change desirable and they are by and large implemented by consent over time - It was evolution rather than revolution. There were a few examples where the pressure for change involved violence but in the main it came from a groundswell of public opinion. 

 

10 hours ago, DJ360 said:

I contend it would depend how you said it

 

Which is the same as saying we have to self-censor our speech or risk reprimand as a minimum and prosecution as a distinct possibility. Mollifying the statement by hiding behind a 'higher power' is merely obfuscation, an attempt to avoid sanction by claiming the moral high ground. 

 

10 hours ago, DJ360 said:

The Law allows you an opinion on anything.  It does NOT allow you to preach hate or discrimination.

 

 

The law allows you an opinion, not the right to express it. The law is so ambiguous it will often come down to an individual officers opinion whether it is hate speech or not. Under the public order act it is an offence to 'use or engage in insulting words'

 

Examples:

 

“Scientology is not a religion it is a dangerous cult"....     were words written on a placard that had a 16yr old arrested and reported to the CPS.

 

An Oxford student was arrested for asking a police officer if his horse was gay.

 

A young man successfully prosecuted for saying "WOOF' to a dog despite the dog walker not wanting to prosecute.

 

In Cumbria a street preacher, Dale McAlpine, was asked by a CPS officer about homosexuality. It was NOT part of his sermon but in reply to the question he said "homosexuality is a sin",  he was arrested and charged. 

 

In Scotland police are collecting details of people posting jokes they consider 'offensive'... and there's more...

 

10 hours ago, DJ360 said:

No no no!!!  The vast bulk of the population ..Gay, Straight, Right Left and Centre. Atheist, Muslim, Jew, Christian etc.. will all happily ascribe to those basic values.

 

I agree but you miss the point, the vast majority is not a fringe group and by definition, not a minority.

There are more ways of being 'punished' than being fined or jailed. You can be punished by being castigated and vilified, made to appear foolish or embarrassed by such as the animal rights people who get in your face whilst in town.

The far right/left political groups will quickly repudiate (probably violently), your right to speak against them.

To those who object gay pride parades are insulting and offensive. But are 'punished' by being forced to accept them.

Tell the countryside alliance you object to fox hunting etc. all fringe groups, all minor matters but they accumulate and contribute to shaping our mindset, to make us wary of what we say and to whom we say it. 

 

11 hours ago, DJ360 said:

The reality is that until very recently ..it was 'society' which punished nonconformists.

 

Until recently? By 'society'?  By all of or part of...

[DJ360 6,721]

22 hours ago, Brew said:

Examples:

 

“Scientology is not a religion it is a dangerous cult"....     were words written on a placard that had a 16yr old arrested and reported to the CPS.

 

An Oxford student was arrested for asking a police officer if his horse was gay.

 

A young man successfully prosecuted for saying "WOOF' to a dog despite the dog walker not wanting to prosecute.

 

In Cumbria a street preacher, Dale McAlpine, was asked by a CPS officer about homosexuality. It was NOT part of his sermon but in reply to the question he said "homosexuality is a sin",  he was arrested and charged. 

 

In Scotland police are collecting details of people posting jokes they consider 'offensive'... and there's more...

 

I'm genuinely surprised at those examples, though I rather suspect that charges (if finally brought) would not have led to much in the end. I've seen far more discriminatory and prejudiced views expressed on this forum.

For what it's worth I'm happy to say I agree on Scientology.

Not sure why the student would ask the question about the horse but I'd guess there was more to it and that the arrest had more to do with public order than the 'gay' comment.

'WOOF'.  I don't even understand that one. I frequently say that to dogs. It is neither discriminatory nor offensive.  Nope.. ya got me there..

'Homosexuality is a sin'  That is..at worst..a moral judgement and an opinion which people are entitled to hold.. and even verbalise.. though I think he'd have been better prefacing his reply with 'In my view..' and ending with 'Though I accept it is legal and should not invoke discrimination'.. Again. I suspect there was more to the story. Many things are 'sins' in the eyes of many religions..yet are not illegal.

 

Homosexuality, Envy, Avarice, Pride, Dishonesty etc., etc...are all 'sins' yet not necessarily illegal.

 

I'm sure that many Police Officers are 'challenged' by the whole field of discrimination, hate speech etc.