• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

AusPoliGAF |OT| Boats? What Boats?

Status
Not open for further replies.

r1chard

Member
Antony Green brings down the Reality Stick on the double-dissolution election y'all have been talking about.

TL;DR because, frankly, Green does tend to overwhelm with details ;-) :

In my opionion there is not going to be a double dissolution in the near future, and even in the more distant future, I cannot see any possibility of a double dissolution before late 2015 or the first months of 2016. Even then, a double dissolution will not occur unless the government thinks it will win.
 

lexi

Banned
The mere idea of having to listen to fucking Abbott and Hockey's smug dumbass mugs for another two years at the least is pretty vomit-inducing, really.

Christ I hope the populace hasn't forgotten about this in three years.

It will only get worse IMO, Austerity will hit hard and the masses will be baying for blood in an unprecedented fashion.
 

Arksy

Member
The amount of gross, pornographic and sometimes violent messages sent to women, especially in politics (I've seen it happen almost equally to conservative and progressive women), is frankly disgusting.
 

Jintor

Member
The amount of gross, pornographic and sometimes violent messages sent to women, especially in politics (I've seen it happen almost equally to conservative and progressive women), is frankly disgusting.

Agreed 100%. Doesn't matter what side of politics it happens to, it's gross.

Rubix your link is missing a : after the http
 

Rubixcuba

Banned
The amount of gross, pornographic and sometimes violent messages sent to women, especially in politics (I've seen it happen almost equally to conservative and progressive women), is frankly disgusting.
You'll recall I wasn't particularly happy about what she said, but knowing that people leaked her personal details to the world is scary. Outright abuse discredits any argument no matter what side of the political divide.
 

Dead Man

Member
Abbott and co will be just fine. These sorts of people are why:

SHqBKbw.png

Sorry for the long image, didn't have the patience to crop it properly.

Sadly I went to school with the Tony lunatic. Happily though I also went to school with Mikey.

Joel? Utter moron.
 

Arksy

Member
I consider myself the bastion of empathy and tolerance -- that said, fuck that bitch; reap what you sow.

So you think violence and harassment are proportionate responses for holding a different view? Hardly seems empathic and tolerant to me.
 

lexi

Banned
So you think violence and harassment are proportionate responses for holding a different view? Hardly seems empathic and tolerant to me.

Violence, no. Harassment, sure, why not. If you want to publicly put yourself up and say heinously dumb shit, be prepared for the blowback you rightfully deserve.
 

Arksy

Member
Violence, no. Harassment, sure, why not. If you want to publicly put yourself up and say heinously dumb shit, be prepared for the blowback you rightfully deserve.

There's a clear difference between engaging in debate with a person, and even ostracising them, and threatening violence and harassment, leaking her details to the public and stalking her etc.
 

Arksy

Member
This is an odd view to take regarding a federal government. The "quality" of the fiscal position of the federal government should be determined by the real macroeconomic goals it wants to achieve: growth, inflation, interest rates, unemployment etc...

Sorry for the late response. I'm not entirely sure I either understand or buy the idea that the government having control of the printing press means that debt doesn't matter. I mean I do agree that the government can take measures that can reduce the impact of debt, but those measures have consequences which could be beneficial in one area and deleterious in another. The U.S. situation basically requires interest rates to stay zero or they'll be overwhelmed by interest repayments. This has repercussions for things like foreign investment, it disincentives thrift, etc. I mean they could print money as they've done (I don't think I'll ever understand the difference between that and QE) but that again devalues the currency.

I'm not an economist, and there's a good chance I'm wrong about everything I've just said, but I've not seen anything that I've found convincing saying that the debt position is irrelevant. I mean if we accept that it is relevant, than Australia's position is *STILL* not that bad....but I just don't see the flipside.
 
Continuing from Friday's Triple J Hack program, Tom Tilley will be addressing the backlash/controversy Carla Efstratiou's comments during tonights Hack at 5:30. The comments left on Facebook and Twitter were pretty angry about her, will be interesting to see what Tilley says.

http://www.crikey.com.au/2014/05/19/media-briefs-their-abc-to-the-barricades-polls-polls-polls/ See Crikey for more

That particular article is paywalled and Crikey seems to be the first site I've come across whose paywall actually works lol. Accessing the article through a google search it's still paywalled

Violence, no. Harassment, sure, why not. If you want to publicly put yourself up and say heinously dumb shit, be prepared for the blowback you rightfully deserve.

