-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
Talking Politics
- Thread starter Legends of 2017
- Start date
tigersnake said:
Approving a coal mine on prime agricultural land is just more evidence of the ideological madness, it makes no economic sense even discounting the social and environmental costs. Coal is in decline, there's every chance it will never recover, there's coal mines shutting down almost daily and yet Tone and the crew want to add to an already choked up supply. Perhaps the worst aspect of this is the fact these mines will be foreign owned, and in the case of the Liverpool Plains mine, it will be the Chinese who can then exercise their right to hire their own workers if the proposed free trade agreement goes ahead. All this amounts to treason, selling out the country and our natural resources in a desperate bid to stay in power. I pray and hope the people of Canning do the right thing and give Abbott his final death blow, every day this fool is in power Australia sinks further down the S-bend.
antman said:
As usual the men in suits (not you antman) overeact to what they see as a falling Chinese economy.
They see the growth drop from 7.5% to 6.5% and the sky falls in.
Get some perspective please.
poppa x said:
agree. Reporting on the stock market is generally irrational. Rises of a couple of hundred points are reported as normal, little fanfare, drops of the same are 'dives', 'volatility' and general hand wringing.
Personally I think the days of steady upwards trends in shares are over, at least short to medium term. Resources are getting scarcer and more contested, markets are saturated, people are generally buying less stuff, getting rid of stuff if anything. Next growth phase will be low energy and environmental problem solving stocks. My super has a new option 'global environmental solutions', been around 2.5 years or so, went up 30% per year (45% the first). I ticked 50%. The rest 'sustainable balanced' which also outperformed the traditional options.
bullus_hit said:
It's not just mines. The Chinese are also investing in rail and ports. Think about it.
But I'm not going to blame the Chinese. Our honourable, esteemed leaders make the rules. It's their fault entirely. And don't blame the voter. We can only vote for who is nominated and politics is so corrupt these days that it can only be entered via certain channels. Outsiders are soon put in their place. Look at One Nation. Doesn't matter what you thought of them. What happened to Pauline Hanson was a disgrace. Our leaders only respect democracy when it's in their favour. As soon as things don't go their way, democracy goes out the window.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, Australia is definitely the lucky country because we're definitely not smart. And our luck will soon run out.
Is our government just scared of the 21st century? Or do they not understand it? I posted on my electic car thread a press release from the very conservative UK Government on a trial of technology to build an inductive roadway. It makes it theoretically possible to charge electic vehicles "as they drive". No need to stop to re-charge. So it is not the Abbott Government's "conservative" bent that is dictating their 19th century thinking, not if Torys can do this kind of thing. Australia has been dragged so far backward by this mob.
KnightersRevenge said:
"Australia is a lucky country run mainly by second rate people who share its luck. It lives on other people's ideas, and, although its ordinary people are adaptable, most of its leaders (in all fields) so lack curiosity about the events that surround them that they are often taken by surprise."
Donald Horne, 51 years ago.
http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2015/aug/26/australian-republic-time-for-high-brow-worthiness-over-says-peter-fitzsimons
[quote author=Daniel Hurst in The Guardian Australia]Australian republic: time for 'high-brow worthiness' over, says Peter FitzSimons
New chair of Australian Republican Movement says republicans are ‘putting the band back together’
Author and chairman of the Australian Republican Movement Peter FitzSimons wants a non-binding vote on a republic within five years.
The movement towards a republic in Australia has suffered from too much focus on “legal niceties” and “high-brow worthiness” and must now champion the big-picture aspirations of an independent 21st century nation, Peter FitzSimons says.
The chair of the Australian Republican Movement used an energetic speech to the National Press Club in Canberra on Wednesday to push for a two-step process to achieve a republic, starting with a non-binding public vote within five years on the principle of having an Australian head of state followed by serious discussions about the model.
FitzSimons also announced the federal treasurer and Liberal MP Joe Hockey and the former Australian Capital Territory chief minister and Labor senator Katy Gallagher would be the co-convenors of a new parliamentary group for an Australian head of state.
ARM-commissioned polling – released to coincide with the speech – suggested 47% of respondents supported replacing the British monarch with an Australian head of state, while 29% opposed it and the remaining 24% were undecided.
But in a more decisive result, 57% supported the idea of holding a national vote by 2020 “on whether Australia should have an Australian as head of state”. The Essential Media Research polling was conducted between 19 and 24 August.
