Jump to content
scruffy1

how crap is this government ?

Recommended Posts

Granted, the right of the owners to not like an existing home and it be more to their liking and finances, to tear it down and start from scratch, but oh what a fucking shame .

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-08-03/battle-to-save-melbourne-heritage-homes-from-developers/11378710

Especially given the often negligent state of new home builds these days, it's such a worry that these old places aren't wanted for their style and obvious longevity any more ... also, no mention of the possibility of inner walls using asbestos either. I wonder if the guys tearing the place down and the neighbours are prepared to weather that storm. Actually looking at the photo in the link I would think it's too late to be wondering. I really hope the owners build something in keeping with the style the street has worked to maintain.

 

Some body in the article says the local councils needs more funds, perhaps they do, but I reckon we just need more people with sense and taste ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's an Australian attitude that I have never understood Ev.

 

A real estate agent once told me that the only thing that appreciated on any site was the land, the house was a depreciating expendable liability, not an asset at all.

 

Coming from a country that treats 100 year old houses as far from old I have never understood it, I probably never will...

 

Cheers

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many "heritage" homes before about 1930 have plenty of character and should be preserved.

But some of the cheap & nasty weatherboard things from 30s through 60s... not quite.

 

In the modern day, most new houses are pretty nondescript and somewhat ugly.  And the 3+ storey apartments are a frigging disease.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 02/08/2019 at 2:21 PM, Jeruselem said:

Former Senator Frazer Anning could be declared bankrupt, no wonder he needed his 200K per year Senate position.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-08-02/fraser-anning-facing-bankruptcy-believed-to-be-in-united-states/11377610

I was just reading about this. Sounds like karma is trying to get him, just a pity he's hiding in the USA. Still his visa will run out and Trump will send him home to face his dues, hopefully.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure of the law in that regard, I believe at least one of his daughters is a naturalised American so he may be able to stay permanently.

 

I hope I'm wrong by the way....

 

Cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/2/2019 at 7:03 AM, fliptopia said:

In this day and age one business prices out or swallow up all the smaller guys, competition goes to zero or close enough and everyone loses.

Examples of this in a free market please.

23 hours ago, fliptopia said:

You assume things of people that is clearly not shown to be the case.

Do you mean "You assume things of people that are clearly shown to not be the case"? If so then tell me what I am wrongly assuming and show clearly why it is wrong.

23 hours ago, fliptopia said:

There *are* those who will support small business but people gravitate towards price and convenience.

Do you mean "most people gravitate towards price and convenience"?

On 8/2/2019 at 9:58 PM, fliptopia said:

Bigger businesses can more easily follow trends in consumer sentiment.

Small businesses can easily copy big businesses.

On 8/2/2019 at 9:58 PM, fliptopia said:

You can't divorve cronyism from capitalism.

Why?

On 8/2/2019 at 9:58 PM, fliptopia said:

In many cases regulation is the only thing that keeps competition.

Examples please.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 01/08/2019 at 6:53 AM, eveln said:

Yes. They are in charge of the voting booths on the days.

As well as monitoring the behaviour inside where the voting is happening it would be good policy for them to make sure signage and party promoters are doing the right thing outside too. It speaks to our credibility of a good standard of ethics 😉

 

 

On 01/08/2019 at 6:57 PM, eveln said:

And all that will use up more precious monies than slapping them with a fine and having one of their temp staff patrolling the areas at the gates where the various parties display their signage. It's not fucking rocket science (despite  chrisg's unwarranted ire, although, I think his ire is more at me than the idea ... lol  )

It's illegal for opposing persons to interfere with another's signs, and no one wants to see fights ( verbal or otherwise ) between the folks manning their tickets on the day. So it is the bloody obvious conclusion that the AEC needs to deal with it as part of their work.

And the fact that no one dealt with this particular dodgey signage means more wasted time with elected dudes being questioned on the eligibility of their winning their seats. Although, it is a pity none of the opposing parties made a proper fracas about it on the day ...

or did they ?

 

So it's illegal to interfere with signage but you think the AEC should do it on the day?  But it's illegal.  Shouldn't you change the law before fining people for breaking it?

 

On 02/08/2019 at 8:08 PM, NZT48 said:

You are assuming a few things. If people know that they can support the smaller businesses and/or benefit from paying more in businesses competing with the big ones then that won't happen. Socialism is a problem. Crony capitalism is a problem. Free market capitalism is not a problem.

 

Also: less regulation and taxation benefits new enterprise greatly, makes it easier to get off the ground whereas big business loves it because it hinders competition.

You're assuming a lot of things there, if you think that what we need is less red tape before people will suddenly start paying more for goods to support competition.  They can do that now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Nich... said:
On 01/08/2019 at 6:57 PM, eveln said:

And all that will use up more precious monies than slapping them with a fine and having one of their temp staff patrolling the areas at the gates where the various parties display their signage. It's not fucking rocket science (despite  chrisg's unwarranted ire, although, I think his ire is more at me than the idea ... lol  )

It's illegal for opposing persons to interfere with another's signs, and no one wants to see fights ( verbal or otherwise ) between the folks manning their tickets on the day. So it is the bloody obvious conclusion that the AEC needs to deal with it as part of their work.

And the fact that no one dealt with this particular dodgey signage means more wasted time with elected dudes being questioned on the eligibility of their winning their seats. Although, it is a pity none of the opposing parties made a proper fracas about it on the day ...

or did they ?

 

So it's illegal to interfere with signage but you think the AEC should do it on the day?  But it's illegal.  Shouldn't you change the law before fining people for breaking it?

If the AEC were manning the territory of the voting booth as well as the area where the various Party spruikers be then they wouldn't actually have to touch the signs them selves, they could just tell those concerned to take down inappropriate / misleading signage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My understanding, from following this conversation in over areas on election weekend etc, is that they're not able to.  It's meant to basically go to court to determine if it's a valid sign or not. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well isn't that just a waste of taxpayers money ?! I've no idea of the correct protocol, but I did think my idea made perfect sense

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm.

 

If I understand the matter correctly the signage advised either Mandarin or Cantonese speakers on the correct way to vote and that was directing votes towards a particular party.

 

That is decidedly underhand, but, is it reasonable to expect AEC workers to be able to translate the signage?

 

I'd suggest not.

 

More importantly the perpetrators need to be censured to the extent of the law, which I would hope and trust is sufficient to prevent a recurrence.

 

But to reiterate, it is ridiculous to fine the AEC.

 

Cheers

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, chrisg said:

is it reasonable to expect AEC workers to be able to translate the signage?

tell me where I suggested that was a good idea, ffs chrisg ... get off the fucking grass man, your armchair needs you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

🙂

 

Just how else were they to know there was nefarious intent ?

 

You reacted with ire against the AEC but I can't see how the hell they could have known - especially in the pressure of an election.

 

i don't need an armchair, sorta wonder if you don't need a chill-pill...

 

Cheers

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, chrisg said:

Just how else were they to know there was nefarious intent ?

it's not just knowing whether there is nefarious intent. It's the logic of having signs in only a foreign language on display at an Australian voting booth. the requisite should be that all foreign language signs have the English written alongside /underneath.

 

your trolling is childish chrisg ... perhaps you need to get your personalities in order ... have a rest.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

🙂

 

Nothing childish about it and not trolling.

 

How could the inspectors be certain the English translation was actually the same as what was written in the other language ?

 

I don't have a personality issue, I have anxiety issues, that I have had, intermittently for years - they do not affect my common sense.

 

Cheers

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

lol.

I should think " Google is your friend" , could be an end result for translation purposes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

🙂

 

Possibly, although Mandarin and Cantonese are particularly obtuse - I don't know if Google Translate is particularly good at making sense of them.

 

But, the AEC personnel to my knowledge don't have access anyway, or time to worry about it - mostly they are handing out voting papers, directing traffic and answering questions - it's a busy job.

 

Keep it simple - the AEC did not know that those signs said what they did, if they had have they would have had an interesting dilemma of proof in the context of one day only.

 

I also wonder, although I have not seen any evidence yet, if there was not also mail-outs to Mandarin and Cantonese speakers -it would not be hard, the electoral enrollment has you nominate the principal language spoken at home, but it would have been riskier in case a dual language person in the household read them and had different views.

 

The simple fact is some cunning little persons found a way around the remarkably robust regulations that govern the AEC, they won't manage it again, but they will probably try something else - corruption abounds.

 

I don't have any particular suggestions other than endless vigilance but i do not think fining the AEC is in any respect an answer.

 

End of story.

 

Cheers

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

🙂

 

i'd very much doubt it, we COULD increase our own extraction but that is not going to happen overnight. There are rigs out exploring in the bight and southern Spencer Gulf atm, with a good chance of big strikes but even if so that would be years away from refinement.

 

We'll be bending over to the arabs again, mighty soon.

 

Cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Still getting my head around 'someone broke the law, make the regulator pay, not the person breaking the law'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The other problem is where to put these new fuel tank farms, since they tend to get covered over by city growth. Darwin had some but they are gone now (there's new ones at the Vopak Terminal).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

🙂

 

That is a very succinct way to put it Nich   🙂

 

I dunno if we will really need much more in the way of fuel tank farms - possibly in Darwin for a time but electric cars are coming quicker than we think.

 

My BinL is thinking to retire in a couple of years, he's thinking his retirement vehicle will be electric, he's probably right.

 

 

Cheers

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, chrisg said:

🙂

 

That is a very succinct way to put it Nich   🙂

 

I dunno if we will really need much more in the way of fuel tank farms - possibly in Darwin for a time but electric cars are coming quicker than we think.

 

My BinL is thinking to retire in a couple of years, he's thinking his retirement vehicle will be electric, he's probably right.

 

 

Cheers

 

 

 

 

I'm sure the US military might need some if they put in a new port here ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

🙂

 

Do they still refuel there ? They moved to off-shore refueling to avoid any debate over if they are carrying nukes I had thought, years ago   🙂

 

Cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×