-Loki-Don't pee in my mouth and tell me it's raining.Registered Userregular
edited January 2019
Eh, part of that is coerce with intimidation which I don't think this qualifies for.
It's fucking stupid, and just another of her stunts that shows she's more interested in political stunts than policy to gain support (because her policies aren't popular enough to actually gain much support), but it's not terrorism by that definition.
So... on Thursday Pauline Hanson advocated an act of Terrorism.
She called on her supporters to intentionally overload the power grid even further during a period we were already experiencing blackouts (due to the heatwave) to try and force construction of new coal power plants and abandon renewables.
Terrorist acts
A terrorist act is an act, or a threat to act, that meets both these criteria:
it intends to coerce or influence the public or any government by intimidation to advance a political, religious or ideological cause.
it causes one or more of the following:
death, serious harm or danger to a person
serious damage to property
a serious risk to the health of safety of the public serious interference with, disruption to, or destruction of critical infrastructure such as a telecommunications or electricity network.
The statement I'm seeing is 'Stuff the government; just use whatever you normally would this heat wave'.
This is, at worst, accelerationism, as opposed to complete cartoon villany.
At best, it's why does the little guy have to pay for the mismanagement of government, leading into a completely misguided 'So build more coal'.
So, I sort of agree with her that more investment is needed into our power infrastructure.
Just probably solar instead, not coal.
Seems that would work well in the middle of a heatwave.
Aside I've been AC shopping, and these things seem to only be rated up to 46 degrees outside
Where was she trying to do this then, because I'm pretty sure at least in SA and Vic the government already had powered up extra diesel generators and said yo its gonna be hot, we're putting on extra power, go nuts to get through, so that stunt would have meant squat here really?
I think I basically agree wtih you and I'm sure she wouldn't even be able to come close to doing it, but under those weather conditions, in a world where the power had gone then she would be pulling a stunt that would seriously put people's health at risk in order to promote an idea that puts the world at risk and I would be utterly unable to discuss it and her in any way that would be polite
E: To be more clear I mean that if she had said hey let's crash the power and it did, and it could be proven that she was responsible, I would be fine to not call it terrorism, under the assumption and expectation that there is something else that she could be charged with or held accountable for because it really seems wildy reckless to me
Looking at the Guardian's summary of the Commission, I don't know how mortgage brokers are going to get paid if the recommendations are implemented.
Whilst trailing commissions from lenders do provide a conflict of interest, they also mean the service is free for borrowers.
So borrowers who can't pay have to now go.. to the big banks directly for loans?
I don't see how that would be an improvement.
Dhalphirdon't you open that trapdooryou're a fool if you dareRegistered Userregular
also I'm not convinced there is a way to get rid of any conflict of interest. People who don't do their due diligence in researching what they're being told about their mortgages will be taken advantage of somehow by someone, I don't really think it matters whether it's a crooked mortgage broker or a big bank doing the taking advantage of.
Ultimately, I think the government needs some sort of bank of the common-wealth because I don't see private banks ever being able to resist the pull of shareholders over customers.
Yeah, if it shifts to user-pays it's really just going to mean very few people will use brokers, and so most brokers will stop being brokers.
I work in a finance-adjacent area myself and unfortunately do see a lot of people who have been taken advantage of or not realised what they are paying for, and it sucks - just recently had someone try and trade in a car worth $30k only to discover they still owed $54k on it since the finance guy at the yard he bought it from was nice enough to include a whole bunch of insurances.
Hell, I worked at a (non-mortgage) broker about 8 years ago and ended up getting fired because they expected me to lie on applications and not disclose expenses that the customer was going to be paying. There is some shit in the industry for sure, I'm just not sure that what will effectively be burning it to the ground is the best solution.
Switch Friend Code: SW-3944-9431-0318
PSN / Xbox / NNID: Fodder185
Not sure why..
I mean Tas is on fire, but our government is in a holding pattern until we can vote the Liberals out.
It's not like this is the UK or US (2nd shutdown incoming..) thread.
I dread what Morrison will do as he circles the drain. They'll do whatever they can to curb progress once they're out.
They're a bucket of rats and the bucket's on fire.
They also no longer have a majority, so I'm not worried terribly that their flailing will result in anything other than more self-inflicted gaffes.
This election is going to be rough, so many names fighting to be bottom of my ballot this time. so many in fact that I am sure some are going to be nearer the top than I would really like.
Chris Bowen really didn't do Labor any favours regarding the franking credit return.
'hey I'm on lowish income, I'll lose a substantial chunk of money'
'feel free to not vote for us then'
Ok mate, thanks. That's real inspiring.
+2
Options
-Loki-Don't pee in my mouth and tell me it's raining.Registered Userregular
I’m getting three fucken UAP ads every ad break.
Clive, this is how you piss someone off for life, not how you gain votes.
Meanwhile I keep seeing these Treasury-produced-and-funded government election ads everywhere.
And I don't get how they're allowed to waste money like this, without it being election funding.
Christopher Pyne tipped the govt's hand this morning on insiders (in an incredible display of desperation fuelled ranting) as far as their election campaign goes. They're pulling out the classics and going with "Oh noes Boats"
"If any boat arrives between now and election day, we'll be able to say that's here because of Shorten's law."
And since the boats never actually stopped coming, expect that surprise surprise on-water-matters suddenly get talked about again and some of those turn backs get a little less turned back.
The government is in the process of losing the vote on the medivac bill and Pyne completely lost his goddamn mind. He turned bright pink and began ranting about Charles the 1st and the english civil war.
And it's done. Scott managed to get in a particularly shouty and unhinged rant before the vote, but now any illusion of his caretaker government being legitimate have evaporated. Can someone call the Queen and get the GG to put this Goverment out of it's misery.
-SPI- on
+4
Options
-Loki-Don't pee in my mouth and tell me it's raining.Registered Userregular
So that didn’t go the governments way.
0
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
Wish I could block ads from returning but YouTube won't even allow me to block certain channels, so.
If you report the ad you won't see that specific one anymore (click why am I seeing this ad in the bottom left) Unfortunately YouTube is run by Howler Monkeys who will keep serving up other ads from there database of way too goddamn many Palmer ads.
Lol, did the house pass funding without the government's support?
They did!
So from what I heard the amendments were the Labor senate's amendments, I think to allay security department concerns about medical transfers, but also to set up a board of doctors to more quickly review potential transferees.
That costs money, and the senate can't allocate money. But they can send a suggestion back to the lower house, albeit not usually as a draft amendment that says 'and we will spend money'.
Normally the government is the government because they can produce a budget and spend money (they control supply).
However, they just lost this vote in the house which now allocates money to the board of doctors.
This will be sent back to the Senate to repass as they shouldn't have sent a funding amendment to the lower house.
So, the government claims to have supply and can pass the budget with the cross-benchers, but now the opposition can also claim to have supply and so is the government really the government at all?
At which point it really should be GG: Calling a snap dissolution.
Not really, it's schrodinger's Government. It's still a Government until there's no confidence, which has to come in the form of a no confidence vote. Until then, they're still confirmed as the Government of the day because they can pass supply.
They're not going to pass a lot of legislation and they're essentially a lame duck and yes, an early election would be lovely to put them out of their misery, but that's not going to happen either. Morrison will drag this out as long as possible in order to hope for a miracle - it's not totally unheard of in Australian politics for a long lead in the polls to be squandered and Labor can definitely snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
Not really, it's schrodinger's Government. It's still a Government until there's no confidence, which has to come in the form of a no confidence vote. Until then, they're still confirmed as the Government of the day because they can pass supply.
They're not going to pass a lot of legislation and they're essentially a lame duck and yes, an early election would be lovely to put them out of their misery, but that's not going to happen either. Morrison will drag this out as long as possible in order to hope for a miracle - it's not totally unheard of in Australian politics for a long lead in the polls to be squandered and Labor can definitely snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
But the Opposition just passed supply!
That's why the Solicitor General ruled the original Senate amendments unconstitutional (the House needs to start supply bills)
They passed a bill that requires funding and did so against the Government of the day's wishes. That's very rare, but not unprecedented. It happens when you get a minority Government - although, it wouldn't be that different if you had enough members cross the floor if it was a particularly controversial vote.
The Government will still pass a budget, or at least large parts of one. Though even that isn't totally necessary either - the Abbott Government didn't pass large parts of the 2014 budget, though still passed supply overall.
It definitely shows that the current Government is fucked, thank God, but is not a Constitutional crisis needing a snap election.
They passed a bill that requires funding and did so against the Government of the day's wishes. That's very rare, but not unprecedented. It happens when you get a minority Government - although, it wouldn't be that different if you had enough members cross the floor if it was a particularly controversial vote.
The Government will still pass a budget, or at least large parts of one. Though even that isn't totally necessary either - the Abbott Government didn't pass large parts of the 2014 budget, though still passed supply overall.
It definitely shows that the current Government is fucked, thank God, but is not a Constitutional crisis needing a snap election.
Boo...
Sunday Morning Herald is saying I got it wrong and the lower house cut the spending part of the bill to get it over the line:
Constitutional expert Anne Twomey, a professor of law at the University of Sydney, said the Labor decision to cut the cost of the medical panel changed the implications of the loss in Parliament.
"Now that it is no longer a money bill, and given that the government did not declare it to be an issue of confidence, the government can continue governing," she said.
Senate starting to debate the amendments, Liberals are now listing all the speculative rapists, murderers and pedophiles that will flood the country as soon as we start giving people appropriate levels of medical care.
Ghouls.
Posts
It's fucking stupid, and just another of her stunts that shows she's more interested in political stunts than policy to gain support (because her policies aren't popular enough to actually gain much support), but it's not terrorism by that definition.
Someone needs to put a "no acting like a Kim Possible supervillain" law on the books.
The statement I'm seeing is 'Stuff the government; just use whatever you normally would this heat wave'.
This is, at worst, accelerationism, as opposed to complete cartoon villany.
At best, it's why does the little guy have to pay for the mismanagement of government, leading into a completely misguided 'So build more coal'.
So, I sort of agree with her that more investment is needed into our power infrastructure.
Just probably solar instead, not coal.
Seems that would work well in the middle of a heatwave.
Aside I've been AC shopping, and these things seem to only be rated up to 46 degrees outside
What Pauline Hanson did is not terrorism. Even if it crashed the power network ten times over, it wouldn't be terrorism.
E: To be more clear I mean that if she had said hey let's crash the power and it did, and it could be proven that she was responsible, I would be fine to not call it terrorism, under the assumption and expectation that there is something else that she could be charged with or held accountable for because it really seems wildy reckless to me
Whilst trailing commissions from lenders do provide a conflict of interest, they also mean the service is free for borrowers.
So borrowers who can't pay have to now go.. to the big banks directly for loans?
I don't see how that would be an improvement.
I work in a finance-adjacent area myself and unfortunately do see a lot of people who have been taken advantage of or not realised what they are paying for, and it sucks - just recently had someone try and trade in a car worth $30k only to discover they still owed $54k on it since the finance guy at the yard he bought it from was nice enough to include a whole bunch of insurances.
Hell, I worked at a (non-mortgage) broker about 8 years ago and ended up getting fired because they expected me to lie on applications and not disclose expenses that the customer was going to be paying. There is some shit in the industry for sure, I'm just not sure that what will effectively be burning it to the ground is the best solution.
PSN / Xbox / NNID: Fodder185
<_<
Not sure why..
I mean Tas is on fire, but our government is in a holding pattern until we can vote the Liberals out.
It's not like this is the UK or US (2nd shutdown incoming..) thread.
Please shoot me a PM if you add me so I know to add you back.
They're a bucket of rats and the bucket's on fire.
They also no longer have a majority, so I'm not worried terribly that their flailing will result in anything other than more self-inflicted gaffes.
But yeah, they are desperate I guess.
PSN / Xbox / NNID: Fodder185
Bravely Default / 3DS Friend Code = 3394-3571-1609
'hey I'm on lowish income, I'll lose a substantial chunk of money'
'feel free to not vote for us then'
Ok mate, thanks. That's real inspiring.
Clive, this is how you piss someone off for life, not how you gain votes.
Wish I could block ads from returning but YouTube won't even allow me to block certain channels, so.
And I don't get how they're allowed to waste money like this, without it being election funding.
"If any boat arrives between now and election day, we'll be able to say that's here because of Shorten's law."
And since the boats never actually stopped coming, expect that surprise surprise on-water-matters suddenly get talked about again and some of those turn backs get a little less turned back.
And it's done. Scott managed to get in a particularly shouty and unhinged rant before the vote, but now any illusion of his caretaker government being legitimate have evaporated. Can someone call the Queen and get the GG to put this Goverment out of it's misery.
If you report the ad you won't see that specific one anymore (click why am I seeing this ad in the bottom left) Unfortunately YouTube is run by Howler Monkeys who will keep serving up other ads from there database of way too goddamn many Palmer ads.
They did!
So from what I heard the amendments were the Labor senate's amendments, I think to allay security department concerns about medical transfers, but also to set up a board of doctors to more quickly review potential transferees.
That costs money, and the senate can't allocate money. But they can send a suggestion back to the lower house, albeit not usually as a draft amendment that says 'and we will spend money'.
Normally the government is the government because they can produce a budget and spend money (they control supply).
However, they just lost this vote in the house which now allocates money to the board of doctors.
This will be sent back to the Senate to repass as they shouldn't have sent a funding amendment to the lower house.
So, the government claims to have supply and can pass the budget with the cross-benchers, but now the opposition can also claim to have supply and so is the government really the government at all?
At which point it really should be GG: Calling a snap dissolution.
They're not going to pass a lot of legislation and they're essentially a lame duck and yes, an early election would be lovely to put them out of their misery, but that's not going to happen either. Morrison will drag this out as long as possible in order to hope for a miracle - it's not totally unheard of in Australian politics for a long lead in the polls to be squandered and Labor can definitely snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
But the Opposition just passed supply!
That's why the Solicitor General ruled the original Senate amendments unconstitutional (the House needs to start supply bills)
The Government will still pass a budget, or at least large parts of one. Though even that isn't totally necessary either - the Abbott Government didn't pass large parts of the 2014 budget, though still passed supply overall.
It definitely shows that the current Government is fucked, thank God, but is not a Constitutional crisis needing a snap election.
Boo...
Sunday Morning Herald is saying I got it wrong and the lower house cut the spending part of the bill to get it over the line:
Constitutional expert Anne Twomey, a professor of law at the University of Sydney, said the Labor decision to cut the cost of the medical panel changed the implications of the loss in Parliament.
"Now that it is no longer a money bill, and given that the government did not declare it to be an issue of confidence, the government can continue governing," she said.
Ghouls.