Support NeoGAF

[Fredescu]

Better than I could have said it I guess.

 

[Myansie]

It is a personal attack, it is not necessarily a sexist one. I really think you are reaching when you say that is has to be a sexist motivation.

It's sexist to apply the 'born to rule' mantra to Credlin because that applies to everyone in the Liberal Party. Especially the men.

The issue with Credlin is she is unelected. If Abbott is booted by the Libs, based on history, Credlin would stay. Her position is supposed to be more bureaucratic, in reality she's actually making a lot of the decisions.

 

[hidys]

It's sexist to apply the 'born to rule' mantra to Credlin because that applies to everyone in the Liberal Party. Especially the men.

The issue with Credlin is she is unelected. If Abbott is booted by the Libs, based on history, Credlin would stay. Her position is supposed to be more bureaucratic, in reality she's actually making a lot of the decisions.

Is she?

 

[Fredescu]

Also

 

[Dead Man]

It's sexist to apply the 'born to rule' mantra to Credlin because that applies to everyone in the Liberal Party. Especially the men.

The issue with Credlin is she is unelected. If Abbott is booted by the Libs, based on history, Credlin would stay. Her position is supposed to be more bureaucratic, in reality she's actually making a lot of the decisions.

I apply it to almost all politicians. It is only sexist if you DON'T also apply it to the men, which I think most people who apply it about Peta would.

I tried to explain further in my next post. It's a bit like climate change. Individual extreme weather events might not be caused by climate change, but climate change means you get more of them. Individual examples of unreasonable criticism of the competence of women might not be caused by sexism, but there is more of it due to sexism. If you want to criticise the competence of a woman your reasoning better be sound, or, yes, it's probably sexism, even if that wasn't your conscious intent.

That's fine, but you can't label each instance as due to sexist views. That is quite a bit different to what you are suggesting with the climate change analogy. Just because an environment full of sexism creates more sexist events doesn't mean each criticism of a female is due to sexism inherently.

Better than I could have said it I guess.

Nope, not buying it. Unless they think she isn't a manipulative string puller? Which would not seem to be a very controversial statement to me, almost everybody in political Canberra either is, or aspires to be so.

 

[Fredescu]

That's fine, but you can't label each instance as due to sexist views.

Probably true. I'm labelling this instance though.

Nope, not buying it. Unless they think she isn't a manipulative string puller? Which would not seem to be a very controversial statement to me, almost everybody in political Canberra either is, or aspires to be so.

Is she a manipulative string puller because she's like all the others, or because she's different from all the others? If the former, why all the press? How many chiefs of staff get this much coverage?

 

[Quasar]

Hmm. So if Peta is wormtongue, who is Saruman?

 

[bomma_man]

I think he's probably right to a point, but he's also being horrendously hypocritical.

*posted from a Meredith festival portaloo*

 

[markot]

Better than I could have said it I guess.

Those are ridconkulous.

All politicians are manipultive string pullers... What did we see when Rudd was dudded? It wasnt women, it was the 'faceless men'. Thats politics.

Its like saying a bad asian driver is a bad driver. Is this a racist stereotype? Yes. Can it be true of individual Asians? Obviously. The argument seems to be that we cant label a female certain things because that is a stereotype of females in certain roles. Even if they are committing the actions that lead to those labels.

Surely the more sexist thing is to apply a defence to all women in these scenarios regardless of the facts.

 

[Dryk]

I think the fact that she has a memorable, evil sounding name doesn't help

 

[mjontrix]

Hmm. So if Peta is wormtongue, who is Saruman?

There's no wise one in either government who started good but fell into darkness.

Sauron is clearly the USA government - they dictate everything we do. And the pollies are the Orcs, with the stronger ones in front of the cameras an urukhai hai.

 

[bobnowhere]

Hmm. So if Peta is wormtongue, who is Saruman?

Nick Minchin, though not sure of his influence now that he has left the senate.

 

[Quasar]

http://theaimn.com/morrison-now-seeks-sole-authority-citizenship-decisions/

The Department of Immigration and Border Protection, under the authority of Minister Scott Morrison, is in the process of seeking amendments to the Australian Citizenship Act 2007 that will give the minister draconian powers over not only asylum seekers, but anyone who has become or wishes to become an Australian citizen.

The Australian Citizenship and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2014, will give Morrison the power to set aside decisions made by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal on the character and identity of those applying for citizenship or who have already received it, in a public interest test determined solely by the Minister.

The DIBA submission to a Senate committee argues that an elected member of parliament and minister of the Crown has gained a particular insight into the community’s standards and values. This particular insight therefore qualifies Morrison to overrule AAT decisions. It is the bill’s intention to grant a minister, in this case Morrison, the power to determine an individual’s “good character” or otherwise, regardless of any ruling made by the AAT. Morrison’s decision will be unchallengeable.

The bill also aims to give Morrison the right to determine “fraud” or “misrepresentation” in applications for citizenship. In such instances Morrison can revoke papers regardless of whether or not the individual concerned has been convicted of either offence.

That is, Morrison or the minister concerned has the power to determine “guilt” outside of any criminal proceedings, denying individuals the presumption of innocence.

WTF?

 

[senahorse]

http://theaimn.com/morrison-now-seeks-sole-authority-citizenship-decisions/



WTF?

The DIBA submission to a Senate committee argues that an elected member of parliament and minister of the Crown has gained a particular insight into the community’s standards and values. This particular insight therefore qualifies Morrison to overrule AAT decisions. It is the bill’s intention to grant a minister, in this case Morrison, the power to determine an individual’s “good character” or otherwise, regardless of any ruling made by the AAT. Morrison’s decision will be unchallengeable.

Jesus, can we just have a referendum to deport him instead?

 

[wonzo]

morrison is literally a fascist creep. typical "moderate" lib

 

[markot]

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-12-...nce-of-credlin-a-career-limiting-move/5963790

Good article on the matter.

 

[mjontrix]

http://theaimn.com/morrison-now-seeks-sole-authority-citizenship-decisions/



WTF?

So he wants to become judge, jury, and executor...

This if passed will easily be the worst policy ever done in Australian history except for the White Australian policy. Heck I'd say it rivals it.

 

[Tim the Wiz]

http://theaimn.com/morrison-now-seeks-sole-authority-citizenship-decisions/



WTF?

Gotta say, I'm speechless. That's some crazy overreach.

 

[Shaneus]

Morrison's gone mad. Literally mad.

 

[markot]

He was always like this.

This is the man who got pissed when the government paid for a asylum seeker kid to go to his parents funeral.

He is a scumbag.

 

[Dryk]

Getting elected on the platform of one of the major parties says nothing about the particular insight of that candidate. DIBA should (and probably does) know that.

 

[mjontrix]

He was always like this.

This is the man who got pissed when the government paid for a asylum seeker kid to go to his parents funeral.

He is a scumbag.

He's a monster - literally a Hitler in the making if nothing is done about him.

Next it'll be removing citizenship from all asylum seekers from the Khmer rouge - Cambodia's safe now no need to remain in Australia. The sadest part is that it'd probably work

 

[viciouskillersquirrel]

The worst part is that the way it reads, you can be retroactively stripped of citizenship and all the rights that go with it. I have lived in this country for 25 years. If I were to be convicted of a crime, I could literally be deported back to El Salvador.

Fascist doesn't even begin to describe this.
If this passes, he has effectively made every foreign born Australian a second class citizen.

 

[Arksy]

Worst part is, it's probably constitutional after the latest high court case on the whole naturalised citizens are a separate class bullshit.

 

[Jintor]

Worst part is, it's probably constitutional after the latest high court case on the whole naturalised citizens are a separate class bullshit.

Wait what?

Could you link me? I've been out of the constitutional loop

 

[mjontrix]

The worst part is that the way it reads, you can be retroactively stripped of citizenship and all the rights that go with it. I have lived in this country for 25 years. If I were to be convicted of a crime, I could literally be deported back to El Salvador.

Fascist doesn't even begin to describe this.
If this passes, he has effectively made every foreign born Australian a second class citizen.

Convicted? Bahahahaha no its even worse - you just have to be someone Scott Morrison considers a bad character. God help you if you cut him in traffic

 

[bomma_man]

Worst part is, it's probably constitutional after the latest high court case on the whole naturalised citizens are a separate class bullshit.

Wait what?

Could you link me? I've been out of the constitutional loop

What the fuck? We're never going to get another Mason court; and I'm worried that the Libs will turn the court into the politicised mess that the US Supreme Court is.

 

[Arksy]

Well, Labor did appoint about four justices in their last two terms. Won't do a whole lot of good though, Australian Judges are incredibly legalistic.

I'm a little inebriated and I don't have my sources with me but basically because the constitution gives power over naturalisation and aliens and not citizenship it was kind of assumed for a long time that the commonwealth didn't have the power to remove citizenship, this was basically affirmed in one case (probably about 20 years ago) and then some other justices in another case said that was wrong (was obiter though). This happened a whole ago on both fronts, so I apologise by saying 'latest' but I meant 'latest' in terms of head of power.

In other words it's inconclusive but yeah I wouldn't rely on the High Court to deem these laws unconstitutional but they might.

 

[Dryk]

Any shit the government gets over the MYEFO is on them. They're the ones that created the current economic narrative in the first place. So looks like we'll still be stuck with point-scoring instead of fixing the problems for even longer :\

<shakes fist at Howard/Costello>

 

[r1chard]

Abbott keeps trumpeting that he has three great achievements in his term so far. One of them is debatable ("turning back the boats") and comes at a huge cost, and the other two? Those were revenue streams (well, ok, both were called "taxes" but I'm not actually sure the ETS was actual revenue but the mining tax sure was). Might be useful trying to balance a fucking budget.

Has anyone done an economic analysis of those actual achievements of his against the budget?

 

[Myansie]

The mining tax was a bit of a balls up, so with falling commodity prices it probably wouldn't have generated much.

The carbon tax on the other hand was designed to be redistributive. The tax paid by the polluters was used to offset the end users power bill and to fund alternative energy r&d and construction. The Libs have reduced the latter, but kept the former so people think their power bills have dropped. What's left is basically energy welfare, skewing the market to over consume. Milton Friedman (Hockey's economic sensei) would have been disgusted.

 

[Dastardly Jerks]

Appealing current legislation is barely an achievement.

So, how did we go with that budget forecast?

 

[Dryk]

Labor took the Fisher by-election by a handful of votes. The FPTP advocates are already crawling out of the woodwork.

So, how did we go with that budget forecast?

Revenue's through the floor, deficit forecast is up by $10 billion. This is what happens when you base an economy around commodity prices

A lot of damnation from experts too, I especially like the guy that says the government has dug a hole its not competent enough to climb out of
http://theconversation.com/federal-budget-deficit-climbs-to-40-4bn-experts-react-35481

 

[Shaneus]

Can anyone tell me what the fuck the difference is between a "Finance Minister" and Treasurer? Cheers.

 

[Fredescu]

Can anyone tell me what the fuck the difference is between a "Finance Minister" and Treasurer? Cheers.

Treasury and the Department of Finance are different departments that do different things, but then I read this on Wikipedia:

In the Government of Australia, the [finance] minister supplements the role of the Treasurer, being responsible for areas such as government expenditure, financial management, and the operations of government. The minister administers the portfolio through the Department of Finance. The Finance Minister is in effect the Deputy Treasurer, as the Finance Minister acts as the Treasurer in the Treasurer's absence. Unlike the Treasurer, who by convention has been a member of the House of Representatives, the Finance Minister is someone from either House of Parliament.

And came away more confused than I was before. So thanks for that Shaneus.

 

[A More Normal Bird]

Don't forget the Assistant Treasurer! Due to the untimely demise of Senator Arthur Sinodinos' political career, the current Acting Assistant Treasurer is... Finance Minister Mathias Cormann! One wonders how he copes with the strain of two portfolios.

 

[bomma_man]

Revenue problem? Time for tax cuts! Infinite revenue!

 

[hidys]

 

[hidys]

Revenue problem? Time for tax cuts! Infinite revenue!

Bro, imagine of mining companies paid zero tax!

 

[Arksy]

If the government wants money it can simply create it, making revenue streams redundant.

 

[senahorse]

Treasurer Joe Hockey has broken a pledge to impose tough new tax avoidance rules on multinational companies that shift billions of dollars in profits between Australia and their international subsidiaries.

The practice of global corporations loading up subsidiaries with debt and then claiming relief from the Australian tax man on the interest paid gives an "unfair competitive advantage" over local rivals, Treasury said in 2013.

"When some taxpayers avoid or minimise their tax in a sustained way, the tax burden eventually falls more heavily on other taxpayers," a Treasury issues paper found at the time.

The Gillard government announced the abolition of deductions under section 25-90 of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 as part of a package to combat tax minimisation by global corporations, at a projected benefit to the taxpayer of $600 million.

In November last year, Mr Hockey and the then Assistant Treasurer, Arthur Sinodinos, announced they would not legislate Labor's package, saying it would impose "unreasonable compliance costs on Australian companies" with subsidiaries offshore.

The current loophole favours the largest Australian companies such as BHP Billiton and Rio Tinto, currently under pressure from diving commodity prices.

Instead, Mr Hockey – who has trumpeted a global tax crackdown on multinationals through the G20 process – and Mr Sinodinos pledged in November to "introduce a targeted anti&#8209;avoidance provision after detailed consultation with stakeholders".

But in Monday's Mid-Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook, a single line on page 117 revealed: "The government will not proceed with a targeted anti-avoidance provision to address certain conduit arrangements involving foreign multinational enterprises, first announced in the 2013-14 MYEFO."

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/fed...national-profit-shifters-20141216-128ebg.html

Is anyone really surprised?

 

[A More Normal Bird]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B48zKe1CAAA5TtP.png:large

AHAHAHAHAHAHA. What's the bet she never acknowledges this? Of course, "the left" is imagining division Miranda says, as she retweets articles saying things like this:

The story of how the campaign started is, admittedly, quite touching. An Australian woman called Rachael Jacobs saw a Muslim woman commuter on the train looking "isolated and fearful" and apparently trying to remove her headscarf so as to avoid attracting attention. Ms Jacobs approached her and said: "Leave it on. I'll walk with you."

Individual acts of kindness like this are lovely. But when they mutate into Twitter hashtag campaigns they acquire a smug, bullying sanctimoniousness which not only demeans the original act but which, worse, skews the debate about Islamism in a very unhelpful, self-defeating way.

One of the more notable facts about Islamist terror incidents in the West, be they 9/11 and the Boston marathon bombings or the 7/7 tube and bus bombings or the Bali bomb which killed so many young Australians, is how very little they have changed public attitudes to Muslims in general.

Which is to say that - despite the best efforts of organisations like Tell Mama to prove otherwise with dodgy stastistics - there has been NO significant anti-Muslim backlash and NO outbreak of "Islamophobia" in the West.

Damn right, almost no Islamophobia in the West, especially not in Australia and certainly not in Sydney. Plus, who are the real racists? The girl who started the hashtag apparently wrote a blog post where she talked about hating white people and privilege or something and also she doesn't like Gamergate. Of course Miranda isn't saying that supporting or using a hashtag means you're endorsing bizarre SJW views, she's merely retweeting an article. She saves her full blown straw-manning for her own pieces:

They prefer to downplay the terrorist threat and excuse the perpetrators. In their view the self-styled Iranian-born sheik and alleged rapist Man Haron Monis was a humanitarian, motivated by concern for children dying in the Middle East.

Of course by "they" she isn't talking about a particular person or group, or providing a quote, simply outlining the views of "the left".

If the government wants money it can simply create it, making revenue streams redundant.

Zero taxes, zero need to use the government currency. True competition as the government must establish market value to compete with private sector currencies. Ayn Rand's ghost gets an erection.

 

[markot]

My problem with the twitter thing is.... how do you know she was taking it off out of fear?

Its very... presumptuous. Maybe her husband or father made her wear it and she always takes it off when she gets on the train?

Jumping to conclusions is silly.

 

[Jintor]

Hey if you see something say something

 

[A More Normal Bird]

My problem with the twitter thing is.... how do you know she was taking it off out of fear?

Its very... presumptuous. Maybe her husband or father made her wear it and she always takes it off when she gets on the train?

Jumping to conclusions is silly.

Possibly, but, much like the originator of the hashtag being full tumblr, does it really matter? If any one individual doesn't feel they need help they can say so. Even before the topic blew up on social media there were calls coming in to radio stations where Muslims and "people of ME appearance" were saying that they were heading home early or picking up friends or family because they didn't want to be on public transport that day due to past experiences. Of course Miranda Devine might say that these people are all paranoid or secretly hate Australia or something, but even if that was the case then surely the hashtag being so prominent is a good thing, because it would show them that their fears are misplaced and that they've been brainwashed by the loony left... who are the ones using the hashtag.

 

[markot]

Possibly, but, much like the originator of the hashtag being full tumblr, does it really matter? If any one individual doesn't feel they need help they can say so. Even before the topic blew up on social media there were calls coming in to radio stations where Muslims and "people of ME appearance" were saying that they were heading home early or picking up friends or family because they didn't want to be on public transport that day due to past experiences. Of course Miranda Devine might say that these people are all paranoid or secretly hate Australia or something, but even if that was the case then surely the hashtag being so prominent is a good thing, because it would show them that their fears are misplaced and that they've been brainwashed by the loony left... who are the ones using the hashtag.

Does it matter?

That people are 'twittervists' and not doing anything at all constructive but pretending to in the twitterverse?

No it doesnt. Its all awful background noise that makes decent people feel good without doing anything. So in that sense, it does matter.

Twitter has replaced doing things. Cause lets face it, doing things is hard #doingthingsishard.

I mean, I mentioned orwell once! I think ive done my part to stop the police state!

 

[Jintor]

Better positive background noise than apathy or negative background noise though

Also social media might make it easier to just adopt a hashtag or whatever but that's hardly a new problem, movements have been complaining about hangers-on who aren't actually active for as long as there's been movements

 

[Fredescu]

No it doesnt. Its all awful background noise that makes decent people feel good without doing anything. So in that sense, it does matter.

Twitter has replaced doing things.

Helen Razer makes this argument a lot, and I'm not sure I'm fully on board with it yet. She trolls pretty much every lefty/feminist online campaign with "This just makes you think X is the problem and you feel good about winning against it, but the real problem is <power structure>. You haven't done anything about that, and beating X makes you less likely to try."

I can see her point, but I'm not convinced that "Twitter has replaced doing things." What things should they be doing instead? Do we have evidence of the decline of those things? If yes, did being nice on Twitter really lead to the decline of those things?

 

[markot]

Maybe we dont want you on board with it?

Well, what has this campaign achieved?

Will muslim women feel more empowered to wear their choice of clothing? No.

Will racists see it and think 'oh, I get it now' No.

Its just a feel good circle jerk by morans. ie, twitter.

Twitter is to discourse as emoji is to emotion.

 

[Mr. Tone]