Home » Posts tagged 'Australian Labor Party'
Tag Archives: Australian Labor Party
There is nothing that I love more than discovering that our friends from the left have been caught with their hands down the trousers of children, hang on let me clarify that, I detest the abuse in fact there is nothing more abhorrent to me but I certainly do love it when the naive maleficence of the left is revealed. I had great joy in the discovery of the way that the prototype of the Australian Greens endorsed paedophilia and a very spirited debate in the comment thread. Any how it seems that another element of the left has been caught out flirting with nonces, this time its elements of the left wing of the British Labor party:
But how did the Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE), whose affiliation to the NCCL has been exhaustively investigated by the Daily Mail, come to get a ticket to the party?
“It was an extraordinarily liberal period,” said Harry Fletcher, a criminal justice expert who at the time was the senior social worker for the National Council for One Parent Families. “The abortion laws had come in and capital punishment had been abolished.” People were pushing at every boundary – sexual, moral, legal. Fletcher recalled how the groups would spend hours debating whether the NCCL, which became the campaign group Liberty, should defend the right of someone with racist or homophobic views to express themselves. The discussion about defending the National Front’s right to march went on for months.
But by far the most divisive topic centred on the lowering of the age of consent. Many on the left thought that criminalising sexual behaviour between consenting teenagers was misguided and wanted it lowered to 14, a proposal endorsed by the NCCL’s executive committee. Others, like Fletcher, felt such a move would give a licence to older men to prey on young girls. Into this permissive climate crept the PIE, a group that actively promoted sex between children and adults and that was allowed not only to affiliate to the NCCL (in return for paying a £15 subscription) but enjoyed considerable recognition and support for its right to speak out on such issues.
The group inveigled itself so successfully into the NCCL that, as reported in the May 1978 edition of its magazine MagPIE, the council’s annual meeting passed a motion in support of PIE’s rights. Motion 39 stated: “This AGM reaffirms the right of free discussion and freedom to hold meetings for all organisations and individuals doing so within the law. Accordingly, whilst reaffirming the NCCL policy on the age of consent and the rights of children; particularly the need to protect those of prepubertal age, this AGM condemns the physical and other attacks on those who have discussed or attempted to discuss paedophilia, and reaffirms the NCCL’s condemnation of harassment and unlawful attacks on such persons.”
That motion was passed two years after Harman has claimed that the group no longer wielded influence in the NCCL. “They had been pushed to the margins before I actually went to NCCL and to allege that I was involved in collusion with paedophilia or apologising for paedophilia is quite wrong and is a smear,” she told the BBC last week. She said her husband had successfully fought to stop PIE having any influence in the NCCL in 1976 – two years before she joined as its legal officer.
Admittedly, any group could join the NCCL, which had more than 1,000 affiliate member organisations and the council’s motion probably owed more to defending the principle of free speech than defending PIE. And it would be wrong to portray PIE as a major force. Being small, comprising only a handful of activists and with a membership estimated to be between 300 and 1,000, PIE was not a powerful voice at a time when the main debates within the council were about sexual equality and race relations. But its views were so profoundly abhorrent to most of Britain that it is still hard to see why the council did not do more to disown PIE from the start.
What I find most darkly amusing about the report from the Guardian that I quote from is the headline “How paedophiles infiltrated the left and hijacked the fight for civil rights” there was clearly nothing covert at all about the creeps from PIE joining the NCCL they were entirely open about their beliefs and their desire to make their perversion more socially acceptable. there was therefore no infiltration, they asked to join and they were welcomed. That is what makes these minions of the left so culpable now. Eventually PIE were shunned by the NCCL but the shame of the left was that they were ever allowed to have the supposed respectability of membership in the first place.
Am I the only one who sees a pattern here? The prototype of the Greens endorses paedophilia, the British Labor party is complicit in endorsing PIE so it seems to me be in the DNA of the left to accept any expression of abnormal sexuality . Can it be that the far left (and maybe those further from the extreme as well) might just have some equally vile skeletons in their collective closets? OK that is enough Schardenfreude for this morning I realise taht the Australian left are of course just that little bit better than its European precursors but then again they don’t have much to say about followers of Islam who take the life of the Prophet as their template to “marry” pre-pubescent girls do they? Hmm maybe they are not that much better after all…
The brilliance of the government’s tactics in using those orange boats is being refined with each time that they have to be deployed:
The asylum seekers were transferred to the Customs vessel – perhaps MV Triton, though they do not know the name. As they were loaded on board, officers were ”pushing one by one with hands behind our back”, Ali says, showing on his friend how their arms were bent into a painful position.
Any objections or requests for food and water were shouted down, no discussion entered into.
”He says: ‘Don’t speak. Shut up. F— you’,” Ali says, the others nodding. One man, Khazim Mohammad, from Iraq, was lying sick on the boat: ”The [Australian officer] said, ‘You’re joking. Liar, liar’ … and grabbed him and pulled him.”
The Indonesian crew have told Central Java police that the wooden boat was then ”blown up”. They cannot say how this happened, but speculate on a bomb.
On board the large Customs ship, interaction between crew and asylum seekers was minimal. Once their details were taken and entered on a computer, the men were given wristbands with numbers on them.
For about three days, they say they were kept below decks.
”Inside the big ship, no sun, no air. We don’t know if it’s night or day. We can’t sleep; loud noises,” says Ali.
They were fed once – cheese sandwiches – and given a cup and told to fill it up in the bathroom to drink. ”For two days we went on hunger strike.”
The Indonesian crew was kept in a separate part of the ship.
On the Customs patrol boat, Ashrof says someone searched their belongings, and all valuables – money, phone, SIM card – were taken. He does not know who took them. No phones means that, unlike on other ships, there is no video footage of their experience.
The next move, on Monday morning, was to the orange lifeboat. It was the first time they had seen it and the transfer was done in sight of land.
”The soldiers brought [us to] the orange boat … and closed the door and said to the driver of this boat … ‘Go to that island’,” Ali says.
Again the Australians would not answer questions. The Indonesians – who spoke almost no English – said it was Christmas Island. Ali did not believe them.
But there was no chance of turning back to the real Christmas Island. The crew, though experienced sailors, had never seen anything like the orange blob they now captained, and there was not enough fuel to go anywhere except to that island on the horizon.
The island, it turned out, was Java.
The lifeboats are small and inside they feel smaller. They are dark and airless with only a couple of small, high windows. Having 28 on board would have felt crowded – not everyone could have a seat, though the nameplate says it is rated for 55 people.
”No air inside and no airconditioning for the orange boat. We are very sick. We have no oxygen. We are very sick,” says Ali. ”It’s like animals. Animals [cannot be treated] like this.”
There was water on board and muesli bars.
The journey lasted only about three hours before the boat ran aground in huge seas on a rugged bay near the village of Kebumen. They were 30 metres from the beach and the surf was high, but there was little choice but to jump.
”We jumped from the boat. We are at the beach, ocean high. We arrive and drift, arrive and drift. We think we will die. We think we will die. We can’t swim,” Ali says.
Finally on the beach the exhausted men were confronted with a steep, slippery slope to climb before a local farmer found them and called the police.
The crew is now in custody being questioned by police under people smuggling laws for taking people out of the country illegally and then, at the insistence of the Australian Customs and Border Protection, back into it. The asylum seekers are bound for detention, although they don’t know where.
Some how I doubt that this group of chancers will be trying again and while I expect that the usual suspects will whine about the less that luxurious conditions in the orange boats , or the confiscation of mobile phones from this cohort but there is no escaping the simple fact that this tactic works as a way to return people who try to enter this country illegally under the pretense that they are refugees . Labor believed all of the lies that they were told because they wanted the preferences of Greens voters and the Greens were the most useful idiots to the people smuggling trade but we , the Australian people, want orderly a controlled immigration program that chooses socially useful immigrants that will help make this country a better place instead of self selectors who bring with them a legacy of self serving deceit.
Who would have thunk it?
There has been something rather sad and desperate about the way that the luvvies were taking great comfort in the short lived downturn in the polling for the coalition but this poll reversal must come as a very bitter blow to those who have been clinging to the vain hope that the Labor party can come back into contention without the reformation that it so dearly needs if it is ever to be credible enough to return to office.
I also think that their parliamentary tactics are backfiring badly. Simply put they are being obstructionist to the government legislative agenda in a rather shallow attempt to demonstrate that they still have parliamentary teeth. A sensible party would have waved through the repeal of the Carbon and Mining taxes but in an expression of political machismo Electricity Bill Shorten has just succeeded in shooting himself and keeping the very reasons that his party was thrown out front and centre in the minds of the voters.
The utter brilliance of the coalition’s proposed Royal commission into the Unions can not be underestimated every new revelation of thuggery or other nastiness will stain the reputation of the party that is the creature of the union movement and that means that things can only get worse for the ALP under the current leadership and the truly sad thing is that none of the alternatives are likely to do much better. Shorten had a chance to draw a line under the follies of the last government and move on to rebuilding the party’s fortunes but he chose (or was instructed by his union masters) to carry on in the usual Labor style. Frankly If he is still leader by Christmas I will be very surprised indeed.
We are beginning to see the strength of the government’s resolve to end the flow of illegal immigrants coming via Indonesia and I for one can’t help but applaud the effectiveness of the strategy. Naturally the Indonesian government are not happy but frankly they are just going to have to cop it sweet because quite laudably the Abbott Government are not going to be bullied the way that Labor was bullied and just tug our forelocks as we do as they wish.
Australia is under no obligation to accept undocumented economic migrants as these men so clearly are, What amazes me is that these men are all Bangladeshis, who in heavens name are they claiming to be oppressed by? This has to be a case of well done to the Royal Australian Navy, well done to the minister Scott Morrison, and well done to the Abbott government for keeping their promise to turn back the boats when it is safe to do so. Its interesting to read the comments attached to may source piece in the Fairfax press where they seem to me to be running very strongly in support of the government actions. The “open borders” shrills are increasingly pissing into the wind on this issue and the Australian people are quite rightly less than impressed by their blathering anymore.
As for Indonesia well what can they do? Whine and complain? For too long they have tried to shirk the responsibility that they have for the foreign nationals that they allow into their country in transit to illegal entry into our territory and they scream blue murder when we quite rightly jail their nationals for braking our laws. I think that they may well be tightening the visa-less entry for their fellow Muslim Bangladeshis in the near future just as they have for Iranians. What it boils down to is respect, Indonesia has for years failed to respect our right to control our borders and allowed all and sundry to transit their territory to facilitate the people smuggling trade, now they can’t get away with it.
As I suggested the other day the government has easily found an adequate workaround to overcome the stunt pulled by the Greens and the ALP in moving to disallow TPVs in the senate:
The cap ordered yesterday has been set at the current number already issued this year – 1650 – meaning not a single new permanent residency visa will be granted until at least July when the cap will be reset.
This is also when the new Senate will be sworn in, stripping Labor and the Greens of their power to block legislation.
Mr Morrison has also used provisions under section 46 of the Migration Act – which apply to ministerial discretion to allow applications to be made by asylum seekers offshore – and has placed a self-imposed ban on allowing applications to be made for permanent protection visas.
All other humanitarian visa programs remain in place, such as those which apply for asylum seekers in UN-administered refugee camps overseas.
Mr Morrison said the effect of the Greens-led roadblock in the Senate – supported by Labor – would be asylum seekers in Australia would be denied any access to work rights or welfare payments other than what is allowed under the bridging visa program.
He said the move was necessary to ensure people smugglers did not use the Labor-Greens Senate alliance to “re-open the door to asylum seekers” as propaganda to encourage more people to get on boats.
He said the freeze on permanent protection visas would remain until the Senate changed its mind.
So all that the stunt will do is provide a small hiatus in the issuing of TPVs and in the mean time those who would qualify for them will suffer more. Good one Mr Shorten. of course this issue clearly begs the question “just how out of date is the UN convention?” and for those of us who have been suggesting for some time that the answer is a resounding “completely!”. Of course the minions of the left claim that the UN convention is wonderful and overflowing with fine principles about “protecting” vulnerable people and I will admit that the original intention was precisely that. However the passage of sixty odd years finds that the world is a vastly different place, in many ways its two worlds, there is the well governed old world countries that have both stability and relative prosperity and then there is the ill governed rabble that makes up the majority of the planet’s nation states. Sadly many of that rabble will never get their act together enough to provide the opportunities for their citizens that we can take for granted. Minions of the far left take the point of view that materially successful nations are required to feel guilty about those who live in dysfunctional societies and to subsequently supply them with either money or allow them to immigrate so that they can share the spoils of our good governance and our ordered society, the problem with this seemingly humane approach is just where to draw the line about just how generous we should be, Its clear to me that for the far left there should be no line at all which will lead to our nation being overwhelmed.
The history of immigration has largely been a success because the numbers have generally been held at the level that can easily be absorbed into our society the problem with the open borders left is that they are just too myopic to see the bigger picture and the possible consequences of the things that they advocate. That is fine when you are dealing with just one person but when that individual is but one of many thousands then we have a big problem.
Going out on a limb here I would suggest that if the Abbott government were to consider pulling out of the UN convention it would be done by providing a legislative instrument setting out the way that asylum-seekers would be treated. An instrument that enshrines in law that we offer temporary protection and that permanent residency would forever be out of the question. Likewise I would expect that those applicants who arrive without any form of documentation would generally be considered suspect. Now if this sort legal basis was enshrined in our law I tend to think that we would not be the only nation to get off the UN convention bandwagon. because we are certainly not the most put upon nation that has to deal with the mass migration from the third world.
In mediaeval Japan anyone who set foot on the shores of the land was subject to immediate beheading. We certainly do not want to get to that extreme but the more that western nations have a problem with an uncontrollable influx of the world’s poor the more brutal the methods to control the flow will surely become. This country , being an island, is better placed than either Europe or the US to have very effective border controls and it is the duty of our federal government to make-sure that those who come here are people that we choose, people who add to the whole rather than create a social problem but most importantly who can become Australians first and foremost rather than just living here.
- Visa decision will leave asylum seekers worse off, Scott Morrison says (oddonion.com)
- Immigration Minister freezes refugee visas (dailytelegraph.com.au)
- The Depths of Indecency (speakupforthose.wordpress.com)
- Morrison puts a cap on protection visas (news.theage.com.au)
- Abbott castigates Labor on TPVs (news.smh.com.au)
- Morrison puts permanent visas on hold (skynews.com.au)
- Senate quashes temporary visas (news.com.au)
- Senate quashes temporary visas (skynews.com.au)
- Morrison visa halt ‘brutal’: Labor, Greens (news.smh.com.au)
Well if there is an upside to the Indonesian hissy-fit of Labor authorising phone tapping its this instruction to the Australian navy to stay out of Indonesia’s search and rescue zone. Frankly even when we have kissed and made up with SBY I think that the current restriction on our navy’s operations should continue for several very sound reasons.
Firstly it will be a mighty powerful disincentive to people who have may be seduced by the people smugglers to buy one of their poisoned tickets because as it stands the so called asylum seekers have been relying on our Navy being a virtual taxi service.
Secondly for a nation of islands it seems ridiculous that Indonesia can not provide adequate rescue capabilities in its own waters and its just not our job to provide an eternal back up service to take up their slack.
Thirdly we keep being told that the constant rescue operations are wearing out both our personnel and our hardware at a prodigious rate keeping our assets out of Indonesian waters will allow proper maintenance to be done and personnel to recharge their batteries.
Fourthly it will help the budget bottom line.
Now of course I expect the usual suspects to scream blue murder if a boat full of asylum seekers founders but in that unhappy event it will be the fault of Indonesia if any lives are lost but some how I don’t think it will come to that as long as the water-borne mendicants get the message that our taxi service is no longer an option.
- Indonesia spy row: talks have stalled, say Indonesians (theage.com.au)
- Indonesia refuses to take asylum seekers (skynews.com.au)
- Mid-ocean boat stand-off (smh.com.au)
- Australian Navy show off sub rescue capability Australian Navy show off sub rescue capability Read more posts and click here (h16613.com)
- PM says Indonesia at fault (theage.com.au)
As one of those who voted for the Abbott Government I feel duty bound to address the points that you have made in your open letter because I do believe that you are very much mistaken in your missive:
I’m seriously unhappy with you. You might think that you understand why this is the case. You might think that I’m disappointed because the Labor Party is no longer in power, and it would be a lie for me to say this doesn’t contribute to my dissatisfaction. But what’s more important, and what’s driven me to write this letter to you all, is something far larger than the people who get elected. My issue is with you. You personally, and your greed and your selfishness, and your decision to put a fractional increase in your electricity bill ahead of your responsibility to provide a sustainable future for my planet. The planet I live on. The planet I am hoping will provide my children and grandchildren with a place to live. Yes, I’m hoping you haven’t contributed to the death of my offspring. This is how seriously outraged by you I am. This is personal.
It was neither greed no selfishness that motivated me to vote for the Abbott government, it was a profound disappointment with the six years of labor government, I was disappointed when its two leading lights Rudd and Gillard dissipated their electoral capital with their eternal self serving power struggle> I was also horribly disappointed by the fact that Labor never seemed to be able to manage even any of their sometimes laudable ideas properly into fruition> But when it comes to the Climate change policy they pursued I was angry at both the needless impost upon the cost of living and the clear futility of their grand plan. If the AGW theory is correct nothing that Labor did and that we are all collectively paying for is going to make a scrap of difference to the future of the planet.
So you probably noticed, or more likely didn’t unless Kyle Sandilands/Stefanovic mentioned it, that approximately 60,000 Australians turned out on Sunday to rally for action to combat climate change. You know, climate change, that thing that you deny, discount, laugh at, and generally ignore every time you have the opportunity. And yes, if you’re an Abbott voter, I do believe it’s fair to put you in this bucket. If you even begin to tell me you want action to reduce the catastrophic effects of climate change and that you also voted for the man who vowed to ‘axe the tax’, the very mechanism that was reducing Australian emissions and contributing to a world-wide acceptance of the need to do something about climate change, I will tell you you’re a moron. A dangerous moron. And this leads me to my reason for writing you this letter. I want you to know that I’m not just pissed off with you. I’m furious* (*not a strong enough word). And I’m not pandering to you anymore. This is a call for those who share my anger not to pander to you either.
I was well aware of the rallies you mention Victoria, but I think that you need to put the numbers that you are so proud of into perspective. We have more than twenty million people living in this country which means that as a proportion of our national population the turnout was truly miniscule. You may or may not be aware of this but the claims of a pending climate apocalypse have been rather oversold and like the boy who cried wolf its most vehement proponents are less than credible anymore. Like you I care very much about the fate of the planet that we share and will leave to our offspring and I’m even angry too. But I’m angry that so much effort and treasure has been wasted on the futility of mitigation rather than making us so much more flexible in our thinking and so much more capable of adapting to any changes that actually occur to the climate.
I know what you’re thinking. You’re thinking that climate change rally-ers have been out in the streets before, with similar rallies calling for similar action to do something about climate change. Yes, we’ve been out before. But I think it’s time things changed. I think it’s time to talk about what’s happened in Australia. I think it’s time to call you all out for what you have done. Australia had action and emissions were reducing. But now Abbott is undoing it, because you supported him to do this. Because you elected Abbott, you have brought about an outcome which equates to you personally choosing a few dollars in your pocket over the safety of the planet. You don’t seem to care about your taxpayer dollars being wasted on Abbott’s ludicrous tree-planting exercise, Direct Action. Nor do you care that every credible scientist – and most economists – know that this policy will not work. This waste of money scheme is going to end up costing you far more personally, through your tax dollars, than the Carbon Price would ever have cost you. And no one has yet been able to explain to me in words that make sense how you processed this decision into a rational thought.
Yes I understand that its the same people who turn up to such events and I even share some of your cynicism about Tony Abbott’s Direct Action plan but it at least has a chance to do some good for our environment even if the AGW theory is a load of old cobblers. That said there is no chance at all that the Labor scheme will make a scrap of difference to either the climate or to the environment in general. I just can’t understand why you cling so desperately to such a futile scheme that will enrich spivs and shysters.
I actually think it’s pointless that we, those who want action, rally quietly in huge numbers and then go back to our day jobs on Monday and tell our work colleagues that we were there at the rally and how it’s going to help. We’re talking to work colleagues who, in their majority, have used their democratic vote to empower a man who everyone with half-a-brain knows is a climate change denier, for the personally convenient purpose of maintaining his friendship/donor relationship with the likes of Gina Rinehart.
The thing is Victoria you have to want more than just “action”, you have to want “effective action” and there was no way under heaven that the Labor scheme could have ever given you that. All it could have ever been was an act of climate piety, an empty indulgence that would make an almost immeasurably small change to the climate even if the science is right and the Jury is out on that point.
But that’s the thing about Tony Abbott. You people, the ones who voted for him, invented him. Like a disturbingly incoherent Frankenstein thug, you needed someone to tell you that climate change wasn’t a problem. You needed someone to maintain your comfortable status quo, to tell you that your pastimes of shopping and buying credits on your Candy Crush iPhone game were perfectly justifiable ways to spend your spare time and money. You needed this man to give you a reason to do nothing, and to campaign against action when someone tried to do something about the biggest problem our society has ever, and will ever, encounter, to make you feel like you’re not doing something wrong by doing nothing. But that’s the thing. You’re not just doing nothing. You’ve given Tony Abbott a mandate to undo the only action we had. The action we, the responsible Australians, rallied for. You’re the handbrake, you’re the ‘control z’ that could destroy the lives of my future offspring. You don’t care that people are already dying in countries you’ve heard of but never visited, as long as your electricity bill isn’t more than it was last month, which it probably isn’t because you spent half the month in Bali drinking 50c beers and buying $1 copies of Breaking Bad Season 2 so your plasma TV wasn’t on for 18 hours a day. And this is the point I want to make.
The simple truth is Victoria that there are a lot of people who voted for the Abbott government who did so out of entirely altruistic reasons, we just want the government to soundly administer its programs and departments. We want our government to put the interests of Australians ahead of the making futile acts of climate piety. Nor are we all crazy slaves to consumerism many of us tread just as lightly on the planet as you yourself do. Some of us would never even consider taking the sort of overseas holidays you and so many of the participants and your climate rallies have on your CVs.
Climate change is not a debate. You have no right to an opinion on climate change. You’re not a climate scientist, I can guarantee it. Climate change is happening. It’s killing people now. Whether you like it or not in your comfortable little greed fest, we’re having more regular and more severe storms, droughts, floods and fires across the planet because of climate change, right now. People like me don’t go to rallies because we have nothing better to do on a weekend. And personally, I’m sick of the attitude that we, as a community of people who want to do something, should pander to people like you who refuse to listen, who refuse to understand what scientists are saying (note I say ‘understand’ and not ‘believe’ because this is not a fairy in the garden that you can choose to believe in or not). This is real. And it’s affecting those who want to do something about it just as much as it’s affecting you. But since you voted for Abbott, the coal companies are back in charge. Now we have a government who doesn’t even bother to attend the Warsaw climate conference, where the world is discussing plans to do something. Now we have an environment minister referencing Wikipedia to justify his denial.
This is where you go oh so wrong Victoria, everything in science is open to debate, without that its just not science, it is then nothing but a sort of religious dogma and it does otherwise intelligent people no good service to so misunderstand the principles of science and the scientific method. likewise it does you no good to inappropriately insist that only the priests (climate scientists) of your climate faith have any right to an opinion on the changes that you wish to impose upon our society and the whole world. We live in a democracy Victoria and the people have spoken, you seem to be implicitly arguing for some sort of totalitarian dictatorship to “save the planet” would you really want to live in such a society? To have every aspect of your life controlled for the sake of the planet?
So this is my statement: I’m not pandering to you anymore. I’m not pretending it’s a good use of my time to try to convince you of the completely and utterly proven fact of climate change. Polite diplomacy has not got us anywhere. You need to know loud and clear that you’re the problem. And you need to take responsibility for what you and your selfish lifestyle, and your prioritising of dollars on your electricity bill have done to the continuation of the planet we all live on, the same place where we all hope to see our children live without being destroyed by your selfishness and greed.
The planet will endure well enough without the Carbon tax et al, in fact the Australian economy and environment may well do better without out its odious burden. But beyond that I share your wish for us all to tread lightly on the planet. Like you I eschew the consumer treadmill In fact I am personally a great practitioner of the the mend and make do school of thought so all of my furniture and many appliances are on their second lives. The thing is such frugality is sadly less common from people of all political percussions, and it should be an underlying imperative for all of us.
Your legacy is a country which convinced other wavering, weak societies that there was no point taking action, because it would just be un-done if they did. You will be remembered, and studied by future generations as the people who had the chance to do something, but were too selfish, mean, greedy and self-centered to sacrifice just a small amount for the benefit of the future. I don’t give a shit if this statement upsets you. You deserve to feel upset. You deserve to feel like total cowards. You needed to think of people in the future, and all you could think of was an insignificant sacrifice on your electricity bill which might affect how much, ever so slightly, you can afford to spend on your lifestyle today. You could have just made the easy and smart decision to cut down on your electricity usage, which was really the point of the Carbon Price in the first place. But this was an inconvenience to you. Your mindset is a complete outrage. You’ve democratically elected the most dangerous person you could possibly have voted for at a tipping point in the future of humanity, and you argue in favor of this disastrous decision with all your energy whenever you can. This is beyond wrong. Your behaviour is reprehensible and it’s time we told you so.
Where your argument falls down is in your misplaced faith in the ability of humanity as a whole to consistently work together for a single purpose not just for a sort time but forever. Surely with your interest in politics and history you must realise that such cooperation is just totally at odds with the totality of human existence? We are by a very nature a quarrelsome creature who just can not play together well for long enough to make any Global scheme work. So you are just going to have to face the reality that the plan can n0t be made to work. Which means we have no choice but to adapt if and when the climate changes. There is just no point in doing anything else.
Next time you’re in the tea room at work equating climate change to the Y2K bug, I think someone should tell you you’re a blight on our future. Next time you spout your bullshit about the science not being settled on my Twitter stream, or you write loony comments on my blog to justify why you don’t want to do anything about climate change, I’m not going to engage in a debate with you as this just gives you the idea you’ve got some credibility in the argument. You have no credibility. I’m going to tell you you’re selfish and greedy. And I’m going to bring up this conversation with you rather than letting you ignore it. I’m calling on others who are as concerned as I am about the path this country has chosen not to pander to you anymore either. This is not a debate. This is you choosing to play Russian roulette with the lives of my unborn children. It’s not time for me to try to convince you to do the right thing because you’ve already had the chance to do the right thing and you spectacularly didn’t do it. Those who are worried about climate change aren’t going to get anywhere by being nice to you people. It’s time to get angry. It’s time to explain to you the gigantic error you have made. You voted for Tony Abbott. Now you have to live with what that means. It’s time to pop your comfortable little bubble. You’ve done the wrong thing.
Well I actually have children Victoria and I can tell you one thing and that is children certainly focus your attention on the future so I am doing my best to make sure that they are practical resourceful people who can make the most of what life throws at them. But I am also trying very hard to protect them form the sort of millenarian thinking that has clearly affected you on the issue of climate change. Our individual lives are oh so short and we are all rather insignificant. so all that I can do to close is suggest that when it comes to the climate we need to heed the wisdom serenity prayer even if you are, like me, an unbeliever:
God grant me the serenity
to accept the things I cannot change,
Courage to change the things I can,
And wisdom to know the difference
We both as individuals will not be able to change the climate and it is nothing but a vain conceit to think otherwise so the only way for you to get past the pain and anguish you feel at present is to gain the wisdom about that which you can and can not change
There is a a hoary old chest nut that is dragged out on a regular basis from our domestic retailers . Its the exemption for online purchases of less than $1000 dollars from the GST. The retailers dream that lowering that threshold will make an improvement in their ability to compete.
I can’t see Abbott going anywhere near this to be honest, firstly the GST is workable only because retailers are forced to act as tax collectors for the government but the Australian government does not have the jurisdiction to force overseas suppliers to do the same for them. It just can’t happen. So how would such a tax be collected? from the shippers or via Customs? The reason for the $1000 threshold is to make the administrative burden of collecting the tax commensurate with the revenue gathered. Lowering the threshold would not lower the burden per transaction so it could very easily mean that the cost to collect the tax could exceed the revenue collected which is the Labor way of doing things (see the mining tax as an example) its unworkable and the government knows this.
The simple fact is that retailing is moving more and more online simply because we the consumers like to shop that way and personally I would be more than happy to buy from Australian based online traders and I do so when ever I can because domestic online stores have one very big advantage over those based overseas and that is reduced shipping times. In my experience any item purchased from China will take about a month to arrive items shipped from within Australia can be on your doorstep within days if not the next day. In this age of instant gratification that short of difference in shipping times is a deal maker/breaker for most people.
So I predict that this whine about GST on online sales will amount to nothing just as similar whining in the past has done. If domestic retailers want to retain their market share then they are going to have to try to play to their strengths more, namely work on their service, their ability to instantly supply the goods to a customer and being available to attend to any warranty claim that may arise finally they have to realise that the price for their products is a big determining factor in buying decisions and they can no longer just hope that we consumers don’t notice that the product they sell can be bought cheaper elsewhere.
- No change to OS internet sale GST – yet (news.theage.com.au)
- Net shopping tax talks (stuff.co.nz)
- McClay to consult on GST for online shopping (stuff.co.nz)
- Canberra to maintain current GST threshold for online purchases (zdnet.com)