Opinion Commentary & Media VI

[Colby Cheer Squad]

I may have misspelled or is it misspelt definite deliberitely just to draw out the nit pickers on this board. Being one of the afore mentioned, my pet hate is "should of" instead of "should have".

"Should of gone to the Gold Coast" has long been the strongest indicator of double-figure IQ without having to go to the trouble of actually doing an IQ test.

 

[roo blitz]

You just sound like an old dumb campaigner who can’t form an argument when you say “woke”

May as well say derp.

There’s intelligence in comprehending the whole argument and that there are multiple opinions

So what is wokism then. Just to educate those who go on the attack. Its when big organisations , companies etc try and convince people to vote or agree to a certain way of life without deciding for themselves. They have their agendas and its a form of brainwashing . It has invaded society in recent years and is basically trying to change society overall. Change is good when it is done for the good but right now many decisions are being made that will change the way society exists and not for the better , thats when it is a major concern. Im not talking strictly about The Voice vote here as it needs to be carefully unpackaged but about many issues confronting society. I think you are a smart person and can work out what they are and Im not going to go on about them as I have better things to do, . What I will say is that everyone who votes NO will be classified as a racist you watch. Thats how wokism effects society. It actually divides and dosnt bring people together at all. I haven't decided which side I would vote for. If everyone treated everyone with respect and how they would want to be treated racism would never be an issue. Thats how I endeavour to treat people.

 

[Colby Cheer Squad]

I dont know how a company or any organisation has the right to speak for everyone. Not everyone are ever in 100 per cent agreement so you cant speak for all. For what its worth I'm on the fence with this Voice thing as I see issues on both sides

Well, let's take that to an extreme. Let's say an opponent gets racially abused by one of our supporters at a game. The club will obviously come out strongly and condemn the comments made by that supporter. But there will no doubt be a few club members who sympathise with the racist comments. Should the club not condemn extreme racism because, as you suggest, no company or organisation has the right to speak for everyone? Of course that would be wrong and you know it.

 

[roo blitz]

Well, let's take that to an extreme. Let's say an opponent gets racially abused by one of our supporters at a game. The club will obviously come out strongly and condemn the comments made by that supporter. But there will no doubt be a few club members who sympathise with the racist comments. Should the club not condemn extreme racism because, as you suggest, no company or organisation has the right to speak for everyone? Of course that would be wrong and you know it.

I agree 100 per cent, of course they should . I hate racism as much as anyone. But this is a totally different matter. My beef is why the AFL /clubs/companies feel they have to tell everyone what they should think and vote for. Keep politics out of sport. Dont make this about racism. Thats what wokism does.

 

[Colby Cheer Squad]

So what is wokism then. Just to educate those who go on the attack. Its when big organisations , companies etc try and convince people to vote or agree to a certain way of life without deciding for themselves. They have their agendas and its a form of brainwashing . It has invaded society in recent years and is basically trying to change society overall. Change is good when it is done for the good but right now many decisions are being made that will change the way society exists and not for the better , thats when it is a major concern. Im not talking strictly about The Voice vote here as it needs to be carefully unpackaged but about many issues confronting society. I think you are a smart person and can work out what they are and Im not going to go on about them as I have better things to do, . What I will say is that everyone who votes NO will be classified as a racist you watch. Thats how wokism effects society. It actually divides and dosnt bring people together at all. I haven't decided which side I would vote for. If everyone treated everyone with respect and how they would want to be treated racism would never be an issue. Thats how I endeavour to treat people.

Ironically "if everyone treated everyone with respect" is closer to the true definition of "wokism" than anything else you have imagined it to be. Wokism is really the acknowledgement that long term, institutionalised prejudice exists and that it favours certain groups while harming others, and that this prejudice is not right and that steps should be taken to correct it.

The real brainwashing involved in all this is the imported American culture war that chooses to weaponise attempts to treat all people with dignity and respect.

 

[Colby Cheer Squad]

Unlike donot and havenot, both can not and cannot are correct…

Mmmmmm... donots.

 

[Colby Cheer Squad]

It'll get up.

It could easily pass the majority YES vote requirement overall due to strong support in Melbourne and Sydney but still get knocked back by failing to achieve a majority in a majority of states. Who would be all that surprised if QLD and WA vote NO? Then we'd be turning our attention to SA and Tassie.

 

[Mav]

Next Interstate Final I take Mav in to hostile enemy Pub

I’m a North supporter that grew up in WA! I watched the 96 GF in a pub in Augusta (not THE Augusta, the one down the bottom of WA) that was packed with West Aussies all barracking for the non Vic team. There was me and 1 other going for North. Copped it all day, but got the last laugh. I’ll go into any hostile pub if it means I canget a beer.

 

[Gasometer]

I’m a North supporter that grew up in WA! I watched the 96 GF in a pub in Augusta (not THE Augusta, the one down the bottom of WA) that was packed with West Aussies all barracking for the non Vic team. There was me and 1 other going for North. Copped it all day, but got the last laugh. I’ll go into any hostile pub if it means I canget a beer.

 

[Kimbo]

I’m a North supporter that grew up in WA! I watched the 96 GF in a pub in Augusta (not THE Augusta, the one down the bottom of WA) that was packed with West Aussies all barracking for the non Vic team. There was me and 1 other going for North. Copped it all day, but got the last laugh. I’ll go into any hostile pub if it means I canget a beer.

Okay, now it's gone too far. You cannot say that.

 

[Passmore]

Okay, now it's gone too far. You cannot say that.

It’s a legit word. Canget. To get a can of beer.

 

[Kimbo]

It’s a legit word. Canget. To get a can of beer.

Cool. The conjugations apply too I guess?
I cangot a beer yesterday.
I'm cangetting one from the fridge... want one?
He cangets them for me.

 

[Sillygit]

ah cannae believe it...

 

[north_lad]

Do you use "donot" or "havenot"? I ******* hate it when people use "cannot". And while we're on grammar, let's look at punctuation. You need a full stop at the end of your sentence.

It's do not or have not, and Lindsay Thomas and Jaidyn Stephenson are both fine footballers

 

[Gumble Frankieton]

What about woken tokism?

It’s when something wakes you up ion the middle of the night so you have a joint.

Woke in Fright.

Could be a movie about a fella that’s traumatised after being stuck in a broken down country town with a bloke that is obsessed with talking about Woke.
He later wakes up and realises that it was only a dream. He is, in fact, stuck in a broken down lift with Linda Hurley, the wife of the Gov-General, who insists on singing You Are My Sunshine until they are rescued. Unfortunately for our main character, she sings in door key and also has an unshakable belief in the value of her singing voice.

 

[Kimbo]

I notice, by the way, that the collective noun for 'wokes' seems to be 'brigade'.

 

[Devington]

Woke is about as useful as fascist or nazi is these days. Has genuine meaning but is mostly just an easy/lazy word to throw at certain people and things that someone doesn't like.

 

[QueenslandRoo]

North Melbourne's support for the creation of a body within the constitution open only to people of a certain race is disappointing.

The constitution does not discriminate against Indigenous people. Indigenous people have the exact same rights as every other Australian. So there is no 'problem' within the constitution that requires fixing.

If the Voice is approved, as North Melbourne now publicly hopes, then discrimination - against non-indigenous people - will be written into the constitution. That is, there will be a body within the constitution of Australia open only to some Australians by virtue of their race.

This is morally wrong.

"But what about the wrongs Indigenous people have suffered?"

You don't fix one wrong by creating another wrong. Though people who allow emotion and sentiment to cloud good judgement will certainly try.

Everyone wants the best for Indigenous people. But wanting the best for Indigenous people is no excuse for failing to think.

North Melbourne should stick to football. It's what we do best, and let's be honest, we're not even that good at it.

 

[Kangaroos techno]

No issue with the club making a statement on the topic. As other's have said, our co-captain is indigenous so it'd be sort of strange not to.

What I do find odd is the - we feel this way and so you should too...nudge nudge

 

[disco_cowboy]

So what is wokism then. Just to educate those who go on the attack. Its when big organisations , companies etc try and convince people to vote or agree to a certain way of life without deciding for themselves. They have their agendas and its a form of brainwashing . It has invaded society in recent years and is basically trying to change society overall. Change is good when it is done for the good but right now many decisions are being made that will change the way society exists and not for the better , thats when it is a major concern. Im not talking strictly about The Voice vote here as it needs to be carefully unpackaged but about many issues confronting society. I think you are a smart person and can work out what they are and Im not going to go on about them as I have better things to do, . What I will say is that everyone who votes NO will be classified as a racist you watch. Thats how wokism effects society. It actually divides and dosnt bring people together at all. I haven't decided which side I would vote for. If everyone treated everyone with respect and how they would want to be treated racism would never be an issue. Thats how I endeavour to treat people.

this is all categorically wrong.

 

[disco_cowboy]

No issue with the club making a statement on the topic. As other's have said, our co-captain is indigenous so it'd be sort of strange not to.

What I do find odd is the - we feel this way and so you should too...nudge nudge

It doesn't do that at all

 

[Hearts to hearts]

No issue with the club making a statement on the topic. As other's have said, our co-captain is indigenous so it'd be sort of strange not to.

What I do find odd is the - we feel this way and so you should too...nudge nudge

How exactly do you get that from the words “North Melbourne encourages every Australian to take time to listen, learn and understand. As a club we are taking the opportunity to provide education and resources to our staff and players to help them make their own informed decisions.” Unless you decided what you didn’t like before reading what the club actually said.

As a nation we benefit from living on land that was stolen, and try not to notice the lasting negative impacts of that dispossession. The very least we can do is accept the invitation to listen to indigenous people when our governments considers policies that will affect them - god knows, all the things governments have tried so far with limited input from indigenous people haven‘t done enough to improve things.

This proposal doesn’t guarantee any of the thoughts and suggestions that come through the Voice will be implemented - just that our governments will hear what they have to say. I don’t understand how that could be a bad thing. I understand if people think it’s not enough, but I don’t understand how anyone can think it’s too much.

Governments listen to plenty of people with money and influence now, and we never get to know about those deals - this will be a transparent setup where we can all see what has been said and what comes of it.

People aren’t perfect, indigenous and non-indigenous, and the Voice like our governments is also not going to be perfect because it represents people. It is still worth doing. Being prepared to listen - not just when we feel like it but as a sustained effort - is literally the least we can do.

 

[domiroo]

No issue with the club making a statement on the topic. As other's have said, our co-captain is indigenous so it'd be sort of strange not to.

What I do find odd is the - we feel this way and so you should too...nudge nudge

Yeah nah ..

 

[Mav]

Okay, now it's gone too far. You cannot say that.

I was wondering who would pick it up. You would have been short on fav I reckon.

 

[Makeshift Park]

For those who wanted a chaser after watching Carlton's misfortunes last night.

Former PwC boss Luke Sayers has questions to answer on tax scandal​

​

Spoiler: By Deborah O'Neill

May 26, 2023 — 3.29pm


Many Australians don’t read the financial sections of the papers or pay attention to the detail of what’s played out in a financial world so far away from their own family budgeting.

Let’s face it: there’s a whole economics-discourse gap that makes financial literacy a challenge, and not everyone is into the jargon or the detail. But even at such a distance from the financial service sector, knowledge of the scale of the ethical and moral failure at PwC is leaking into the broader community.

​

Finance secretary Jenny Wilkinson says the department was kept in the dark over the extent of the breaches of confidentiality by staff at PWC.
People know it’s something to do with tax and big tech companies not paying their fair share, and a bloke who took confidential information from Australian citizens and used it to make money.
When a senior partner at PwC, Peter Collins, signed three separate confidentiality agreements with the Australian government between 2013 and 2018, he knew what he was doing. He was inside the tent; he had access to confidential information about Australian tax laws being designed to ensure big multinationals pay their fair share of tax.

He sat in meetings with Australian Treasury officials and shared his considerable knowledge about tax law to assist in the effective design of Australian law. But then he went back to PwC Australia and PwC Global and – with the support of PwC colleagues in the US, UK, Singapore, Ireland, and Europe – unethically and collaboratively designed a scheme to profit himself, his colleagues and all the partners in the firm.

PwC attempted to enable major international companies, the names of which I intend to ensure are revealed, to avoid paying their fair share of tax. That is money straight from the pockets of hard-working Australians. The actions of PwC were a direct assault on our nation’s capacity to fund our schools, hospitals and public services – and in that way was a direct assault on every Australian citizen.

Let’s be clear about this: once Collins had the intelligence about what the Australian government was doing on the Multinational Anti-Avoidance Legislation (MAAL), he took it back to PwC to share with colleagues. And share it he did – far and wide across the PwC Australia and Global network. Together with others at PwC, Collins became the central cog in the machine being actively constructed inside PwC to turn confidential knowledge into a product for PwC to flog off to the same multinationals who were trying to minimise the amount of tax they pay in Australia.

The very first time that sharing of confidential material and insights was suggested was the moment PwC should have pounced on Collins and sacked him for multiple breaches of ethical boundaries. The moment of opportunity to do the right thing was lost. What occurred is matter of historical fact: there is a now public cache of communications between Collins and at least 53 different redacted PwC email addresses that fills 144 pages. It is truly shocking material.


A sample: “In total we expect (based on fee estimates that we have agreed with clients) that revenue from the first stage of the MAAL projects will be approximately $2.5 million.” That’s Collins in a PwC love-in that celebrated his deception and delighted in the anticipated flow of dollars into the PwC coffers.
Another: “Don’t circulate it beyond us or discuss it outside PwC – it would really put PwC Australia and me in a real bind.” Not only did Collins know he shouldn’t be sharing the confidential material with anyone, he knew it would be a big problem for everyone who facilitated the process he was leading. No one at PwC Australia or PwC Global stopped him.

Peter Collins, former international tax leader for PwC Australia.

The communications between PwC Australia and PwC Global extends from October 2014 to January 2017. In May 2016, so excited was PwC by the prospect of capturing the multinational tax avoidance market with the insider intel, it held a conference call for global tax partners.
Collins knew what he was doing. It breached the ethical and professional boundary he should have known and observed in spirit and practice. He was banned from practising for two years. But he was not alone and the emails he sent and received implicate many of his PwC colleagues.

All this occurred during the leadership in Australia of Luke Sayers, PwC’s then-CEO. He has questions to answer about the behaviour that took place on his watch. Tom Seymour, PwC’s head of tax at the time and later CEO of PwC Australia, has already stepped down. We’re told by PwC that he will retire in September, about the same time as the PwC internal review is expected to land. But what about all the others?

The Australian people deserve better from one of Australia’s biggest assurance companies. It’s time for PwC to face the music and to name the names of all involved. No delaying; no mucking around; no hiding any longer. Name the names. As the PwC saga continues, I think it’s time to call out the behaviour of a leadership team now in damage-control mode.

Deborah O’Neill is a Labor senator for NSW and chair of the Joint Standing Committee on Corporations and Financial Services.