The ARM is seeking to build fresh momentum, 16 years after the failed referendum of 1999 that was marked by division over the best form for a republic.
The key error we made last time was disunity.
FitzSimons, a prominent writer and Fairfax Media columnist, led the charge with a speech on Wednesday in which he declared republicans were “putting the band back together”.
“We are going to have another go at this and this time we’ll learn by the errors that we made last time and the key error I think that we made last time was disunity,” said FitzSimons, who was named as the new ARM chair last month.
He said he personally favoured a minimalist change to the present arrangements in order to allay the concerns of “the ‘if it ain’t broke don’t fix it’ crowd”. The Queen appoints the governor general as her representative in Australia on the advice of the prime minister.
“I say everything stays the same, starting with the title of governor general, and including the convention that the prime minister chooses that position, including the reserve powers, and including the writing of the letter seeking position,” he said.
“We simply save the price of the postal stamp. Instead of sending that letter external mail to the Queen of England saying ‘Your majesty, is it okay with you?’ we send to the parliament of the people to get a two-thirds majority to say will you sign off on this.”
FitzSimons acknowledged there were other views about the best model – such as a direct election of the head of state – and said the important thing was republicans unite behind whatever model garnered support in a process that would include constitutional conventions and people’s forums.
But FitzSimons said he did not want to get bogged down in detail or “legal niceties” at this stage of the process, because his current focus was engaging the public in the overarching principles of a republic.
“For my money, if the republican movement has suffered from one thing over the years, it’s been a surfeit of deadly earnestness, of high-brow worthiness. We need high-brow, we have it in spades, but to this point the debate has lacked publicly expressed low-brow passion and low-brow for me is a personal speciality,” he quipped.
“We respectfully submit that in the 21st century, it is against the natural order of things that a mature and sophisticated nation, multicultural and independent as we are, proud of our egalitarianism and more than ever aware of our Indigenous heritage ... should still be finding our head of state from one family of English aristocrats living in a palace in England. Please.”
FitzSimons said supporters should take their cues from same-sex marriage advocates in Ireland – who secured majority support in a recent referendum – by campaigning “house by house, street by street, suburb by suburb, powered by the passion we have for the cause, sustained by the logic of our argument”.
“That argument is Australia is mature enough to run our own affairs and must be seen to be so,” he said, adding goodwill was not enough and people needed to be engaged in the process.
FitzSimons predicted Tony Abbott, a former executive director of Australians for Constitutional Monarchy, would be the last prime minister to oppose the push for a republic.
The Labor leader, Bill Shorten, has set a goal of achieving an Australian head of state within the next decade.
FitzSimons said numerous Coalition figures – including Hockey, Malcolm Turnbull, Christopher Pyne, Marise Payne and Wyatt Roy – supported a republic, showing the issue cut across the political spectrum. “We won’t get this over the line without bipartisan support,” he said.
A spokeswoman for the treasurer said Hockey had “long advocated his views on this issue; they are a matter of public record and those views haven’t changed”.
Shorten said the country was “smart and mature enough” to debate having an Australian head of state and he welcomed Hockey’s support. “If only he could convince his prime minister to think of the future for a change and not remain stuck in the past,” Shorten said.[/quote]
Hear! Hear!
[quote author=Daniel Hurst in The Guardian Australia]Australian republic: time for 'high-brow worthiness' over, says Peter FitzSimons
New chair of Australian Republican Movement says republicans are ‘putting the band back together’
Author and chairman of the Australian Republican Movement Peter FitzSimons wants a non-binding vote on a republic within five years.
The movement towards a republic in Australia has suffered from too much focus on “legal niceties” and “high-brow worthiness” and must now champion the big-picture aspirations of an independent 21st century nation, Peter FitzSimons says.
The chair of the Australian Republican Movement used an energetic speech to the National Press Club in Canberra on Wednesday to push for a two-step process to achieve a republic, starting with a non-binding public vote within five years on the principle of having an Australian head of state followed by serious discussions about the model.
FitzSimons also announced the federal treasurer and Liberal MP Joe Hockey and the former Australian Capital Territory chief minister and Labor senator Katy Gallagher would be the co-convenors of a new parliamentary group for an Australian head of state.
ARM-commissioned polling – released to coincide with the speech – suggested 47% of respondents supported replacing the British monarch with an Australian head of state, while 29% opposed it and the remaining 24% were undecided.
But in a more decisive result, 57% supported the idea of holding a national vote by 2020 “on whether Australia should have an Australian as head of state”. The Essential Media Research polling was conducted between 19 and 24 August.
The ARM is seeking to build fresh momentum, 16 years after the failed referendum of 1999 that was marked by division over the best form for a republic.
The key error we made last time was disunity.
FitzSimons, a prominent writer and Fairfax Media columnist, led the charge with a speech on Wednesday in which he declared republicans were “putting the band back together”.
“We are going to have another go at this and this time we’ll learn by the errors that we made last time and the key error I think that we made last time was disunity,” said FitzSimons, who was named as the new ARM chair last month.
He said he personally favoured a minimalist change to the present arrangements in order to allay the concerns of “the ‘if it ain’t broke don’t fix it’ crowd”. The Queen appoints the governor general as her representative in Australia on the advice of the prime minister.
“I say everything stays the same, starting with the title of governor general, and including the convention that the prime minister chooses that position, including the reserve powers, and including the writing of the letter seeking position,” he said.
“We simply save the price of the postal stamp. Instead of sending that letter external mail to the Queen of England saying ‘Your majesty, is it okay with you?’ we send to the parliament of the people to get a two-thirds majority to say will you sign off on this.”
FitzSimons acknowledged there were other views about the best model – such as a direct election of the head of state – and said the important thing was republicans unite behind whatever model garnered support in a process that would include constitutional conventions and people’s forums.
But FitzSimons said he did not want to get bogged down in detail or “legal niceties” at this stage of the process, because his current focus was engaging the public in the overarching principles of a republic.
“For my money, if the republican movement has suffered from one thing over the years, it’s been a surfeit of deadly earnestness, of high-brow worthiness. We need high-brow, we have it in spades, but to this point the debate has lacked publicly expressed low-brow passion and low-brow for me is a personal speciality,” he quipped.
“We respectfully submit that in the 21st century, it is against the natural order of things that a mature and sophisticated nation, multicultural and independent as we are, proud of our egalitarianism and more than ever aware of our Indigenous heritage ... should still be finding our head of state from one family of English aristocrats living in a palace in England. Please.”
FitzSimons said supporters should take their cues from same-sex marriage advocates in Ireland – who secured majority support in a recent referendum – by campaigning “house by house, street by street, suburb by suburb, powered by the passion we have for the cause, sustained by the logic of our argument”.
“That argument is Australia is mature enough to run our own affairs and must be seen to be so,” he said, adding goodwill was not enough and people needed to be engaged in the process.
FitzSimons predicted Tony Abbott, a former executive director of Australians for Constitutional Monarchy, would be the last prime minister to oppose the push for a republic.
The Labor leader, Bill Shorten, has set a goal of achieving an Australian head of state within the next decade.
FitzSimons said numerous Coalition figures – including Hockey, Malcolm Turnbull, Christopher Pyne, Marise Payne and Wyatt Roy – supported a republic, showing the issue cut across the political spectrum. “We won’t get this over the line without bipartisan support,” he said.
A spokeswoman for the treasurer said Hockey had “long advocated his views on this issue; they are a matter of public record and those views haven’t changed”.
Shorten said the country was “smart and mature enough” to debate having an Australian head of state and he welcomed Hockey’s support. “If only he could convince his prime minister to think of the future for a change and not remain stuck in the past,” Shorten said.[/quote]
Hear! Hear!
Exactly and therein lies the problem.Baloo said:
There are those who want to make the republic debate into left versus right and of course it has nothing to do with politics in reality. To me it is logic, it is no more complicated than the fact that I am Australian and Australia is a sovereign country that should have it's own head of state. Others have different opinions of course but I hope that isn't along party lines, why should it be?
I want a republic but to be honest I am not sure we need more nationalistic chest beating in this country right now.
Baloo said:
Broadly speaking, the left/ progressive side of politics is republican. The right/ conservative side is monarchist. Thats the reality. There exceptions of course as there usually is. You wouldn't find many, if any, monarchist lefties, but you'd find a fair few republican conservatives.
The logic to me is that we will have to spend a lot of money to institute a change that delivers next to nothing. If we are going to spend money on such a venture, we might as well do something useful like disband the federation.Sintiger said: