Roast Collingwood Supporters in love with Pauline Hanson thread

[muzzy2]

I'm alright. All my debts have been cleared, sold my car for $7500.

Thanks for keeping in touch guys.

Well done mate. A wise decision, and even though it feels like a loss now, you will find yourself SO much better off in the long run.

Pick your fights with Centrelink. I know your Psych may be busy etc, but she will have dealt with them before and understand that she needs to provide forms etc at short notice. FWIW I am proud of you for being in the headspace you are now, knowing where you came from when you were having all your previous work/home problems.

It's a long road, but we, the BF magpies community, are here for you, and for each other as well, as demonstrated again by our little Adelaide Maggie...



Best news yet is that footy starts this week...

Side by side...

Go Pies.

 

[PicaBoo]

Nah. They probably will though, I bet they'll go as far as to ask for my penis size. Anything to kick me off the DSP.
(Not sure where that joke was going, just pull the zip down and let it fly... Uhhh forget I said anything)

Oh who wouldn't love chatting with me? I'm a charming young gentleman and I'm totally not busy trying to find a job or anything so centrelink thinks they can just pull me in there whenever.
(This was sarcasm)

Centerlink are in my bad books too. My sons Healthcare card was about to expire last XMas so they sent us a reminder and a form for a new one. With all the paper again to prove he is Diabetic. And instead of sending a new one, they sent us a replacement that had expired by that the time we got it. Luckily we had stocked up on medication.
And if it is of any consolation if you think Centerlink is not cooperative, be glad you don't have to deal with the ATO. Bloodhounds are not even there to help people but extort as much as they can and are literally above the law. You can murder someone and still have more legal rights.

 

[jaxter600]

Hi Temploar - sounds like a fun ride at the moment. Glad you had an asset to sell but sorry you had to sell your car. When you get back on your feet that can be replaced though. If centrelink continue stressing you this service may be useful. http://www.ssrv.org.au/services/
Copy and paste the link (sorry hyperlink didn't work)!

You could also contact a centrelink social worker 132 850 (yes i know what most people think about them) they have been really useful for some people and can often fix things that generalist workers can't.

As for the info they want from your Psch mail it to them with a note expaining their urgency or suggest centrelink do so......

 

[Apex36]

True, but i'm dealing in particular with this 'case manager' who wants to see the documents.
I'm not sure if any other worker would understand the issue? Nor am I prepared to travel all the way to Broadmeadows from Collingwood just for a chance at seeing someone decent. (because it's hard enough to get an appt at Centrelink as it is, and they're directing all my new appts here) .

If you genuinely feel like you're being pushed around by your case manager, you could always ask to speak to his supervisor or manager. I can't say I've had to deal with Centrelink in that capacity before, but I'm fairly certain there would be guidelines that case managers need to follow under your kind of circumstances, and harassing your grandparents surely can't be one of them!

 

[Bard]

Centrelink are the worst. Can't stand their shit sometimes, but it has a knack for turning out to be okay. They've all been through this crap before and know what to expect, and you can bet that you won't have been the worst case scenario they've ever encountered.

 

[TheGreatGrundy]

Fill in all their forms and attend all their appointments. It won't guarantee success ( I know that from personal recent experience), but it gives you a safety net. If you have done the right thing, then you will be back payed. If you haven't lodged a form or you miss an appointment, you slash a hole through your net. Give yourself the best chance of winning.

 

[76woodenspooners]

Except there's more shit going on with centrelink now, they want signed documents from my psych to prove i am seeing her as it's part of my 'plan' with them so i can remain on DSP. I told the idiot that i saw 2 weeks ago that i'd get the documents in 3 weeks when I see her, but he insisted that he had them by friday. No matter how much I told him that she only works on tuesdays, and that shes too busy to call, he kept pestering me. Now he's called up my grandparents 4 times asking for me, and it looks like I will be cut off DSP until I provide these documents.

I hate these campaigners, I've been at Centrelink 3 times in the last 3 weeks now. The broadmeadows office, for all the bad rep Broadmeadows gets, was an AMAZING Centrelink office. The people there were really genuine, understood my issues, and never gave me any headaches.

This new office for where I am living right now.... Is really stressing me out! I can't believe they are allowed to push someone around who has confirmed Clinical Depression, Anxiety, Aspergers, and ADHD. And more importantly, he is putting pressure on my grandparents to get a hold of me. MY GRANDPARENTS HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS. LEAVE THEM OUT OF THIS!!!! Ugh.

You could try contacting your local Federal Member. They can go into bat for you with Federal Government agencies like Centrelink.

Given you live in Collingwood, that would put you in the electorate of 'Melbourne'. You're in luck, the member for Melbourne is Adam Bandt (Greens) - as good as you can probably get for a member with a social conscience.

If you go to the link here it'll give you his contact details (phone number and office location) together with a list of things like this that his office can help you with.

It'll be unlikely you'll be dealing with him directly, somebody from his office will look after you.

BTW, you have updated the electoral roll with your new address? ... www.aec.gov.au can help you out with that if you need it

 

[TradeDraft]

You could try contacting your local Federal Member. They can go into bat for you with Federal Government agencies like Centrelink.

Given you live in Collingwood, that would put you in the electorate of 'Melbourne'. You're in luck, the member for Melbourne is Adam Bandt (Greens) - as good as you can probably get for a member with a social conscience.

If you go to the link here it'll give you his contact details (phone number and office location) together with a list of things like this that his office can help you with.

It'll be unlikely you'll be dealing with him directly, somebody from his office will look after you.

BTW, you have updated the electoral roll with your new address? ... www.aec.gov.au can help you out with that if you need it

I find it Interning quite a Few People think that we all be Better with Greens in Power

 

[76woodenspooners]

I find it Interning quite a Few People think that we all be Better with Greens in Power

LOL!

***Nobody*** thinks we'd be better with the Greens in power.

They are a party of protest and couldn't govern themselves out of a recycled wet paper bag.

But the Greens do serve a purpose and they do have their advantages.

If I needed my local member to go into bat for me against a government agency, my best chance is if they were a Greens member.

 

[TradeDraft]

LOL!

***Nobody*** thinks we'd be better with the Greens in power.

They are a party of protest and couldn't govern themselves out of a recycled wet paper bag.

But the Greens do serve a purpose and they do have their advantages.

If I needed my local member to go into bat for me against a government agency, my best chance is if they were a Greens member.

So the Greens is good as what dad tells me "Keep's the Pricks Honest"?

True they are good for standing up against the Government when something is Obvious of Being Wrong

 

[76woodenspooners]

So the Greens is good as what dad tells me "Keep's the Pricks Honest"?

Your dad sounds like he was once a Don Chipp supporter and Australian Democrats voter? Don Chipp was a decent bloke.

The Democrates are now pretty much defunct and the Greens have taken over their role.

What your Dad is talking about there is the Greens in the upper house having some influence over the balance of power. IMHO they have a role to play there and do a reasonable job of that.

But you wouldn't want them in the lower house running the country.

True they are good for standing up against the Government when something is Obvious of Being Wrong

On some issues - yes.

 

[TradeDraft]

Your dad sounds like he was once a Don Chipp supporter and Australian Democrats voter? Don Chipp was a decent bloke.

My Dad is Very Much a Labor Man

 

[TheGreatGrundy]

TD the Greens are like a mosquito stinging an elephant. There might be slight irritation but a decent swat of the trunk will quickly remind the mossy of it relatively more slippery grip on mortality.

 

[Bard]

Your dad sounds like he was once a Don Chipp supporter and Australian Democrats voter? Don Chipp was a decent bloke.

The Democrates are now pretty much defunct and the Greens have taken over their role.

What your Dad is talking about there is the Greens in the upper house having some influence over the balance of power. IMHO they have a role to play there and do a reasonable job of that.

But you wouldn't want them in the lower house running the country.



On some issues - yes.

Could say that about all the parties!

 

[TradeDraft]

Could say that about all the parties!

Espically at the Moment

 

[Bard]

LOL!

***Nobody*** thinks we'd be better with the Greens in power.

They are a party of protest and couldn't govern themselves out of a recycled wet paper bag.

But the Greens do serve a purpose and they do have their advantages.

If I needed my local member to go into bat for me against a government agency, my best chance is if they were a Greens member.

It'll be interesting when the Greens click and realise they're a legitimate chance for winning an election one day if they just tinker with their mentality surrounding things (one of the main deterrents I have with voting for them is due to that 'party of protest' you speak of). Could possibly happen within a relatively short amount of time too, maybe 3 or 4 elections from this one (as in they change their mentality, not necessarily win).

 

[76woodenspooners]

It'll be interesting when the Greens click and realise they're a legitimate chance for winning an election one day if they just tinker with their mentality surrounding things (one of the main deterrents I have with voting for them is due to that 'party of protest' you speak of). Could possibly happen within a relatively short amount of time too, maybe 3 or 4 elections from this one (as in they change their mentality, not necessarily win).

I do not believe it will ***ever*** happen. Maybe there is one caveat which I'll address at the end.

There are 3 reasons IMHO why it will never happen.

Reason 1:

There are 76 seats in the Australian senate. Presently 10 of those 76 are greens. The Greens may get more over time if trends continue, but that makes no difference. The Greens could have all 76 seats, but they still won't be running the country, because running the country effectively happens in the House of Representatives (lower house). The majority of the lower house runs the country.

In the lower house there are 150 seats in total. How many of those are Green? One. That's Adam Bandt, the member for Melbourne (the electorate that Collingwood is in - and by 'Collingwood' I mean the footy club at the Holden Centre, the suburb, Victoria Park, everything)

So the Greens are 75 seats away from forming a majority government needed to run the country.

We effectively have two major parties in the country - Labour and The Coalition. The Coalition have 90 seats and Labour have 55 seats.

If the Greens were to take power, not only would they need another 75 seats, but the major parties would need to lose that number.

The major parties simply won't let that happen. How can they do that? When a minor party starts to become big, then the major parties simply adopt that minor party's policies and then make that minor party irrelevant.

One classic example of that was the Fish 'n Chip shop owner from Ipswich who put her hand up and said that she believed in a White Australia policy. What gave Pauline Hanson power and a voice was that a hell of a lot of people agreed with her and voted for her.

What happened next? The coalition simply absorbed some of of her thinking, adapted those kind of policies, and made One Nation irrelevant. Hence the coalition's border protection policy.

And so it would it would be with the Greens too. When the greens came to being, none of the major parties had an environment policy. They now do.

Add to this that Australian parliamentary terms are only 3 years (ridiculously short IMHO), and the the major parties have time to adapt.

The parliament are generally made up of career politicians. Sure, they do have foundation principles, but essentially their job is to keep their job. They will do whatever is required to get themselves voted. When they come up with a budget, or a policy, it's generally for no other compelling reason simply wanting to get elected. I'm sure Saintly Viewed will back me up here, because he's a horse man - always back a horse named "self interest" because you'll know that it's the only horse that is really trying (with apologies to Jack Lang)

In summary, there are too many vested interests who have the power and the will to prevent the Greens from running the county.


Reason 2:

I don't reckon the Greens have any interest whatsoever of running the country. Running a country is hard. Tough decisions need to be made. You need to not just have policies, but you need to execute them. Could you imagine the Greens executing a defence policy? A foreign policy? A budget? The Greens don't want that, they just want to have the care with no responsibility (and I say that as somebody who is governed by the Greens at the state level, and has been governed by the Greens for long periods of time at the local level).

In summary, the Greens don't want to run the country.


Reason 3:

There are far far more progressive societies than Australia who will have the Greens running them before Australia does - and yet it's never happened. Germany have been governed by a coalition that has included the Greens (The Greens were a very minor party in the coalition, kind of analogous to the Nationals in our current government) and Germany are way ahead of us in progressive politics.

In summary, hell would need to freeze over first before the Greens run the county.


And the caveat?

If the Greens could get a charismatic anti-establishment leader who could capture the imagination of a nation. Kinda like what Donald Trump is doing in the US at the moment with the Republican Party nomination. But IMHO if Trump wins the nomination he's got practically zero chance of winning the presidency - it would take a significant event (on the scale of 911) for that to happen.

I can't think of anybody in this country who would have that kind of national profile. This is a country who had Australans of the year like Adam Goodes and Rosy Batty. All worthy, but hardly people who could launch a wide reaching government policy.

 

[Bard]

I do not believe it will ***ever*** happen. Maybe there is one caveat which I'll address at the end.

There are 3 reasons IMHO why it will never happen.

Reason 1:

There are 76 seats in the Australian senate. Presently 10 of those 76 are greens. The Greens may get more over time if trends continue, but that makes no difference. The Greens could have all 76 seats, but they still won't be running the country, because running the country effectively happens in the House of Representatives (lower house). The majority of the lower house runs the country.

In the lower house there are 150 seats in total. How many of those are Green? One. That's Adam Bandt, the member for Melbourne (the electorate that Collingwood is in - and by 'Collingwood' I mean the footy club at the Holden Centre, the suburb, Victoria Park, everything)

So the Greens are 75 seats away from forming a majority government needed to run the country.

We effectively have two major parties in the country - Labour and The Coalition. The Coalition have 90 seats and Labour have 55 seats.

If the Greens were to take power, not only would they need another 75 seats, but the major parties would need to lose that number.

The major parties simply won't let that happen. How can they do that? When a minor party starts to become big, then the major parties simply adopt that minor party's policies and then make that minor party irrelevant.

One classic example of that was the Fish 'n Chip shop owner from Ipswich who put her hand and said that she thinks Australia should be white Anglo Saxon and we should keep the foreigners out. What gave Pauline Hanson power and a voice was that a hell of a lot of people agreed with her and voted for her.

What happened next? The coalition simply absorbed some of of her thinking, adapted those kind of policies, and made One Nation irrelevant.

And so it would it would be with the Greens too. When the greens came to being, none of the major parties had an environment policy. They now do.

Add to this that Australian parliamentary terms are only 3 years (ridiculously short IMHO), and the the major parties have time to adapt.

The parliament are generally made up of career politicians. Sure, they do have foundation principles, but essentially their job is to keep their job. They will do whatever is required to get themselves voted. When they come up with a budget, or a policy, it's generally for no other compelling reason simply wanting to elected. I'm sure Saintly Viewed will back me up here, because he's a horse man - always back a horse named "self interest" because you'll know that he's the only one that is really trying (with apologies to Jack Lang)

In summary, there are too many vested interests who have the power and the will to prevent the Greens from running the county.


Reason 2:

I don't reckon the Greens have any interest whatsoever of running the country. Running a country is hard. Tough decisions need to be made. You need to not just have policies, but you need to execute them. Could you imagine the Greens executing a defence policy? A foreign policy? A budget? The Greens don't want that, they just want to have the care with no responsibility (and I say that as somebody who is governed by the Greens at the state level, and has been governed by the Greens for long periods of time at the local level).

In summary, the Greens don't want to run the country.


Reason 3:

There are far far more progressive societies than Australia who will have the Greens running them before Australia does - and yet it's never happened. Germany have been governed by a coalition that has included the Greens (The Greens were a very minor party in the coalition, kind of analogous to the Nationals in our current government) and they are way ahead of us.

In summary, hell would need to freeze over first before the Greens run the county.


And the caveat?

If the Greens could get a charismatic anti-establishment leader who could capture the imagination of a nation. Kinda like what Donald Trump is doing in the US at the moment with the Republican Party nomination. But IMHO if Trump wins the nomination he's got practically zero chance of winning the presidency - it would take a significant event (on the scale of 911) for that to happen.

I can't think of anybody in this country who would have that kind of national profile. This is a country who had Australans of the year like Adam Goodes and Rosy Batty. All worthy, but hardly people who could launch a government policy.

Interesting and all good points, particularly the first regarding parties changing policy. Maybe I should change my stance to a 'moral' victory for the Greens because if they have the power to make the two major parties change their tunes to the one the Greens are walking then they'll have certainly exerted far more power than they probably ever expected to.

As for the 'career politician' statement, I agree completely and it's probably the main glaring flaw in our political system. A way to circumvent that needs to be found so that people who actually want to have a real influence on the way the country is run take those seats. I understand by saying this this means both 'good' and 'Trump' will be the kinds of people in those seats but it's what we need to actually progress IMO.

 

[76woodenspooners]

Interesting and all good points, particularly the first regarding parties changing policy. Maybe I should change my stance to a 'moral' victory for the Greens because if they have the power to make the two major parties change their tunes to the one the Greens are walking then they'll have certainly exerted far more power than they probably ever expected to.

The Greens are as power hungry as any of them.

For example, the Senate preferential voting reforms.

The current government are bringing them in so they don't have to negotiate the passing of laws in the senate with people like this bloke from the motor enthusiasts party ...



... And this independent (former PUP) ...



The Greens are supporting the preferential voting reforms to get these people out of the senate. Why would they care? Because it might win them more power.

 

[sirlothie]

The Greens are as power hungry as any of them.

For example, the Senate preferential voting reforms.

The current government are bringing them in so they don't have to negotiate the passing of laws in the senate with people like this ...



... And this ...



The Greens are supporting it. Why would they care? Because it might win them a seat or two (power)

Lord help us. What utter morons. We are governed by idiots.

 

[ottoman]

The Greens are as power hungry as any of them.

For example, the Senate preferential voting reforms.

The current government are bringing them in so they don't have to negotiate the passing of laws in the senate with people like this ...



... And this ...



The Greens are supporting it. Why would they care? Because it might win them a seat or two (power)

When I read your post I got the impression that you were saying the people above are greens.
I watched the videos and thought "no way are they greens." Checked google and realised that in fact they are not greens. (Being out of the country I am a bit out of the loop so wasn't sure who these people were)
Re read your post and realised that in fact you didn't make that claim but on first reading that is the impression it gives.
Your final sentence which starts off "the greens are supporting it" makes it seem like you are referencing the above people as greens.

So for anyone else who may get confused the two morons in the videos are not greens.
(or maybe I am the moron for not being able to clearly understand the post)

 

[sirlothie]

When I read your post I got the impression that you were saying the people above are greens.
I watched the videos and thought "no way are they greens." Checked google and realised that in fact they are not greens. (Being out of the country I am a bit out of the loop so wasn't sure who these people were)
Re read your post and realised that in fact you didn't make that claim but on first reading that is the impression it gives.
Your final sentence which starts off "the greens are supporting it" makes it seem like you are referencing the above people as greens.

So for anyone else who may get confused the two morons in the videos are not greens.
(or maybe I am the moron for not being able to clearly understand the post)

They are a couple of mongers from minority parties who got in on the back of donkey votes. That they beat out the major parties for the Senate says it all really... there are just as many dipshits representing Labor and Liberal though.

 

[ottoman]

They are a couple of mongers from minority parties who got in on the back of donkey votes. That they beat out the major parties for the Senate says it all really... there are just as many dipshits representing Labor and Liberal though.

LOL - Mongers - My new favorite word.

 

[Saintly Viewed]

I do not believe it will ***ever*** happen. Maybe there is one caveat which I'll address at the end.

There are 3 reasons IMHO why it will never happen.

Reason 1:

There are 76 seats in the Australian senate. Presently 10 of those 76 are greens. The Greens may get more over time if trends continue, but that makes no difference. The Greens could have all 76 seats, but they still won't be running the country, because running the country effectively happens in the House of Representatives (lower house). The majority of the lower house runs the country.

In the lower house there are 150 seats in total. How many of those are Green? One. That's Adam Bandt, the member for Melbourne (the electorate that Collingwood is in - and by 'Collingwood' I mean the footy club at the Holden Centre, the suburb, Victoria Park, everything)

So the Greens are 75 seats away from forming a majority government needed to run the country.

We effectively have two major parties in the country - Labour and The Coalition. The Coalition have 90 seats and Labour have 55 seats.

If the Greens were to take power, not only would they need another 75 seats, but the major parties would need to lose that number.

The major parties simply won't let that happen. How can they do that? When a minor party starts to become big, then the major parties simply adopt that minor party's policies and then make that minor party irrelevant.

One classic example of that was the Fish 'n Chip shop owner from Ipswich who put her hand up and said that she believed in a White Australia policy. What gave Pauline Hanson power and a voice was that a hell of a lot of people agreed with her and voted for her.

What happened next? The coalition simply absorbed some of of her thinking, adapted those kind of policies, and made One Nation irrelevant. Hence the coalition's border protection policy.

And so it would it would be with the Greens too. When the greens came to being, none of the major parties had an environment policy. They now do.

Add to this that Australian parliamentary terms are only 3 years (ridiculously short IMHO), and the the major parties have time to adapt.

The parliament are generally made up of career politicians. Sure, they do have foundation principles, but essentially their job is to keep their job. They will do whatever is required to get themselves voted. When they come up with a budget, or a policy, it's generally for no other compelling reason simply wanting to get elected. I'm sure Saintly Viewed will back me up here, because he's a horse man - always back a horse named "self interest" because you'll know that it's the only horse that is really trying (with apologies to Jack Lang)

In summary, there are too many vested interests who have the power and the will to prevent the Greens from running the county.


Reason 2:

I don't reckon the Greens have any interest whatsoever of running the country. Running a country is hard. Tough decisions need to be made. You need to not just have policies, but you need to execute them. Could you imagine the Greens executing a defence policy? A foreign policy? A budget? The Greens don't want that, they just want to have the care with no responsibility (and I say that as somebody who is governed by the Greens at the state level, and has been governed by the Greens for long periods of time at the local level).

In summary, the Greens don't want to run the country.


Reason 3:

There are far far more progressive societies than Australia who will have the Greens running them before Australia does - and yet it's never happened. Germany have been governed by a coalition that has included the Greens (The Greens were a very minor party in the coalition, kind of analogous to the Nationals in our current government) and Germany are way ahead of us in progressive politics.

In summary, hell would need to freeze over first before the Greens run the county.


And the caveat?

If the Greens could get a charismatic anti-establishment leader who could capture the imagination of a nation. Kinda like what Donald Trump is doing in the US at the moment with the Republican Party nomination. But IMHO if Trump wins the nomination he's got practically zero chance of winning the presidency - it would take a significant event (on the scale of 911) for that to happen.

I can't think of anybody in this country who would have that kind of national profile. This is a country who had Australans of the year like Adam Goodes and Rosy Batty. All worthy, but hardly people who could launch a wide reaching government policy.

Self Interest top line horse, yes!

As an aside, what Trump has done is something not ever seen, Hillary is in danger because the Donald has a habit of doing better the more he is bagged. We live in interesting time

 

[Saintly Viewed]

My Dad is Very Much a Labor Man

I think we all guessed your family is steeped in Labor.