This seems like a perverse version of freedom of speech lol

I think getting mad is fine, but threatening bodily harm is beyond the pale, whether an internet comment or whatever.

Definitely. I'll cut anyone who says different.
 

senahorse

Member
I just listened to that JJJ Hack show, and I don't know who Carla Efstratiou is but why was she on the show in the first place? She is a complete and utter moron incapable of articulating a coherent argument for anything she believes in.
 

lexi

Banned
This seems like a perverse version of freedom of speech lol

I do actually feel for the people who say or do something out of ignorance. I don't like nor support twitter lynch mobs on these people.

This bitch was saying it out of nu-age conservative-borne hatred of the poor and disadvantaged. Bring on the lynch mob!
 

hidys

Member
via @GhostWhoVotes

#Nielsen Poll WA Federal Primary Votes: L/NP 34 (-3) ALP 22 (+2) GRN 23 (-4) PUP 13 (+2) #auspol

I'd be interested to see a 2pp based on that.
 

Arksy

Member
via @GhostWhoVotes

#Nielsen Poll WA Federal Primary Votes: L/NP 34 (-3) ALP 22 (+2) GRN 23 (-4) PUP 13 (+2) #auspol

I'd be interested to see a 2pp based on that.

Green vote higher than Labor? I want to half laugh, but all I can manage to do is cry. Dark times ahead.
 

Dead Man

Member
Green vote higher than Labor? I want to half laugh, but all I can manage to do is cry. Dark times ahead.

Yes, greens maybe having a vote share, or a dodgy poll is the reason dark times. Not a totally broken budget based on bad faith and plain old economic ignorance.
 

hidys

Member
Green vote higher than Labor? I want to half laugh, but all I can manage to do is cry. Dark times ahead.

I posted that because I thought it was interesting but it is an outlier, here are that national primaries from Nielsen:

#Nielsen Poll Primary Votes: L/NP 35 (-5) ALP 40 (+6) GRN 14 (-3) PUP 6 (+2)

The Greens have actually declined in votes. I find it unlikely that in a general election the Greens will ever receive above 15% in a general election.

My main concern with the Greens polling higher than Labor is that Labor votes will not transfer to the Greens at the usual 80-90% rate they do currently from Green to Labor.
 

Arksy

Member
Yes, greens maybe having a vote share, or a dodgy poll is the reason dark times. Not a totally broken budget based on bad faith and plain old economic ignorance.

That's correct, I think the greens are incredibly dangerous. Although I'm not a fan of broken promises either.
 

Arksy

Member
I posted that because I thought it was interesting but it is an outlier, here are that national primaries from Nielsen:

#Nielsen Poll Primary Votes: L/NP 35 (-5) ALP 40 (+6) GRN 14 (-3) PUP 6 (+2)

The Greens have actually declined in votes. I find it unlikely that in a general election the Greens will ever receive above 15% in a general election.

My main concern with the Greens polling higher than Labor is that Labor votes will not transfer to the Greens at the usual 80-90% rate they do currently from Green to Labor.

Are you sure it's 80-90% Greens -> Labor? I was under the impression it was 60-70% - I know a lot of people (personally that is, which makes it anecdotal but whatever) that vote Greens for refugees and gay marriage but preference Liberal for economics.
 

lexi

Banned
I don't know about you, but coming from the same philosophical background that produced the most murderous regimes in human history is something that does in fact concern me deeply.

As opposed to the philosophical background of Hitler?
 

Shaneus

Member
That particular articl is paywalled and Crikey seems to be the first site I've come across whose paywall actually works lol. Accessing the article through a google search it's still paywalled
Free trial membership, dingus.

Edit: Pour vous:
Right-wing Hack guest offends. Last Friday’s debate on Triple J’s Hack has raised more than a few hackles on the Left, with a right-wing ideologue attacking young people, the homeless and Newstart recipients. Carla Efstratiou, introduced as a small business owner and MBA student, was invited on Hack last Friday to discuss last week’s budget. She was joined by A Rational Fear’s Dan Ilic, there to offer the presumably ”Left” side of the argument (he spent the segment satirising Efstratiou’s views by repeating them with outrageous examples — e.g. “the best thing about having a surplus is that every house will have a money pit we can go swimming in”). A selection of things Efstratiou said on the show:

“[Young people today] are so keen to go out to concerts, to festivals, they think they’re entitled to yearly European holidays. I know so many people on Newstart who are saving money and going overseas and blowing it.”
“There’s no reason to be homeless in this country. Most people who are homeless have mental illnesses. You can go to heaps of shelters if you’re actually homeless. There are heaps of things …”
“We need to make cuts somewhere … If we keep putting it on rich people, we’re gonna bleed them dry. They’re the people who spend money in this country — they keep it afloat.”
On why we shouldn’t spend money on the environment: “I don’t think it’s a priority.”
Efstratiou twice began a sentence with “the problem with young people today …”.

Needless to say, Triple J’s progressive audience did not endorse Efstratiou’s views. A firestorm erupted on social media, with plenty of guests expressing disappointment with Hack’s choice of guest (it’s worth noting host Tom Tilley didn’t let many of Efstratiou’s assertions stand). It appears Efstratiou’s personal details were posted, leading Hack to tell its commenters to calm down. “We love it when you’ve got strong opinions, but name calling, bullying and compromising someone’s safety by publishing personal details is just not on.” While googling Efstratiou, Crikey came upon this article she wrote in 2012 for Fairfax’s The Vine.

“Being a conservative young woman in our society is hard. It’s lonely, tedious and largely unaccepted by the latte-sipping, inner-city elite — the very people who champion diversity and acceptance in our society …”

That’s likely to be how Efstratiou writes off the criticism. Meanwhile, some of the social media commenters accused her of having no idea how poor people live or the choices they have to make, sometimes in quite personal tones. And so the wheel keeps turning. It’s all marvellous entertaiment, but do you feel more enlightened? — Myriam Robin

To the barricades. Meanwhile, on the class warfare front, The Daily Telegraph had fun with this weekend’s anti-budget protests …
Xzo5tO7.jpg


But after being roundly criticised (along with News Corp) for not giving the March in March coverage due prominence, Fairfax gave Sunday’s protests plenty of coverage. The Age sent a photographer and journalist out on Sunday afternoon, leading to page 4 coverage of the Melbourne rally. The Sydney Morning Herald’s online coverage both canvassed the views of those attending, as well as the speeches given. The ABC also covered the issue, both on television and online. It’s a damn sight more favourable than the coverage the March in March got.

Of course, no two protests (or events) are entirely the same. Yesterday’s rallies were about a political issue (the budget) journalists were already covering, so perhaps it was easier to find news value in the public demonstrations. Backed up by a series of polls that show the prime minister in dire straits, thousands taking to the streets fits this morning’s narrative. Still, Fairfax’s Jacqueline Maley addressed a lot of the criticisms of the coverage in March, saying that while there were good reason the marches weren’t covered, in hindsight, they should have received greater prominence in the Fairfax papers. Maybe attitudes have been reconsidered. — Myriam Robin


Front page of the day. Apart from the aforementioned Daily Tele, polls dominated the nation’s front pages this morning, with both Nielsen and Newspoll showing huge falls for the Prime Minister …
8sFfyMM.png
 

Arksy

Member
There's clearly a difference between Marxism and Fascism, but there's no doubt in my mind, and the minds of many, that Hitler's Fascism grew out of Marxism.

I am a Socialist,' Hitler told Otto Strasser in 1930, 'and a very different kind of Socialist from your rich friend, Count Reventlow'.

Hiter was interested in real socialism as he professed. "der echte Sozialismus." - He talked about how there would be no recourse for capitalists, nor priests nor the Tsars.

(Taken from the book "Lost Literature of Socialism by George Watson).
 

hidys

Member
Are you sure it's 80-90% Greens -> Labor? I was under the impression it was 60-70% - I know a lot of people (personally that is, which makes it anecdotal but whatever) that vote Greens for refugees and gay marriage but preference Liberal for economics.

83% in last election.
http://results.aec.gov.au/17496/Website/HouseStateTppFlow-17496-NAT.htm This is why those preferences are so important.

PUP's distribution of preferences is also interesting. It is a pretty close representation of the actual 2pp vote.
 

Arksy

Member
My point is not that the Greens are Hitler, it's that the philosophical background is problematic. Socialists and Libertarians have the same goals in mind, a classless egalitarian utopia. The difference is that Libertarians want to achieve the absence of force by removing the perpetrators of force, and that Socialists want to achieve the lack of force through force. Which I believe has been disastrous. (Stolen from Roderick T Long)
 

hidys

Member
My point is not that the Greens are Hitler, it's that the philosophical background is problematic. Socialists and Libertarians have the same goals in mind, a classless egalitarian utopia. The difference is that Libertarians want to achieve the absence of force by removing the perpetrators of force, and that Socialists want to achieve the lack of force through force. Which I believe has been disastrous. (Stolen from Roderick T Long)

I don't think the Greens want to create a classless society.
 
Wait, wait, wait. Are we in anyway comparing the current day greens to the nazis? I realise that's not the exact point you're making but what an absolutely idiotic comparison.
 

Arksy

Member
Wait, wait, wait. Are we in anyway comparing the current day greens to the nazis? I realise that's not the exact point you're making but what an absolutely idiotic comparison.

No, not at all. I was trying to dismantle the idea that Hitler wasn't a socialist. He was. Given unlimited power the Greens wouldn't do anything of the sort, but that doesn't mean I think the socialist approaches to the problems of society aren't inherently problematic and dangerous. I agree with the Greens on a few issues, such as gay marriage and refugees but not much else.

Edit: I'm rambling like a fool, and making what I consider to be some piss poor arguments. So I'm going to bow out of this.
 

Myansie

Member
There's clearly a difference between Marxism and Fascism, but there's no doubt in my mind, and the minds of many, that Hitler's Fascism grew out of Marxism.

I am a Socialist,' Hitler told Otto Strasser in 1930, 'and a very different kind of Socialist from your rich friend, Count Reventlow'.

Hiter was interested in real socialism as he professed. "der echte Sozialismus." - He talked about how there would be no recourse for capitalists, nor priests nor the Tsars.

(Taken from the book "Lost Literature of Socialism by George Watson).

Yes and Tony Abbott is Medicare's best friend.
 

Arksy

Member
Let me make this clear:

-The Greens aren't Hitler.

- I think Green's economic policies would be absolutely disastrous. I don't think we'd get gulags and death camps, but I think it would be half the country we are today if they formed government.

Everyone thinks I'm trying to equate the two, I'm not, and hence why I'm bowing out.
 

hidys

Member
No, not at all. I was trying to dismantle the idea that Hitler wasn't a socialist. He was. Given unlimited power the Greens wouldn't do anything of the sort, but that doesn't mean I think the socialist approaches to the problems of society aren't inherently problematic and dangerous. I agree with the Greens on a few issues, such as gay marriage and refugees but not much else.

Edit: I'm rambling like a fool, and making what I consider to be some piss poor arguments. So I'm going to bow out of this.

The Greens share more similarities with Nordic style social democrats than they do with communists or even democratic socialists (though there are some who would definitely fir in the democratic socialist bandwagon). But whether or not they are social democrats or democratic socialists is not relevant. I would say that some of the older Labor leaders such as Chifley or even Calwell are more left wing than they are.They aren't Socialist Alternative for fucks sake.
 
Let me make this clear:

-The Greens aren't Hitler.

- I think Green's economic policies would be absolutely disastrous. I don't think we'd get gulags and death camps, but I think it would be half the country we are today if they formed government.

Everyone thinks I'm trying to equate the two, I'm not, and hence why I'm bowing out.

Bringing the nazis into this conversation at all is just incredible, i don't think it's even worth discussing. The greens are also never going to be a legitimate option for government making the discussion even more worthless.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom