Merged Australian Politics / Australian election

lionking said:
They are aligning with the Liberals. Does that suit you?
Click to expand...
Supporting the bill just because the Libs oppose it would be the stupidest reason to support it imaginable.
The Greens aren't "aligning with the Libs", they are exercising their usual policy of allowing the perfect to be the enemy of the good.
 
psionl0 said:
The Greens aren't "aligning with the Libs", they are exercising their usual policy of allowing the perfect to be the enemy of the good.
Click to expand...
You're probably right. They might want to ban gambling ads altogether which would be nice, as I hate gambling, but maybe it's something that needs to happen in stages.
 
Orphia Nay said:
Does he still have a radio show? Or other soapbox?
Click to expand...
Since he 'lost his contract' on SkyNews a couple of years ago (which is basically just 'foxnews lite) he has been reduced to making podcasts only (which he is still doing- well I suspect they are just using the backlog now lol- I doubt that making podcasts is in the front of what is left of his 'mind'....
 
arthwollipot said:
What? No! It's a stupid idea. I don't know how you come to that conclusion from my posting the above article.
Click to expand...
I was tricked by your posting sequence. You first posted about crazies Thorp and Lambie. Then in your very next post, you stated "Also, this:" and included a link to Andrew Wilkie opposing the ban on teens using social media.
 
Not sure what to make of this...

The framework recommends legal reforms to include minimum requirements to counter racial discrimination. This includes embedding First Nations cultural safety across sectors.

It also includes recommendations for the education system to implement cultural safety and anti-racism reforms, and for workplaces to develop and implement various internal anti-racism strategies. One such suggestion is mandatory cultural safety and anti-racism training for all workers, including parliamentarians.

The plan involves strategies for recruiting and retaining staff from First Nations and other minority communities in leadership and senior roles.

It also calls for media organisations to adopt guidelines based on an anti-racist approach to reporting. To lead by example, parliamentarians and staff should adhere to a zero-tolerance approach to racism.

The framework recommends that the government establish a National Anti-racism Taskforce to develop separate implementation plans. One of these would focus on First Nations people; the other on the general population.
Click to expand...

https://theconversation.com/can-we-...ording-to-the-first-ever-national-plan-244734

It seems to be rehashing all the ideas that seem to have made racism worse in the last few years.
 
arthwollipot said:
What? No! It's a stupid idea. I don't know how you come to that conclusion from my posting the above article.
Click to expand...
I agree, it's a stupid idea. "Social media" is a Boomer bugbear.

Kids should be taught to use it, and tech companies should make it safe. It's a silly law, and banning teens from "social media" (whatever that is) is vague, designed to make old people feel good.
 
arthwollipot said:
And yet, apparently 77% of people are in favour of it.
Click to expand...
Calling an activity illegal won't curtail it. In fact, it is likely to make the activity more attractive - especially to young people. The first thing that will happen is that teens will learn all about setting up VPNs etc so I guess that a positive effect of the law would be to make teens even more tech savvy.

Of course, this highlights the old adage about not underestimating the stupidity of the voting public. I understand that Bill Clinton managed to retain his presidency by introducing similar internet laws after conducting seminars to find out what concerned voters. He must have known that the laws wouldn't make much of a difference but votes are votes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom