Opinion AUSTRALIAN Politics: Adelaide Board Discussion Part 5

[ADL9798]

It’s clear that a handful of posters in here (thankfully not the majority) are now fully reliant on “the expert class” and have dispensed with any and all of their basic guiding moral principles.

I’ll be charitable and say: I’m pretty sure they had them at some point.

But now, they can’t think for themselves anymore and they don’t want you to either.

They can’t bring themselves to object to three-year olds being put on a “medical” path to chemical or physical castration. They need an “expert’s” approval first!

That’s where these people are at.

I’d like to say they’ve hit rock bottom, but I honestly think they’re capable of going even lower than this, if an “expert” tells them to.

Meanwhile, others are fully reliant on “the idiot class”, and still dispense with any and all of their basic guiding moral principles.

At least the first group would be right most of the time

 

[adelaidecrows]

You might want to check your maths - you're off by an order of magnitude. 365M / 100 = 3.65M (not 365K). That's roughly 1 clinic for a population the size of Melbourne.

lol, in my defence I am sick. lol

 

[Bearded Clam]

Meanwhile, others are fully reliant on “the idiot class”, and still dispense with any and all of their basic guiding moral principles.

At least the first group would be right most of the time

in the current “cooker” alternate universe full of “alternate facts” up is actually down.

I would not be in the least bit surprised to hear Slippery start trying to tell us all next that the earth is actually flat..
and then have him argue against every single drop of evidence we provide him refuting his claim, for the next 3 years..

 

[Mr_Moogle]

in the current “cooker” alternate universe full of “alternate facts” up is actually down.

I would not be in the least bit surprised to hear Slippery start trying to tell us all next that the earth is actually flat..
and then have him argue against every single drop of evidence we provide him refuting his claim, for the next 3 years..

Astronauts would definitely be in the expert class.

 

[Eagleboy2011]

Great comment.
"Unbelievable that there are places where an asinine charge like this could go to trial.
Common sense prevails."

Transgender vilification complaint against Binary and Kirralie Smith is dismissed

The NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal (NCAT) is not the appropriate court to deal with the allegations.

www.binary.org.au

 

[Mr_Moogle]

Seems like the sensible thing to do. On the other hand it will give more people more cash to spend so get ready for more rate rises I guess.

Yes the timing isn't ideal as tax cuts are inflationary.

Liz Truss proposed tax cuts when inflation was at its peak in the UK and the markets shat their pants, the pound crashed and she ended up with a reputation for being one of the dumbest, most incompetent PMs they've ever had. There was a competition to see whether she could outlast an ice berg lettuce. The lettuce won.

 

[OneGreatClub]

Makes sense. Snakes in the grass gonna stick together.

 

[Bearded Clam]

Makes sense. Snakes in the grass gonna stick together.

Oh…. Shite..

You didnt just quote “The Chaser” did you..

We’ll have Crow Till I Die go into another one of his meltdowns!..

 

[kirky]

150k isn’t much these days.

Yeh, my heart bleeds for them.

We all make choices in life, what type of house you want, what type of cars you drive, where you send your kids to school, what type of holidays you have etc.

If you have joint income family of say $200k (one on $150k and the other on $50k) perhaps, just perhaps you need to look in a mirror. They are more doing it tough.

 

[kirky]

Why would you be upset at those who are earning 150k but not wanting businesses to pay more tax? Or at least repaying the money they were given to get them through Covid

Your view is as old as your BMW

Well because people on $150k think they are hard done by, thats why.

The ALP isn’t going to ask business to payback money they have already received given it wasn’t in the original legislation. No-one has received the Stage 3 tax cuts and if anyone has already budgeted for it, then they are in more strife.

A bit personal and why upgrade when it is running fine and my next car will be electric.

 

[George Kramer]

Well because people on $150k think they are hard done by, thats why.

The ALP isn’t going to ask business to payback money they have already received given it wasn’t in the original legislation. No-one has received the Stage 3 tax cuts and if anyone has already budgeted for it, then they are in more strife.

A bit personal and why upgrade when it is running fine and my next car will be electric.

Old BMWs will end up costing you money and when it does it will be expensive, I’d be getting out of that whilst you’re still ahead

 

[George Kramer]

Makes sense. Snakes in the grass gonna stick together.

Speaking of snakes in the grass sticking together, shouldn’t you be slithering in the grass with your Port buddies?

 

[kirky]

Old BMWs will end up costing you money and when it does it will be expensive, I’d be getting out of that whilst you’re still ahead

Thank you for the advice.

Well now that I’m 60, can use public transport 24/7 and Ubers as required

 

[Slippery Pete]

I do have a problem with how this works in sport. I do have a problem with how it's managed, for example, in woman's only or supposed safe spaces for woman.

I don't know the answer

Yes you do, and you know you do

 

[Slippery Pete]

Surely the smart political move would be to keep the stage 3 tax cuts as promised, then use some of the surplus to increase the tax free threshold, which would help all taxpayers... including low & middle income earners.

They have received their updated figures on which areas vote ALP and have adjusted the cuts accordingly.

 

[Slippery Pete]

My heart bleeds for those on $150k+. Not.

Things childless boomers say

 

[Slippery Pete]

Meanwhile, others are fully reliant on “the idiot class”, and still dispense with any and all of their basic guiding moral principles.

At least the first group would be right most of the time

95% effective

 

[PeterSalt]

Yes you do, and you know you do

Nice way to cherry pick what you wanted from the post

 

[Slippery Pete]

Question, folks.

Did you ever think you could post something like this on a BF thread along with the comment: “Several people in this thread defend this practice.”

Well, today you can.

 

[El Doederino]

Yeh, my heart bleeds for them.

We all make choices in life, what type of house you want, what type of cars you drive, where you send your kids to school, what type of holidays you have etc.

If you have joint income family of say $200k (one on $150k and the other on $50k) perhaps, just perhaps you need to look in a mirror. They are more doing it tough.

Sure, we all make choices in life. Some of those choices put you in a position to earn $150k a year, which requires study, sacrifice and effort.

Some of those choices put you in a position to earn $45k a year, which requires you to know how to put on a pair of shoes (in most cases)

Why does someone who made the effort and sacrifice have to prop up the poor life choices of the second lot? I note today the numbers on moneys thrown around in pokies. Guess which socio-economic regions are top of the list?

 

[Slippery Pete]

in the current “cooker” alternate universe full of “alternate facts” up is actually down.

Thoughts on this one, Clam?

 

[Samcro24]

Yeh, my heart bleeds for them.

We all make choices in life, what type of house you want, what type of cars you drive, where you send your kids to school, what type of holidays you have etc.

If you have joint income family of say $200k (one on $150k and the other on $50k) perhaps, just perhaps you need to look in a mirror. They are more doing it tough.

I wasn't passing comment on how people should manage their money, if tax cuts are fair or unfair. Just simply that 150k is by no means considered a rock star salary in 2024.

Seeing as you did though, I'd point out that your career path is also a life choice. It's odd that you have a bee on your bonnet over someone doing a bit better than average. At the end of the day, no one wants to hand over any more of their hard earned to the government than they have to.

Anyway, I notice that the proposed amendments mostly benefit people in that range, so that will no doubt gladden your heart!

 

[relapse]

Sure, we all make choices in life. Some of those choices put you in a position to earn $150k a year, which requires study, sacrifice and effort.

Some of those choices put you in a position to earn $45k a year, which requires you to know how to put on a pair of shoes (in most cases)

Why does someone who made the effort and sacrifice have to prop up the poor life choices of the second lot? I note today the numbers on moneys thrown around in pokies. Guess which socio-economic regions are top of the list?

I definitely wouldn't class someone's career as life choice.

There's a whole load of factors in play. Maybe they're a parent or a carer that only has the ability to work part time, perhaps they studied as hard as they could at school, but did have the aptitude to get into Uni. I hardly think you can dumb the argument down to claiming that the differences in income are due to whether someone was lazy and not prepared to put in as much effort as those who are earning more.

Also too those earning higher are still subject to the same sliding tax scale as lower earners so if the tax free threshold is lifted and the 32.5% bracket is lowered to 30% those changes will still be lower their tax burden, but just not by as much as it was originally going to.

 

[El Doederino]

I definitely wouldn't class someone's career as life choice.

There's a whole load of factors in play. Maybe they're a parent or a carer that only has the ability to work part time, perhaps they studied as hard as they could at school, but did have the aptitude to get into Uni. I hardly think you can dumb the argument down to claiming that the differences in income are due to whether someone was lazy and not prepared to put in as much effort as those who are earning more.

Also too those earning higher are still subject to the same sliding tax scale as lower earners so if the tax free threshold is lifted and the 32.5% bracket is lowered to 30% those changes will still be lower their tax burden, but just not by as much as it was originally going to.

Of course it’s a life choice. It’s the very definition of a life choice. At some point in their life, they made choices that determined their career. Or didn’t make choices which determined their non career. No one becomes a doctor or plumber by accident. They don’t become a Centrelink abusing bum by accident either.

It’s not about book smarts either. Plenty of decent paying jobs out there for someone who wants to work for it.

 

[Bearded Clam]

Thoughts on this one, Clam?

Yawn..

I dont know how many times I have to say this before it gets through that thick skull of yours but again..

Its none of my business what a woman, particuarly one I’ve never even met and who could even live in another fxxkn country, choses to do with their body and a fetus they may be carrying..

But lets look at what she said..

“I think abortion should be unrestrictive. And I think when somebody finds out in pregnancy when -- how far along that they are, when someone finds out, they should be able to get an abortion if they want to. And for some people, that is full term. f I can’t get abortion training year, if I can’t perform abortions in my career, I will not stay in Wisconsin. And a lot of my colleagues who are on the same track agree."”

Not sure whats wrong with that..

She is simply giving her opinion.
And its nothing new.

And it comes back to this wild claim that you have been asked a million times to provide credible evidence for and that is..

Please provide credible figures on how many women go nearly full term and then out of the blue say… “actually I dont want to complete this pregnancy.. I want an abortion”..

This would rarely, if ever, happen and late/very late term abortions would be due to health risks/concerns to the mother/fetus.. and this womans opinion does nothing to provide any figures and nothing you have ever posted up here has either.

But thats the way it has always been.. you and your slimey little anti-choice brigade can never provide us with any figures.. they carry on like its a common occurance, because it suits their arguement, but can never provide ANY credible evidence of it when pressed to do so..

So once again slippery, stop getting all triggered over hysterical shit you come across on X or any of the other dodgy web or social media sites you frequent..

And provide us with the official figures.