There is a by election underway in Hinchinbrook. The seat has been held by Nick Dametto of the Katter Australia Party for 8 years. He resigned to run for mayor of Townsville.

Looks like KAP may be in a spot of bother but it will ultimately come down to preferences.

And so it proved. Wayde Chiesa of the LNP has won the seat handily.

KAP’s sole representative in the chamber is now Shane Knuth, in the district of Hill.

dv said:

There is a by election underway in Hinchinbrook. The seat has been held by Nick Dametto of the Katter Australia Party for 8 years. He resigned to run for mayor of Townsville.

Looks like KAP may be in a spot of bother but it will ultimately come down to preferences.

And so it proved. Wayde Chiesa of the LNP has won the seat handily.

KAP’s sole representative in the chamber is now Shane Knuth, in the district of Hill.

Don’t suppose it’ll make much difference.

Bubblecar said:

dv said:

There is a by election underway in Hinchinbrook. The seat has been held by Nick Dametto of the Katter Australia Party for 8 years. He resigned to run for mayor of Townsville.

Looks like KAP may be in a spot of bother but it will ultimately come down to preferences.

And so it proved. Wayde Chiesa of the LNP has won the seat handily.

KAP’s sole representative in the chamber is now Shane Knuth, in the district of Hill.

Don’t suppose it’ll make much difference.

Well that’s true enough. It might buoy the feelings of the government a bit.

Katter is not a good leader, he takes matters too personally, an indicator of low emotional control.

His last show of that was recorded for public record.

Friendly chap.

Tau.Neutrino said:

Katter is not a good leader, he takes matters too personally, an indicator of low emotional control.

His last show of that was recorded for public record.

Friendly chap.

IMO.

Which probably saw votes going to the other parties.

quitter talk, how can you play team sports if you can’t commentate them like team sports

Marles says the government won’t give a running commentary on the movements of all Chinese military vessels.

SCIENCE said:

quitter talk, how can you play team sports if you can’t commentate them like team sports

Marles says the government won’t give a running commentary on the movements of all Chinese military vessels.

I wonder if the USA considers Australia a throw away asset in its dick waving contest with China

Cymek said:

SCIENCE said:

quitter talk, how can you play team sports if you can’t commentate them like team sports

Marles says the government won’t give a running commentary on the movements of all Chinese military vessels.

I wonder if the USA considers Australia a throw away asset in its dick waving contest with China

The professional people in diplomatic and military circles, or the current administration in the WH?

party_pants said:

Cymek said:

SCIENCE said:

quitter talk, how can you play team sports if you can’t commentate them like team sports

Marles says the government won’t give a running commentary on the movements of all Chinese military vessels.

I wonder if the USA considers Australia a throw away asset in its dick waving contest with China

The professional people in diplomatic and military circles, or the current administration in the WH?

Both
I think its why Australia always sides with the USA in military invasions
Worried they won’t honour treaties if we are attacked

Some interesting stats in this article:

…

If Labor really cared about our future, these tax breaks must go

Thomas Walker
Money contributor
December 2, 2025 — 11.28am

When you hear someone say that Australia is “living beyond its means”, or as Opposition Leader Sussan Ley put it, about a culture of dependence that has “weakened both our finances and our national character”, they’re usually not talking about the billions in tax breaks for multimillionaire retirees, wealthy property investors or fossil fuel corporations.

They point to families who rely on childcare, and those with a disability. Or the teachers and nurses who take their salary from the public purse.

It seems that if you’re buying your fourth investment property, you’re a true-blue Aussie inspiration. But a student receiving rent assistance and Austudy? You’re a fiscal burden with a character flaw.

Since the government’s Economic Reform Roundtable identified intergenerational equity as a priority for reform, there’s been a surge of speeches and opinion pieces insisting Australia has a spending problem.

As a millennial worried about the future of the budget, this is an important conversation to have. But it’s clear that “intergenerational equity” is again being hijacked by some politicians, economists and media commentators to justify austerity.

Intergenerational equity as a spending issue has been the dominant frame since the 1990s. But a focus on balancing the budget has not prevented the worsening of living conditions for Australia’s younger generations.

We must wind back the capital gains tax discount, scrap negative gearing for landlords, and throw out generous superannuation tax breaks.

This narrow view of intergenerational equity doesn’t consider what truly matters. It neglects the distribution of wealth and opportunity, the quality of our natural assets and public services, resilience to risks, and whether life is improving.

It means that, on the one hand, our leaders claim they care deeply about younger people through their spending restraint. But then they support the capital gains tax discount, rapidly rising house prices, the privatisation of essential services, and the approval of new fossil fuel projects.

These policies drive intergenerational wealth inequality, record levels of private (rather than public) debt, and climate change, all of which are much more pressing concerns for younger Australians.

Yes, spending taxpayers’ money efficiently is important, but it’s difficult to feel thankful when our political leaders say we have a budget crisis while throwing tens of billions to the already wealthy.

In fairness to those who argue that we have a spending problem, they are right. But it’s not that we spend too much, it’s that we spend on the wrong things. According to OECD data, public spending in Australia is low, equivalent to 38.6 per cent of GDP, well below the OECD average (42.6 per cent) and even lower than the USA (39.1 per cent).

We are a world-leader in tax breaks, though, forgoing approximately 32 per cent of our tax revenue through concessions, which is well above the OECD average of 20 per cent.

The facts show that we are not big spenders, but rather a low-spending nation that shifts our resources from public investment in our collective capacity to private wealth accumulation.

Cutting public spending doesn’t make us better off. It starves us of long-term investments in our future. We must wind back the capital gains tax discount, scrap negative gearing for landlords, subsidies for the fossil fuel industry and throw out generous superannuation tax breaks.

By doing so, work and effort will be rewarded, not speculation, accumulation and rent-seeking. We can shift our public resources into building new homes, funding world-leading public services, making tertiary education affordable, and developing clean-energy and digital infrastructure.

To truly champion intergenerational equity, our leaders must invest in younger generations, not impose austerity in our name. We are not a burden. We just want to get a good, affordable education, to work hard, buy a home, start a family and live on a healthy planet.

Just like generations prior. But that’s being taken from us by the real dependents on the public purse.

Thomas Walker is the CEO of Think Forward, an economics think tank run by younger Australians.

https://www.smh.com.au/money/planning-and-budgeting/if-labor-really-cared-about-our-future-these-tax-breaks-must-go-20251202-p5nk2g.html

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-03/live-bruce-lehrmann-defamation-appeal-finding/106090370

Bruce Lehrmann has lost his appeal against a Federal Court ruling that found on the balance of probabilities he had raped Brittany Higgins in 2019.

The former Liberal staffer took Network Ten and journalist Lisa Wilkinson to court over an episode of The Project in which Brittany Higgins said she was raped in Parliament House, although she did not name the man she accused.

Last year, Justice Michael Lee found on the balance of probabilities that Mr Lehrmann had raped his then-colleague Brittany Higgins at Parliament House in Canberra in 2019.

He appealed against this decision in the Federal Court, and the hearings were held in August.

Mr Lehrmann has always maintained his innocence, and his criminal trial over the alleged rape collapsed in 2022.

“The full court has found, based on the unchallenged findings made by the primary judge, that the only reasonable inference to be drawn by the facts known as observable to Mr Lehrmann at the time that he had sexual intercourse with Ms Higgins is that he did turn his mind to whether Ms Higgins consented to sex, was aware that she was not consenting but proceeded nonetheless.”

He added: “The acceptance of that contention provides another basis for upholding the primary judge’s finding that Mr Lehrmann raped Ms Higgins and that the truth defence pleaded by Network 10 and Ms Wilkinson had been made out.”

dv said:

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-03/live-bruce-lehrmann-defamation-appeal-finding/106090370

Bruce Lehrmann has lost his appeal against a Federal Court ruling that found on the balance of probabilities he had raped Brittany Higgins in 2019.

The former Liberal staffer took Network Ten and journalist Lisa Wilkinson to court over an episode of The Project in which Brittany Higgins said she was raped in Parliament House, although she did not name the man she accused.

Last year, Justice Michael Lee found on the balance of probabilities that Mr Lehrmann had raped his then-colleague Brittany Higgins at Parliament House in Canberra in 2019.

He appealed against this decision in the Federal Court, and the hearings were held in August.

Mr Lehrmann has always maintained his innocence, and his criminal trial over the alleged rape collapsed in 2022.

“The full court has found, based on the unchallenged findings made by the primary judge, that the only reasonable inference to be drawn by the facts known as observable to Mr Lehrmann at the time that he had sexual intercourse with Ms Higgins is that he did turn his mind to whether Ms Higgins consented to sex, was aware that she was not consenting but proceeded nonetheless.”

He added: “The acceptance of that contention provides another basis for upholding the primary judge’s finding that Mr Lehrmann raped Ms Higgins and that the truth defence pleaded by Network 10 and Ms Wilkinson had been made out.”

Get that up ya, Bruce.

captain_spalding said:

dv said:

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-03/live-bruce-lehrmann-defamation-appeal-finding/106090370

Bruce Lehrmann has lost his appeal against a Federal Court ruling that found on the balance of probabilities he had raped Brittany Higgins in 2019.

The former Liberal staffer took Network Ten and journalist Lisa Wilkinson to court over an episode of The Project in which Brittany Higgins said she was raped in Parliament House, although she did not name the man she accused.

Last year, Justice Michael Lee found on the balance of probabilities that Mr Lehrmann had raped his then-colleague Brittany Higgins at Parliament House in Canberra in 2019.

He appealed against this decision in the Federal Court, and the hearings were held in August.

Mr Lehrmann has always maintained his innocence, and his criminal trial over the alleged rape collapsed in 2022.

“The full court has found, based on the unchallenged findings made by the primary judge, that the only reasonable inference to be drawn by the facts known as observable to Mr Lehrmann at the time that he had sexual intercourse with Ms Higgins is that he did turn his mind to whether Ms Higgins consented to sex, was aware that she was not consenting but proceeded nonetheless.”

He added: “The acceptance of that contention provides another basis for upholding the primary judge’s finding that Mr Lehrmann raped Ms Higgins and that the truth defence pleaded by Network 10 and Ms Wilkinson had been made out.”

Get that up ya, Bruce.

so all 4 of these are wrong

That the justification defence in Justice Lee’s judgment was different to the case put forward by Network Ten, again denying Mr Lehrmann procedural fairness.
That relevant material had not been put to witnesses during the defamation trial, denying Mr Lehrmann procedural fairness.
That Justice Lee erroneously assessed what was conveyed to the ordinary, reasonable person.
That Justice Lee erred when he decided — if Mr Lehrmann had succeeded in his case — that he would only be entitled to “a mere $20,000 in damages.”

Witty Rejoinder said:

Some interesting stats in this article:

…

If Labor really cared about our future, these tax breaks must go

Thomas Walker
Money contributor
December 2, 2025 — 11.28am

When you hear someone say that Australia is “living beyond its means”, or as Opposition Leader Sussan Ley put it, about a culture of dependence that has “weakened both our finances and our national character”, they’re usually not talking about the billions in tax breaks for multimillionaire retirees, wealthy property investors or fossil fuel corporations.

They point to families who rely on childcare, and those with a disability. Or the teachers and nurses who take their salary from the public purse.

It seems that if you’re buying your fourth investment property, you’re a true-blue Aussie inspiration. But a student receiving rent assistance and Austudy? You’re a fiscal burden with a character flaw.

Since the government’s Economic Reform Roundtable identified intergenerational equity as a priority for reform, there’s been a surge of speeches and opinion pieces insisting Australia has a spending problem.

As a millennial worried about the future of the budget, this is an important conversation to have. But it’s clear that “intergenerational equity” is again being hijacked by some politicians, economists and media commentators to justify austerity.

Intergenerational equity as a spending issue has been the dominant frame since the 1990s. But a focus on balancing the budget has not prevented the worsening of living conditions for Australia’s younger generations.

We must wind back the capital gains tax discount, scrap negative gearing for landlords, and throw out generous superannuation tax breaks.

This narrow view of intergenerational equity doesn’t consider what truly matters. It neglects the distribution of wealth and opportunity, the quality of our natural assets and public services, resilience to risks, and whether life is improving.

It means that, on the one hand, our leaders claim they care deeply about younger people through their spending restraint. But then they support the capital gains tax discount, rapidly rising house prices, the privatisation of essential services, and the approval of new fossil fuel projects.

These policies drive intergenerational wealth inequality, record levels of private (rather than public) debt, and climate change, all of which are much more pressing concerns for younger Australians.

Yes, spending taxpayers’ money efficiently is important, but it’s difficult to feel thankful when our political leaders say we have a budget crisis while throwing tens of billions to the already wealthy.

In fairness to those who argue that we have a spending problem, they are right. But it’s not that we spend too much, it’s that we spend on the wrong things. According to OECD data, public spending in Australia is low, equivalent to 38.6 per cent of GDP, well below the OECD average (42.6 per cent) and even lower than the USA (39.1 per cent).

We are a world-leader in tax breaks, though, forgoing approximately 32 per cent of our tax revenue through concessions, which is well above the OECD average of 20 per cent.

The facts show that we are not big spenders, but rather a low-spending nation that shifts our resources from public investment in our collective capacity to private wealth accumulation.

Cutting public spending doesn’t make us better off. It starves us of long-term investments in our future. We must wind back the capital gains tax discount, scrap negative gearing for landlords, subsidies for the fossil fuel industry and throw out generous superannuation tax breaks.

By doing so, work and effort will be rewarded, not speculation, accumulation and rent-seeking. We can shift our public resources into building new homes, funding world-leading public services, making tertiary education affordable, and developing clean-energy and digital infrastructure.

To truly champion intergenerational equity, our leaders must invest in younger generations, not impose austerity in our name. We are not a burden. We just want to get a good, affordable education, to work hard, buy a home, start a family and live on a healthy planet.

Just like generations prior. But that’s being taken from us by the real dependents on the public purse.

Thomas Walker is the CEO of Think Forward, an economics think tank run by younger Australians.

https://www.smh.com.au/money/planning-and-budgeting/if-labor-really-cared-about-our-future-these-tax-breaks-must-go-20251202-p5nk2g.html

As almost always, it lumps capital gains concessions and negative gearing concessions together as if they were equally evil.

Yes the capital gains concessions should go. They have no valid basis and encourage short-term investing; i.e sell as soon as possible after 365 days.

Removing the concession on negative gearing means that people will be taxed on income that has been spent on maintaining the investment, and if the capital gains tax concession was removed it wouldn’t even generate more tax in the long term, since costs not deducted for income tax can be deducted for capital gains tax. Apart from which, Big Landlord will just rearrange their affairs to claim the deductions for interest paid elsewhere.

SCIENCE said:

captain_spalding said:

dv said:

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-03/live-bruce-lehrmann-defamation-appeal-finding/106090370

Bruce Lehrmann has lost his appeal against a Federal Court ruling that found on the balance of probabilities he had raped Brittany Higgins in 2019.

The former Liberal staffer took Network Ten and journalist Lisa Wilkinson to court over an episode of The Project in which Brittany Higgins said she was raped in Parliament House, although she did not name the man she accused.

Last year, Justice Michael Lee found on the balance of probabilities that Mr Lehrmann had raped his then-colleague Brittany Higgins at Parliament House in Canberra in 2019.

He appealed against this decision in the Federal Court, and the hearings were held in August.

Mr Lehrmann has always maintained his innocence, and his criminal trial over the alleged rape collapsed in 2022.

“The full court has found, based on the unchallenged findings made by the primary judge, that the only reasonable inference to be drawn by the facts known as observable to Mr Lehrmann at the time that he had sexual intercourse with Ms Higgins is that he did turn his mind to whether Ms Higgins consented to sex, was aware that she was not consenting but proceeded nonetheless.”

He added: “The acceptance of that contention provides another basis for upholding the primary judge’s finding that Mr Lehrmann raped Ms Higgins and that the truth defence pleaded by Network 10 and Ms Wilkinson had been made out.”

Get that up ya, Bruce.

so all 4 of these are wrong

That the justification defence in Justice Lee’s judgment was different to the case put forward by Network Ten, again denying Mr Lehrmann procedural fairness.
That relevant material had not been put to witnesses during the defamation trial, denying Mr Lehrmann procedural fairness.
That Justice Lee erroneously assessed what was conveyed to the ordinary, reasonable person.
That Justice Lee erred when he decided — if Mr Lehrmann had succeeded in his case — that he would only be entitled to “a mere $20,000 in damages.”

The entire way it was handled was extremely distasteful and shows just how nasty people can be.

The Rev Dodgson said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

Some interesting stats in this article:

…

If Labor really cared about our future, these tax breaks must go

Thomas Walker
Money contributor
December 2, 2025 — 11.28am

When you hear someone say that Australia is “living beyond its means”, or as Opposition Leader Sussan Ley put it, about a culture of dependence that has “weakened both our finances and our national character”, they’re usually not talking about the billions in tax breaks for multimillionaire retirees, wealthy property investors or fossil fuel corporations.

They point to families who rely on childcare, and those with a disability. Or the teachers and nurses who take their salary from the public purse.

It seems that if you’re buying your fourth investment property, you’re a true-blue Aussie inspiration. But a student receiving rent assistance and Austudy? You’re a fiscal burden with a character flaw.

Since the government’s Economic Reform Roundtable identified intergenerational equity as a priority for reform, there’s been a surge of speeches and opinion pieces insisting Australia has a spending problem.

As a millennial worried about the future of the budget, this is an important conversation to have. But it’s clear that “intergenerational equity” is again being hijacked by some politicians, economists and media commentators to justify austerity.

Intergenerational equity as a spending issue has been the dominant frame since the 1990s. But a focus on balancing the budget has not prevented the worsening of living conditions for Australia’s younger generations.

We must wind back the capital gains tax discount, scrap negative gearing for landlords, and throw out generous superannuation tax breaks.

This narrow view of intergenerational equity doesn’t consider what truly matters. It neglects the distribution of wealth and opportunity, the quality of our natural assets and public services, resilience to risks, and whether life is improving.

It means that, on the one hand, our leaders claim they care deeply about younger people through their spending restraint. But then they support the capital gains tax discount, rapidly rising house prices, the privatisation of essential services, and the approval of new fossil fuel projects.

These policies drive intergenerational wealth inequality, record levels of private (rather than public) debt, and climate change, all of which are much more pressing concerns for younger Australians.

Yes, spending taxpayers’ money efficiently is important, but it’s difficult to feel thankful when our political leaders say we have a budget crisis while throwing tens of billions to the already wealthy.

In fairness to those who argue that we have a spending problem, they are right. But it’s not that we spend too much, it’s that we spend on the wrong things. According to OECD data, public spending in Australia is low, equivalent to 38.6 per cent of GDP, well below the OECD average (42.6 per cent) and even lower than the USA (39.1 per cent).

We are a world-leader in tax breaks, though, forgoing approximately 32 per cent of our tax revenue through concessions, which is well above the OECD average of 20 per cent.

The facts show that we are not big spenders, but rather a low-spending nation that shifts our resources from public investment in our collective capacity to private wealth accumulation.

Cutting public spending doesn’t make us better off. It starves us of long-term investments in our future. We must wind back the capital gains tax discount, scrap negative gearing for landlords, subsidies for the fossil fuel industry and throw out generous superannuation tax breaks.

By doing so, work and effort will be rewarded, not speculation, accumulation and rent-seeking. We can shift our public resources into building new homes, funding world-leading public services, making tertiary education affordable, and developing clean-energy and digital infrastructure.

To truly champion intergenerational equity, our leaders must invest in younger generations, not impose austerity in our name. We are not a burden. We just want to get a good, affordable education, to work hard, buy a home, start a family and live on a healthy planet.

Just like generations prior. But that’s being taken from us by the real dependents on the public purse.

Thomas Walker is the CEO of Think Forward, an economics think tank run by younger Australians.

https://www.smh.com.au/money/planning-and-budgeting/if-labor-really-cared-about-our-future-these-tax-breaks-must-go-20251202-p5nk2g.html

As almost always, it lumps capital gains concessions and negative gearing concessions together as if they were equally evil.

Yes the capital gains concessions should go. They have no valid basis and encourage short-term investing; i.e sell as soon as possible after 365 days.

Removing the concession on negative gearing means that people will be taxed on income that has been spent on maintaining the investment, and if the capital gains tax concession was removed it wouldn’t even generate more tax in the long term, since costs not deducted for income tax can be deducted for capital gains tax. Apart from which, Big Landlord will just rearrange their affairs to claim the deductions for interest paid elsewhere.

I agree negative gearing for owning one property that is a new build is pretty harmless.

Something that really needs to be addressed is the way that big companies are able to make a great deal of money in Australia, but to structure things so that they pay a trivial sum, or nothing at all!, in taxes in Australia, as evidenced by the lists of profits versus taxes paid that appear in the media from time to time.

There’s billions of dollars to be garnered there.

captain_spalding said:

Something that really needs to be addressed is the way that big companies are able to make a great deal of money in Australia, but to structure things so that they pay a trivial sum, or nothing at all!, in taxes in Australia, as evidenced by the lists of profits versus taxes paid that appear in the media from time to time.

There’s billions of dollars to be garnered there.

didn’t they try that at some international meeting recently and the countries wanting to make a quick but smaller buck told everyone to fuck off

captain_spalding said:

Something that really needs to be addressed is the way that big companies are able to make a great deal of money in Australia, but to structure things so that they pay a trivial sum, or nothing at all!, in taxes in Australia, as evidenced by the lists of profits versus taxes paid that appear in the media from time to time.

There’s billions of dollars to be garnered there.

Yeah, but just because a defect in the system can’t be addressed everywhere, it doesn’t mean that it can’t be rectified anywhere.

captain_spalding said:

Something that really needs to be addressed is the way that big companies are able to make a great deal of money in Australia, but to structure things so that they pay a trivial sum, or nothing at all!, in taxes in Australia, as evidenced by the lists of profits versus taxes paid that appear in the media from time to time.

There’s billions of dollars to be garnered there.

Yep. The various loopholes in tax law that they use to avoid paying tax have been there for quite a long time, but the governments never seem to have the guts to close or even limit them in any way.
The problem isn’t the companies, it’s the government – as usual.

Spiny Norman said:

captain_spalding said:

Something that really needs to be addressed is the way that big companies are able to make a great deal of money in Australia, but to structure things so that they pay a trivial sum, or nothing at all!, in taxes in Australia, as evidenced by the lists of profits versus taxes paid that appear in the media from time to time.

There’s billions of dollars to be garnered there.

Yep. The various loopholes in tax law that they use to avoid paying tax have been there for quite a long time, but the governments never seem to have the guts to close or even limit them in any way.
The problem isn’t the companies, it’s the government – as usual.

There’s been some talk of a tax on revenue for situations where profits are funneled elsewhere. As always it would be complicated.

Witty Rejoinder said:

Spiny Norman said:

captain_spalding said:

Something that really needs to be addressed is the way that big companies are able to make a great deal of money in Australia, but to structure things so that they pay a trivial sum, or nothing at all!, in taxes in Australia, as evidenced by the lists of profits versus taxes paid that appear in the media from time to time.

There’s billions of dollars to be garnered there.

Yep. The various loopholes in tax law that they use to avoid paying tax have been there for quite a long time, but the governments never seem to have the guts to close or even limit them in any way.
The problem isn’t the companies, it’s the government – as usual.

There’s been some talk of a tax on revenue for situations where profits are funneled elsewhere. As always it would be complicated.

Tax law being complicated never seems to be a problem when it targets small fry.

captain_spalding said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

Spiny Norman said:

Yep. The various loopholes in tax law that they use to avoid paying tax have been there for quite a long time, but the governments never seem to have the guts to close or even limit them in any way.
The problem isn’t the companies, it’s the government – as usual.

There’s been some talk of a tax on revenue for situations where profits are funneled elsewhere. As always it would be complicated.

Tax law being complicated never seems to be a problem when it targets small fry.

I mean it would have repercussions for companies not minimising their tax.

Witty Rejoinder said:

captain_spalding said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

There’s been some talk of a tax on revenue for situations where profits are funneled elsewhere. As always it would be complicated.

Tax law being complicated never seems to be a problem when it targets small fry.

I mean it would have repercussions for companies not minimising their tax.

Again, who gives a shit about repercussions if you’re just Joe Average, or a small business?

captain_spalding said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

captain_spalding said:

Tax law being complicated never seems to be a problem when it targets small fry.

I mean it would have repercussions for companies not minimising their tax.

Again, who gives a shit about repercussions if you’re just Joe Average, or a small business?

You feel hard done by by the tax laws?

Witty Rejoinder said:

captain_spalding said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

I mean it would have repercussions for companies not minimising their tax.

Again, who gives a shit about repercussions if you’re just Joe Average, or a small business?

You feel hard done by by the tax laws?

No, i’m all right, thanks.

It irks me when we see articles an opinions like the one in this thread, that say ‘ooh, we can’t afford the benefits and systems that we have now, we just can’t find the money, all the peasants and kulaks need to cough up some more’, while large companies laugh all the way to the offshore bank.

Sure, maybe things like negative gearing, and capital gains tax, and supersized superannuation accounts do need to be looked at.

But, stop pretending that there isn’t a corporate elephant in the room.

captain_spalding said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

captain_spalding said:

Again, who gives a shit about repercussions if you’re just Joe Average, or a small business?

You feel hard done by by the tax laws?

No, i’m all right, thanks.

It irks me when we see articles an opinions like the one in this thread, that say ‘ooh, we can’t afford the benefits and systems that we have now, we just can’t find the money, all the peasants and kulaks need to cough up some more’, while large companies laugh all the way to the offshore bank.

Sure, maybe things like negative gearing, and capital gains tax, and supersized superannuation accounts do need to be looked at.

But, stop pretending that there isn’t a corporate elephant in the room.

I think everyone acknowledges the problems but as I said it’s complicated.

wait so

the platforms in question are Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat, X (formerly Twitter), YouTube, Reddit, Twitch, Kick, and Threads. Already, there are signs plenty of under-16s are planning to move to other platforms that aren’t covered by the new rules, such as Yope, Lemon8 and RedNote. But there’s no guarantee

why aren’t these juveniles just shifting their operations to Discord like all the kids we’ve talked to about it, or are we missing something here

Borrowings by Tasmanian government businesses will be reduced by $500 million over the coming three years to accommodate the debt needed for the Macquarie Point stadium in Hobart.

Premier Jeremy Rockliff and Treasurer Eric Abetz confirmed the reduction in a letter to independent Dean Harriss, along with an agreement to find “additional revenues” ahead of the May budget.

Mr Harriss interpreted this as meaning that “state taxes and charges will increase”, and used the commitment as a basis for his support for the stadium.

In the letter, the government commits to reducing public non-financial corporation (PNFC) net borrowings by $500 million — “broadly equating” to the $490.7 million in borrowing required by the Macquarie Point Development Corporation (MPDC) for the stadium.

PFNCs include entities such as Homes Tasmania — which delivers public and social housing — and government-owned businesses Hydro Tasmania, Spirit of Tasmania operator TT-Line and TasNetworks, among others.

In last month’s state budget, it was noted that Homes Tasmania was “ increasingly reliant on borrowings to achieve its policy objectives”, forecast to exceed $1 billion in 2029, while TT-Line was expected to require additional government bailouts to address its long-term financial issues.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-04/cutbacks-revenue-raising-funding-for-hobart-afl-stadium/106099580

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-05/sa-opposition-leader-vincent-tarzia-steps-down/106106170

South Australia’s Opposition Leader Vincent Tarzia has stepped down from party leadership.
——

Election is 3 months away. Doesn’t give his replacement much time to steer the ship: bit of a hospital pass.

Sydney Water is projecting that by 2035, the amount of water requires by data centres in Sydney will be 250 megalitres per day. This compares with around 1050 ML currently used by households.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/dec/04/thirsty-work-how-the-rise-of-massive-datacentres-strains-australias-drinking-water-supply

So it will be significant but not the biggest component of water use in the city.

dv said:

Sydney Water is projecting that by 2035, the amount of water requires by data centres in Sydney will be 250 megalitres per day. This compares with around 1050 ML currently used by households.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/dec/04/thirsty-work-how-the-rise-of-massive-datacentres-strains-australias-drinking-water-supply

So it will be significant but not the biggest component of water use in the city.

well thankfully humans vote but bots don’t yet and bots totally don’t use social media to manipulate the opinions of humans that do vote

and humans never vote against their own best interests

wait

dv said:

Sydney Water is projecting that by 2035, the amount of water requires by data centres in Sydney will be 250 megalitres per day. This compares with around 1050 ML currently used by households.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/dec/04/thirsty-work-how-the-rise-of-massive-datacentres-strains-australias-drinking-water-supply

So it will be significant but not the biggest component of water use in the city.

And I believe they use a mega tonne of nuclear electricity in other places.

dv said:

Sydney Water is projecting that by 2035, the amount of water requires by data centres in Sydney will be 250 megalitres per day. This compares with around 1050 ML currently used by households.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/dec/04/thirsty-work-how-the-rise-of-massive-datacentres-strains-australias-drinking-water-supply

So it will be significant but not the biggest component of water use in the city.

dv said:

Sydney Water is projecting that by 2035, the amount of water requires by data centres in Sydney will be 250 megalitres per day. This compares with around 1050 ML currently used by households.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/dec/04/thirsty-work-how-the-rise-of-massive-datacentres-strains-australias-drinking-water-supply

So it will be significant but not the biggest component of water use in the city.

I’ve never investigated this but surely data centre cooling systems can recycle the water they use by allowing it to cool again?

Bubblecar said:

dv said:

Sydney Water is projecting that by 2035, the amount of water requires by data centres in Sydney will be 250 megalitres per day. This compares with around 1050 ML currently used by households.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/dec/04/thirsty-work-how-the-rise-of-massive-datacentres-strains-australias-drinking-water-supply

So it will be significant but not the biggest component of water use in the city.

Do they really need all the lights? I’m sure servers work equally well in the dark…

Witty Rejoinder said:

dv said:

Sydney Water is projecting that by 2035, the amount of water requires by data centres in Sydney will be 250 megalitres per day. This compares with around 1050 ML currently used by households.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/dec/04/thirsty-work-how-the-rise-of-massive-datacentres-strains-australias-drinking-water-supply

So it will be significant but not the biggest component of water use in the city.

I’ve never investigated this but surely data centre cooling systems can recycle the water they use by allowing it to cool again?

Or following the principles of homeopathy, they could release the water into the drinking supply, and everyone will get smarter…

furious said:

Bubblecar said:

dv said:

Sydney Water is projecting that by 2035, the amount of water requires by data centres in Sydney will be 250 megalitres per day. This compares with around 1050 ML currently used by households.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/dec/04/thirsty-work-how-the-rise-of-massive-datacentres-strains-australias-drinking-water-supply

So it will be significant but not the biggest component of water use in the city.

Do they really need all the lights? I’m sure servers work equally well in the dark…

Yes, but cameras don’t.

Witty Rejoinder said:

dv said:

Sydney Water is projecting that by 2035, the amount of water requires by data centres in Sydney will be 250 megalitres per day. This compares with around 1050 ML currently used by households.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/dec/04/thirsty-work-how-the-rise-of-massive-datacentres-strains-australias-drinking-water-supply

So it will be significant but not the biggest component of water use in the city.

I’ve never investigated this but surely data centre cooling systems can recycle the water they use by allowing it to cool again?

You’d think so.

captain_spalding said:

furious said:

Bubblecar said:

Do they really need all the lights? I’m sure servers work equally well in the dark…

Yes, but cameras don’t.

I’ve got a Soviet Starlight scope, it works fairly well in pitch blackness.

Spiny Norman said:

captain_spalding said:

furious said:

Do they really need all the lights? I’m sure servers work equally well in the dark…

Yes, but cameras don’t.

I’ve got a Soviet Starlight scope, it works fairly well in pitch blackness.

Is it true that Soviet starlight scopes only use the light from red stars?

Bubblecar said:

dv said:

Sydney Water is projecting that by 2035, the amount of water requires by data centres in Sydney will be 250 megalitres per day. This compares with around 1050 ML currently used by households.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/dec/04/thirsty-work-how-the-rise-of-massive-datacentres-strains-australias-drinking-water-supply

So it will be significant but not the biggest component of water use in the city.

They could half their data centre electricity bill by turning off the lights.

Tau.Neutrino said:

Bubblecar said:

dv said:

Sydney Water is projecting that by 2035, the amount of water requires by data centres in Sydney will be 250 megalitres per day. This compares with around 1050 ML currently used by households.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/dec/04/thirsty-work-how-the-rise-of-massive-datacentres-strains-australias-drinking-water-supply

So it will be significant but not the biggest component of water use in the city.

They could half their data centre electricity bill by turning off the lights.

Don’t worry, once quantum computing comes along, that’ll all be replaced with a laptop and a fan.

Tau.Neutrino said:

Bubblecar said:

dv said:

Sydney Water is projecting that by 2035, the amount of water requires by data centres in Sydney will be 250 megalitres per day. This compares with around 1050 ML currently used by households.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/dec/04/thirsty-work-how-the-rise-of-massive-datacentres-strains-australias-drinking-water-supply

So it will be significant but not the biggest component of water use in the city.

They could half their data centre electricity bill by turning off the lights.

Someone’s bound to ask what colour is a server in the dark…

captain_spalding said:

Spiny Norman said:

captain_spalding said:

Yes, but cameras don’t.

I’ve got a Soviet Starlight scope, it works fairly well in pitch blackness.

Is it true that Soviet starlight scopes only use the light from red stars?

:)
From memory it does have some kind of illuminator to help get a better view. Not sure what spectrum but UV I guess … ?

Tau.Neutrino said:

Bubblecar said:

dv said:

Sydney Water is projecting that by 2035, the amount of water requires by data centres in Sydney will be 250 megalitres per day. This compares with around 1050 ML currently used by households.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/dec/04/thirsty-work-how-the-rise-of-massive-datacentres-strains-australias-drinking-water-supply

So it will be significant but not the biggest component of water use in the city.

They could half their data centre electricity bill by turning off the lights.

Then the Dalek patrols wouldn’t be able to see what they’re patrolling.

Neophyte said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

Bubblecar said:

They could half their data centre electricity bill by turning off the lights.

Someone’s bound to ask what colour is a server in the dark…

Surely that was discussed in the Book of Orange.

Spiny Norman said:

captain_spalding said:

Spiny Norman said:

I’ve got a Soviet Starlight scope, it works fairly well in pitch blackness.

Is it true that Soviet starlight scopes only use the light from red stars?

:)
From memory it does have some kind of illuminator to help get a better view. Not sure what spectrum but UV I guess … ?

UV not so good for eyes in the long term.

Michael V said:

Spiny Norman said:

captain_spalding said:

Is it true that Soviet starlight scopes only use the light from red stars?

:)
From memory it does have some kind of illuminator to help get a better view. Not sure what spectrum but UV I guess … ?

UV not so good for eyes in the long term.

Fortunately it points away from you.

Spiny Norman said:

Michael V said:

Spiny Norman said:

:)
From memory it does have some kind of illuminator to help get a better view. Not sure what spectrum but UV I guess … ?

UV not so good for eyes in the long term.

Fortunately it points away from you.

Depends on which end of the scope you’re holding.

captain_spalding said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

Bubblecar said:

They could half their data centre electricity bill by turning off the lights.

Don’t worry, once quantum computing comes along, that’ll all be replaced with a laptop and a fan.

Why build them in Sydney anyway?

Why not out West where they can get all their electricity from solar + batteries?

captain_spalding said:

Spiny Norman said:

Michael V said:

UV not so good for eyes in the long term.

Fortunately it points away from you.

Depends on which end of the scope you’re holding.

Well it is possible to screw the handle on the wrong way, so …

Spiny Norman said:

captain_spalding said:

Spiny Norman said:

Fortunately it points away from you.

Depends on which end of the scope you’re holding.

Well it is possible to screw the handle on the wrong way, so …

…you can blind yourself with a blast of UV light.

Technologia!

Spiny Norman said:

Michael V said:

Spiny Norman said:

:)
From memory it does have some kind of illuminator to help get a better view. Not sure what spectrum but UV I guess … ?

UV not so good for eyes in the long term.

Fortunately it points away from you.

Good-oh.

The Rev Dodgson said:

captain_spalding said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

They could half their data centre electricity bill by turning off the lights.

Don’t worry, once quantum computing comes along, that’ll all be replaced with a laptop and a fan.

Why build them in Sydney anyway?

Why not out West where they can get all their electricity from solar + batteries?

surely they should build them in orbit get that Кардашёв energy going

The Rev Dodgson said:

captain_spalding said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

They could half their data centre electricity bill by turning off the lights.

Don’t worry, once quantum computing comes along, that’ll all be replaced with a laptop and a fan.

Why build them in Sydney anyway?

Why not out West where they can get all their electricity from solar + batteries?

Even less water, and no desal plants

Bring back Peter Dutton, he can take the Liberals back into the future.

SCIENCE said:

dv said:

Sydney Water is projecting that by 2035, the amount of water requires by data centres in Sydney will be 250 megalitres per day. This compares with around 1050 ML currently used by households.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/dec/04/thirsty-work-how-the-rise-of-massive-datacentres-strains-australias-drinking-water-supply

So it will be significant but not the biggest component of water use in the city.

well thankfully humans vote but bots don’t yet and bots totally don’t use social media to manipulate the opinions of humans that do vote

and humans never vote against their own best interests

wait

Remember to leave out a bowl of water for your clankers during the summer.

The Rev Dodgson said:

captain_spalding said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

They could half their data centre electricity bill by turning off the lights.

Don’t worry, once quantum computing comes along, that’ll all be replaced with a laptop and a fan.

Why build them in Sydney anyway?

Why not out West where they can get all their electricity from solar + batteries?

the one in Perth, which is used to crunch the data from SKA, is cooled with ground water. pump it up in one location and pump it back down in another.

https://pawsey.org.au/groundwater-cooling-system/

Link

Lots of Liberals resigning, the Peter Dutton effect continues. Maybe for another four years, then there will be no one left in the liberal party.

Tau.Neutrino said:

Lots of Liberals resigning, the Peter Dutton effect continues. Maybe for another four years, then there will be no one left in the liberal party.

Whilst that’s unarguable good, it would only allow One Neuron to have a chance at running the place.
It’s be like a pack of monkeys trying to work out how to play cards.

Spiny Norman said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

Lots of Liberals resigning, the Peter Dutton effect continues. Maybe for another four years, then there will be no one left in the liberal party.

Whilst that’s unarguable good, it would only allow One Neuron to have a chance at running the place.
It’s be like a pack of monkeys trying to work out how to play cards.

You’d like to think that the vast majority of Australians would be smart enough to not vote for One Nation.

But, then, you’d like to think that the vast majority of Americans would have been smart enough to not vote for Trump.

captain_spalding said:

Spiny Norman said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

Lots of Liberals resigning, the Peter Dutton effect continues. Maybe for another four years, then there will be no one left in the liberal party.

Whilst that’s unarguable good, it would only allow One Neuron to have a chance at running the place.
It’s be like a pack of monkeys trying to work out how to play cards.

You’d like to think that the vast majority of Australians would be smart enough to not vote for One Nation.

But, then, you’d like to think that the vast majority of Americans would have been smart enough to not vote for Trump.

If the Liberals fall apart the teals might be prompted to organise an alternative given that though pro climate change mitigation they are, and generally represent seats that are economically conservative.

Witty Rejoinder said:

dv said:

Sydney Water is projecting that by 2035, the amount of water requires by data centres in Sydney will be 250 megalitres per day. This compares with around 1050 ML currently used by households.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/dec/04/thirsty-work-how-the-rise-of-massive-datacentres-strains-australias-drinking-water-supply

So it will be significant but not the biggest component of water use in the city.

I’ve never investigated this but surely data centre cooling systems can recycle the water they use by allowing it to cool again?

They do but there are significant losses. I assume SydWat have done their homework.

dv said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

dv said:

Sydney Water is projecting that by 2035, the amount of water requires by data centres in Sydney will be 250 megalitres per day. This compares with around 1050 ML currently used by households.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/dec/04/thirsty-work-how-the-rise-of-massive-datacentres-strains-australias-drinking-water-supply

So it will be significant but not the biggest component of water use in the city.

I’ve never investigated this but surely data centre cooling systems can recycle the water they use by allowing it to cool again?

They do but there are significant losses. I assume SydWat have done their homework.

Ta.

Spiny Norman said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

Lots of Liberals resigning, the Peter Dutton effect continues. Maybe for another four years, then there will be no one left in the liberal party.

Whilst that’s unarguable good, it would only allow One Neuron to have a chance at running the place.
It’s be like a pack of monkeys trying to work out how to play cards.

LOL at the imagery!

:)

Liberal Party signals major voting system review after attack on independents

Tasmania’s Liberal Party has voted to review the Hare-Clark electoral system after a member called independents “dregs” and made personal attacks on their appearance and hygiene.

Elise Kaine – The Mercury

The state Liberal Party has signalled an overhaul of Tasmania’s Hare–Clark electoral system in a bid to prevent the election of independents on a fraction of the primary vote.

The motion was moved at the Liberal State Council at the paranaple Convention Centre on Saturday.

*Seconder Liz Kinnheir‑Tarte from the Burnie branch said she was “confounded” by the system that allowed people who were “shaming us” to be elected to represent Tasmania.
She called out Braddon independent Craig Garland, and said a change to Tasmania’s system would “get the right people in, not the dregs”.
She said she was “absolutely shocked” that the “fellow in Braddon who never gets a haircut or bathes”, and firebrand Senator Jacqui Lambie were elected.
“This is what Hare‑Clark has done to Braddon,” she said.*

-

Lol settle down

Some bot just shared this on FB with garbage text.

250 megalitres well spent

dv said:

Liberal Party signals major voting system review after attack on independents

Tasmania’s Liberal Party has voted to review the Hare-Clark electoral system after a member called independents “dregs” and made personal attacks on their appearance and hygiene.

Elise Kaine – The Mercury

The state Liberal Party has signalled an overhaul of Tasmania’s Hare–Clark electoral system in a bid to prevent the election of independents on a fraction of the primary vote.

The motion was moved at the Liberal State Council at the paranaple Convention Centre on Saturday.

*Seconder Liz Kinnheir‑Tarte from the Burnie branch said she was “confounded” by the system that allowed people who were “shaming us” to be elected to represent Tasmania.
She called out Braddon independent Craig Garland, and said a change to Tasmania’s system would “get the right people in, not the dregs”.
She said she was “absolutely shocked” that the “fellow in Braddon who never gets a haircut or bathes”, and firebrand Senator Jacqui Lambie were elected.
“This is what Hare‑Clark has done to Braddon,” she said.*

-

Lol settle down

Yes. Definitely no Riff Raff!!!

dv said:

Some bot just shared this on FB with garbage text.

250 megalitres well spent

Fake images too, I think.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-04/tasmanian-minister-censured-for-withdrawing-footy-club-funding/106102352

Tasmanian minister censured for withdrawing footy club funding after it attended opposition’s media event

The Tasmanian sports minister wrote a draft letter to a local football club, pledging $100,000 if re-elected.

He told a parliamentary scrutiny hearing the funding was withdrawn because the club did a media event with Labor.

The North Launceston Football Club, which needs a new home, said it did not push for the censure motion but hopes it leads to a solution.

——

I think the crossbench needs to zap the government now and then to remind them that they serve purely at the pleasure of the crossbench.

Not All Politicians

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese yesterday defended Anika Wells’s use of nearly $3,000 of taxpayers’ money on travel allowances and flights, so her husband and children could join her for a weekend at a Thredbo ski resort.

fucking hell how did people even live back in 2010, damn

Gearing up for the school holidays? Here’s how to survive them without social media

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-07/social-media-ban-school-holidays-parenting-children/106018636

Here’s what Tas Labor Senator Richard Dowling said when asked about the cost of the stadium:

A fair question. Hand on heart, I wouldn’t support it if I thought this was just an overpriced footy ground. It is a big investment, but the Commonwealth’s contribution is capped at $240 million, and it only flows if the State delivers the entire precinct — the Aboriginal cultural zone, the upgraded Macquarie Wharf, and new housing for key health workers. So this is about much more than a stadium.

I’m not a construction expert who can adjudicate the precise cost of a stadium, but I do think the real debate is about affordability — and that debate is sharper because the State Liberal Government has seriously damaged the State’s finances. If the Budget were in better shape, this wouldn’t be nearly as controversial.

Too often, the answer to major projects and progress in Tasmania is simply no. That mindset holds us back. This project sends an important signal that we are open to progress and willing to invest in our future.

Right now Tasmania is struggling to attract and retain skilled workers. A modern stadium — plus an events facility that can host up to 1,500 people — is a game-changer for tourism and for our events industry, which is a major employer. We will own the stadium and keep the profits here, backing the industries and workers that drive Tasmania’s economy.

So yes, I think the price tag is reasonable, but it’s on the Liberal State Government to deliver it competently and transparently, and to maintain social licence throughout. Done properly, this is inter-generational infrastructure — creating secure jobs and a stronger economy for young families now and long into the future.

dv said:

Here’s what Tas Labor Senator Richard Dowling said when asked about the cost of the stadium:

A fair question. Hand on heart, I wouldn’t support it if I thought this was just an overpriced footy ground. It is a big investment, but the Commonwealth’s contribution is capped at $240 million, and it only flows if the State delivers the entire precinct — the Aboriginal cultural zone, the upgraded Macquarie Wharf, and new housing for key health workers. So this is about much more than a stadium.

I’m not a construction expert who can adjudicate the precise cost of a stadium, but I do think the real debate is about affordability — and that debate is sharper because the State Liberal Government has seriously damaged the State’s finances. If the Budget were in better shape, this wouldn’t be nearly as controversial.

Too often, the answer to major projects and progress in Tasmania is simply no. That mindset holds us back. This project sends an important signal that we are open to progress and willing to invest in our future.

Right now Tasmania is struggling to attract and retain skilled workers. A modern stadium — plus an events facility that can host up to 1,500 people — is a game-changer for tourism and for our events industry, which is a major employer. We will own the stadium and keep the profits here, backing the industries and workers that drive Tasmania’s economy.

So yes, I think the price tag is reasonable, but it’s on the Liberal State Government to deliver it competently and transparently, and to maintain social licence throughout. Done properly, this is inter-generational infrastructure — creating secure jobs and a stronger economy for young families now and long into the future.

ah well we suppose by the time it’s all done then long distance travel will be renewable as well so it’s not just another recipe for pushing warning past 6 K delta

we had suspected something along these lines but didn’t have the ¿ref so we’ll just let yousr ABC say it

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-09/barnaby-joyce-annabel-crabb-expenses-one-nation-defection/106114804

SCIENCE said:

we had suspected something along these lines but didn’t have the ¿ref so we’ll just let yousr ABC say it

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-09/barnaby-joyce-annabel-crabb-expenses-one-nation-defection/106114804

A Good Read.

Thanks.

:)

Liberals ignore, despise and knife their leaders – and drive their party over a cliff

George Brandis
Former high commissioner to the UK and federal attorney-general

December 7, 2025 — 1.55pm

John Faulkner, Labor’s respected former Senate leader and keeper of the Whitlam flame, once said to me that one of the biggest differences between Labor and the Liberal Party was their different attitudes to their own history – in particular, to past leaders. Liberals celebrate only their most successful leaders, said Faulkner, whereas Labor celebrates all its leaders – even the second-rate ones. The exception, of course, is the rats (although even Labor leaders who ratted still have their photographs hung in the caucus room).

One of the paradoxes of Australian politics is that the conservative side has so little sense of its own history, while the party of the left celebrates – indeed, shamelessly mythologises – its own. For instance, a prime minister as pedestrian as Ben Chifley has been enlarged into a beloved national icon – a pipe-smoking, cardigan-wearing old sweetheart who preferred the modesty of the Kurrajong Hotel to the stateliness of The Lodge. The catastrophes of his government – its disastrous attempt to nationalise the banks; the worst industrial conflict in our history, which put troops in coalmines – have been airbrushed away.

Chifley’s successor as Labor leader, H V Evatt – one of the most unfit national leaders in our history, whose political incompetence failed to avert the split that kept Labor out of office for two decades – is remembered by invariably sympathetic biographers as a passionate, if flawed, idealist. (Always beware that weasel word “flawed” in political hagiography – it’s usually a euphemism for a multitude of character defects.)

Labor honours its leaders in death, even if it stabbed them in life. At Simon Crean’s funeral two years ago, Melbourne’s St Paul’s cathedral was packed to overflowing. Crean may never have been given the chance to fight an election, but his farewell was a vast gathering of the tribes. How many of the Liberal tribes do you imagine would turn out for the two Liberal leaders who never got to fight an election – Brendan Nelson and Alexander Downer?

For every Labor prime minister whose government ended in failure, there’s always a villain to blame. In the case of James Scullin, it was the wicked Bank of England and its devilish agent Sir Otto Neimeyer; in Whitlam’s case, the scheming Sir John Kerr (in league, for loopier conspiracy theorists, with the Palace and/or the CIA); for the Rudd-Gillard-Rudd government, Rupert Murdoch and his evil myrmidons. It’s always someone else’s fault when things end badly. The fallen hero/evil villain narrative gives Labor history a vaguely operatic flavour that the boring old Liberal Party quite lacks.

Perhaps that is why Liberals are so uninterested in their own history – and woefully neglectful of their former leaders. Or perhaps it is because of the dominance in their imagination of Robert Menzies. For most of its existence, the Liberal Party was a one-hero party. John Howard has since joined Menzies in the Liberal empyrean. The rest – including seven prime ministers – are ignored, forgotten or even despised.

Last month, the 50th anniversary of the Dismissal prompted endless commemorations by Labor, and by its surrogates like the ABC. Predictably, they became Gough Whitlam tribute acts. Expect no Liberal Party commemorations for the anniversary next weekend of the denouement of the events of November 11 – Malcolm Fraser’s historic landslide on December 13.

Yet Fraser led the Liberal Party for eight years (all but eight months of them as prime minister), and was our fourth longest-serving prime minister. The Fraser government shaped modern Australia fundamentally and for the better, in particular by transitioning us to a multicultural society, the architecture of which was created by Fraser in collaboration with his adviser Petro Georgiou. It was distinguished by its welcoming of refugees (in particular, the Vietnamese refugees whom Whitlam, to his eternal shame, abandoned), and its human rights-focused foreign policy, reflected in Australia’s global leadership in ending apartheid in South Africa.

The same is true of the Liberal Party’s attitude to the other Malcolm. At the unveiling of Malcolm Turnbull’s official portrait the other day, only four of his cabinet were present: Julie Bishop, Sussan Ley, Christopher Pyne and me. Turnbull has essentially been written out of Liberal history.

It’s never acknowledged that he had at one stage been the party’s most popular leader ever: in November 2015, IPSOS recorded his approval rating at 69 per cent (nine points above Howard at the height of his popularity in 2001, during the Tampa affair), with an astonishing net favourability of +53. Australians initially loved Turnbull’s approach to what the Liberal Party could be. Things quickly went south when they perceived him to be too accommodating to the party’s right.

One of Turnbull’s priorities was the appointment of more women to senior government positions. Among professional women in particular, he was very popular. It is unimaginable that the breakthrough of the teals could have occurred on his watch.

Today, Fraser’s legacy is uncelebrated by the Liberal Party; his liberalism strikes no chord. Turnbull is openly reviled, in particular by the far-right commentariat. Such people reject Howard’s belief that the Liberal Party is strongest when it is a broad church of liberals and conservatives. They don’t pretend to be liberals (of course), but they are not conservatives either. Prejudice-mongering populism is about as far away from authentic conservatism as it is possible to get.

Real conservatives would take pride in the Liberal Party’s rich traditions and, like Labor, honour its past leaders – not just those, like Menzies and Howard, of the first rank, but all of them. After all, Malcolm Fraser brought the Liberal Party a lot more success than any of its recent leaders have done, while the main contribution to the party’s history of those who knifed Malcolm Turnbull was to drive it over a cliff.

George Brandis is a former high commissioner to the UK, and a former Liberal senator and federal attorney-general. He is now a professor at the ANU’s National Security College.

https://www.theage.com.au/politics/federal/liberals-ignore-despise-and-knife-their-leaders-and-drive-their-party-over-a-cliff-20251207-p5nlhh.html

well what do you know, communist Labor are in charge and there’s talk of rising interest rates again what a bunch of shitty economic managers

hey check out this extensively extensive extended olive branch

Ms Reynolds said she still wants an apology from Labor but does not expect one, and felt that even it comes, it would be hollow. Challenged that Senator Katie Gallagher had apologised to her before she left parliament by saying: “I’m sorry that you have been hurt by all this”, Ms Reynolds said it was not enough. “That’s an apology you make when you’re not making an apology,” the former senator said. Ms Reynolds had sued Ms Higgins and her partner David Sharaz over a series of social media posts made in 2022. The former senator told 7.30 the matter with Ms Higgins could have been resolved with an apology.

an absolutely accepted apology ahyes

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-09/linda-reynolds-on-brittany-higgins-lawsuit-albanese-government/106122202

so we weren’t there but on the face of it this is the kind of attitude we really love

Speaking outside court, Marshall’s mum, Karina Stagg, said this was a “kick in the guts”. “It wasn’t the outcome we were hoping for,” Ms Stagg said. “Where is the justice? Where is the justice for Marshall?”

Magistrate Robert Webster told the court that Begovic was leaving the Cosgrove High School pick-up with her two kids in her car when she failed to keep a proper lookout or give way to pedestrians, and her car struck Marshall. Begovic pleaded guilty to one count of negligent driving causing death and three counts of contravention of a vehicle standard last month, where seven victim impact statements were read aloud to the court. While handing down his sentence on Tuesday, Magistrate Webster said he decided to wholly suspend her sentence due to her age, her job as a teacher assistant working with disadvantaged children, her cooperation with authorities and her early guilty plea. He said he did not consider her negligence extreme, due to there being no aggravating factors such as drugs, alcohol or speeding.

As Begovic was leaving the courtroom, one of Marshall’s family members told her, “I hope you rot in hell.” Ms Stagg said she would keep on fighting for justice for Marshall. “There needs to be a change with our law and our justice system to do with crimes with vehicles … there is no justice for our family,” Ms Stagg said.

so justice for the family of someone killed by negligent driving (does that mean accidental even if careless, rather than intentionally running down the target whilst in a guilty mindset) means imprisoning a contrite 51 year old teaching assistant working with disadvantaged children, right got it

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-09/marshall-oakley-stagg-death-driver-avoids-prison/106119608

SCIENCE said:

hey check out this extensively extensive extended olive branch

Ms Reynolds said she still wants an apology from Labor but does not expect one, and felt that even it comes, it would be hollow. Challenged that Senator Katie Gallagher had apologised to her before she left parliament by saying: “I’m sorry that you have been hurt by all this”, Ms Reynolds said it was not enough. “That’s an apology you make when you’re not making an apology,” the former senator said. Ms Reynolds had sued Ms Higgins and her partner David Sharaz over a series of social media posts made in 2022. The former senator told 7.30 the matter with Ms Higgins could have been resolved with an apology.

an absolutely accepted apology ahyes

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-09/linda-reynolds-on-brittany-higgins-lawsuit-albanese-government/106122202

That Reynolds bitch…I hate her.

kii said:

SCIENCE said:

hey check out this extensively extensive extended olive branch

Ms Reynolds said she still wants an apology from Labor but does not expect one, and felt that even it comes, it would be hollow. Challenged that Senator Katie Gallagher had apologised to her before she left parliament by saying: “I’m sorry that you have been hurt by all this”, Ms Reynolds said it was not enough. “That’s an apology you make when you’re not making an apology,” the former senator said. Ms Reynolds had sued Ms Higgins and her partner David Sharaz over a series of social media posts made in 2022. The former senator told 7.30 the matter with Ms Higgins could have been resolved with an apology.

an absolutely accepted apology ahyes

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-09/linda-reynolds-on-brittany-higgins-lawsuit-albanese-government/106122202

That Reynolds bitch…I hate her.

hey it’s not illegal to be an arsehole

kii said:

SCIENCE said:

hey check out this extensively extensive extended olive branch

Ms Reynolds said she still wants an apology from Labor but does not expect one, and felt that even it comes, it would be hollow. Challenged that Senator Katie Gallagher had apologised to her before she left parliament by saying: “I’m sorry that you have been hurt by all this”, Ms Reynolds said it was not enough. “That’s an apology you make when you’re not making an apology,” the former senator said. Ms Reynolds had sued Ms Higgins and her partner David Sharaz over a series of social media posts made in 2022. The former senator told 7.30 the matter with Ms Higgins could have been resolved with an apology.

an absolutely accepted apology ahyes

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-09/linda-reynolds-on-brittany-higgins-lawsuit-albanese-government/106122202

That Reynolds bitch…I hate her.

Can I hate her too without being sexist.

A most unpleasant woman, who continues to suck on the the taxpayers dime, while using taxpayer funded lawyers to sue a rape victim.

¿

what makes them so sure that

Mr Del Villar said that would be especially difficult if the council managed to prove it obtained homeless people’s consent to “bulldoze” their camps. “If in fact there was consent, it would be very difficult to see how there would be a breach of human rights at all,” he told the court. “This is for the disposal, or what the applicants more colourfully call, the bulldozing decision.”

homeless people consented to disposal

?

SCIENCE said:

¿

what makes them so sure that

Mr Del Villar said that would be especially difficult if the council managed to prove it obtained homeless people’s consent to “bulldoze” their camps. “If in fact there was consent, it would be very difficult to see how there would be a breach of human rights at all,” he told the court. “This is for the disposal, or what the applicants more colourfully call, the bulldozing decision.”

homeless people consented to disposal

?

Without any further context, I know this is City of Moreton Bay council. They’ve been bulldozing tent cities for a while now. I’m guessing this is either Eddie Hyland Park or Woody Point.

Consent is a funny word. In this context, it seems to mean, “we told you to piss off, you didn’t, therefore you consent to us forcibly removing you and your stuff”.

https://www.moretonbay.qld.gov.au/News/Media/Eddie-Hyland-Park-camping-on-public-land-statement

https://www.moretonbay.qld.gov.au/News/Media/Gayundah-Arboretum-Park-at-Woody-Point-closed-for-remediation

Kingy said:

kii said:

SCIENCE said:

hey check out this extensively extensive extended olive branch

Ms Reynolds said she still wants an apology from Labor but does not expect one, and felt that even it comes, it would be hollow. Challenged that Senator Katie Gallagher had apologised to her before she left parliament by saying: “I’m sorry that you have been hurt by all this”, Ms Reynolds said it was not enough. “That’s an apology you make when you’re not making an apology,” the former senator said. Ms Reynolds had sued Ms Higgins and her partner David Sharaz over a series of social media posts made in 2022. The former senator told 7.30 the matter with Ms Higgins could have been resolved with an apology.

an absolutely accepted apology ahyes

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-09/linda-reynolds-on-brittany-higgins-lawsuit-albanese-government/106122202

That Reynolds bitch…I hate her.

Can I hate her too without being sexist.

A most unpleasant woman, who continues to suck on the the taxpayers dime, while using taxpayer funded lawyers to sue a rape victim.

A most unpleasant person.

make the most of school holidays coming up, rather than spending it scrolling on your phone”. “Start a new sport, learn a new instrument or read that book that’s been sitting there on your shelf for some time,” he said. “Importantly, spend quality time with your friends and your family

LOL well that’s because UN don’t inspect dirty countries like CHINA or Iran or Syria or Free Gaza or or El Salvador or North Sentinel because we already know we’re way better than them

Australia became the only country other than Rwanda to have ever had inspections terminated after the UN Subcommittee on Torture Prevention was refused full access to Queensland and NSW facilities, including prisons, in 2023. The UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention (WGAD) is in Australia for a 12-day trip to inspect places of detention such as prisons, mental health facilities and immigration detention centres in the Northern Territory, New South Wales, the Australian Capital Territory and Western Australia. But the NT government has blocked WGAD from visiting NT government-operated facilities and meeting with staff, citing staff safety and operational capacity concerns.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-10/nt-un-denied-visit-to-prisons-clp-finocchiaro-government-jails/106121438

SCIENCE said:

LOL well that’s because UN don’t inspect dirty countries like CHINA or Iran or Syria or Free Gaza or or El Salvador or North Sentinel because we already know we’re way better than them

Australia became the only country other than Rwanda to have ever had inspections terminated after the UN Subcommittee on Torture Prevention was refused full access to Queensland and NSW facilities, including prisons, in 2023. The UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention (WGAD) is in Australia for a 12-day trip to inspect places of detention such as prisons, mental health facilities and immigration detention centres in the Northern Territory, New South Wales, the Australian Capital Territory and Western Australia. But the NT government has blocked WGAD from visiting NT government-operated facilities and meeting with staff, citing staff safety and operational capacity concerns.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-10/nt-un-denied-visit-to-prisons-clp-finocchiaro-government-jails/106121438

Arse covering?

roughbarked said:

SCIENCE said:

LOL well that’s because UN don’t inspect dirty countries like CHINA or Iran or Syria or Free Gaza or or El Salvador or North Sentinel because we already know we’re way better than them

Australia became the only country other than Rwanda to have ever had inspections terminated after the UN Subcommittee on Torture Prevention was refused full access to Queensland and NSW facilities, including prisons, in 2023. The UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention (WGAD) is in Australia for a 12-day trip to inspect places of detention such as prisons, mental health facilities and immigration detention centres in the Northern Territory, New South Wales, the Australian Capital Territory and Western Australia. But the NT government has blocked WGAD from visiting NT government-operated facilities and meeting with staff, citing staff safety and operational capacity concerns.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-10/nt-un-denied-visit-to-prisons-clp-finocchiaro-government-jails/106121438

Arse covering?

nfi we’ve never been in a Turkish prison nor a Territory one

roughbarked said:

SCIENCE said:

LOL well that’s because UN don’t inspect dirty countries like CHINA or Iran or Syria or Free Gaza or or El Salvador or North Sentinel because we already know we’re way better than them

Australia became the only country other than Rwanda to have ever had inspections terminated after the UN Subcommittee on Torture Prevention was refused full access to Queensland and NSW facilities, including prisons, in 2023. The UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention (WGAD) is in Australia for a 12-day trip to inspect places of detention such as prisons, mental health facilities and immigration detention centres in the Northern Territory, New South Wales, the Australian Capital Territory and Western Australia. But the NT government has blocked WGAD from visiting NT government-operated facilities and meeting with staff, citing staff safety and operational capacity concerns.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-10/nt-un-denied-visit-to-prisons-clp-finocchiaro-government-jails/106121438

Arse covering?

Overcrowding would be one reason.

Cymek said:

roughbarked said:

SCIENCE said:

LOL well that’s because UN don’t inspect dirty countries like CHINA or Iran or Syria or Free Gaza or or El Salvador or North Sentinel because we already know we’re way better than them

Australia became the only country other than Rwanda to have ever had inspections terminated after the UN Subcommittee on Torture Prevention was refused full access to Queensland and NSW facilities, including prisons, in 2023. The UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention (WGAD) is in Australia for a 12-day trip to inspect places of detention such as prisons, mental health facilities and immigration detention centres in the Northern Territory, New South Wales, the Australian Capital Territory and Western Australia. But the NT government has blocked WGAD from visiting NT government-operated facilities and meeting with staff, citing staff safety and operational capacity concerns.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-10/nt-un-denied-visit-to-prisons-clp-finocchiaro-government-jails/106121438

Arse covering?

Overcrowding would be one reason.

I was told once in regards to WA prisons
That if you weren’t a member of the union
You were asked to join and if refused you would have an encounter with a prisoner who would assault you.
I’d believe this as well

Children as young as 10 who break the law in Queensland could be fitted with electronic ankle monitors under new legislation.

A 2021 trial, launched by the former Labor government, saw serious repeat youth offenders aged 15 and older on bail ordered to wear the devices in regions including south-east Queensland, Townsville and Cairns.

But under proposed laws introduced to state parliament on Wednesday, any child aged 10 years or older who is convicted of an offence could be fitted with the monitors statewide.

The legislation also removes the requirement for either the child, or their parent or guardian, to consent to wearing the device.

Premier David Crisafulli said the trial had shown the monitors reduced offending rates.

“I’m sure it’s uncomfortable, and I’m sure it’s a little embarrassing to wear one, but there is a pretty easy solution around that — don’t offend,” he said.
“I’m not walking away from rehabilitation or early intervention, that’s important to me. But if somebody doesn’t want to wear one of these, the best way to do that is to stay on the straight and narrow.”

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-10/queensland-proposed-laws-crime-children-ankle-monitors/106126136

With all this free time from not scrolling TikTok, what are kids supposed to do other than turn to crime?

Divine Angel said:

SCIENCE said:

make the most of school holidays coming up, rather than spending it scrolling on your phone”. “Start a new sport, learn a new instrument or read that book that’s been sitting there on your shelf for some time,” he said. “Importantly, spend quality time with your friends and your family

Children as young as 10 who break the law in Queensland could be fitted with electronic ankle monitors under new legislation.

A 2021 trial, launched by the former Labor government, saw serious repeat youth offenders aged 15 and older on bail ordered to wear the devices in regions including south-east Queensland, Townsville and Cairns.

But under proposed laws introduced to state parliament on Wednesday, any child aged 10 years or older who is convicted of an offence could be fitted with the monitors statewide.

The legislation also removes the requirement for either the child, or their parent or guardian, to consent to wearing the device.

Premier David Crisafulli said the trial had shown the monitors reduced offending rates.

“I’m sure it’s uncomfortable, and I’m sure it’s a little embarrassing to wear one, but there is a pretty easy solution around that — don’t offend,” he said.
“I’m not walking away from rehabilitation or early intervention, that’s important to me. But if somebody doesn’t want to wear one of these, the best way to do that is to stay on the straight and narrow.”

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-10/queensland-proposed-laws-crime-children-ankle-monitors/106126136

With all this free time from not scrolling TikTok, what are kids supposed to do other than turn to crime?

you kids should probably make the most of school holidays coming up, rather than spending it scrolling on your phone; start a new sport, learn a new instrument or read that book that’s been sitting there on your shelf for some time, spend quality time with your friends and your family

SCIENCE said:

Divine Angel said:

SCIENCE said:

make the most of school holidays coming up, rather than spending it scrolling on your phone”. “Start a new sport, learn a new instrument or read that book that’s been sitting there on your shelf for some time,” he said. “Importantly, spend quality time with your friends and your family

Children as young as 10 who break the law in Queensland could be fitted with electronic ankle monitors under new legislation.

A 2021 trial, launched by the former Labor government, saw serious repeat youth offenders aged 15 and older on bail ordered to wear the devices in regions including south-east Queensland, Townsville and Cairns.

But under proposed laws introduced to state parliament on Wednesday, any child aged 10 years or older who is convicted of an offence could be fitted with the monitors statewide.

The legislation also removes the requirement for either the child, or their parent or guardian, to consent to wearing the device.

Premier David Crisafulli said the trial had shown the monitors reduced offending rates.

“I’m sure it’s uncomfortable, and I’m sure it’s a little embarrassing to wear one, but there is a pretty easy solution around that — don’t offend,” he said.
“I’m not walking away from rehabilitation or early intervention, that’s important to me. But if somebody doesn’t want to wear one of these, the best way to do that is to stay on the straight and narrow.”

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-10/queensland-proposed-laws-crime-children-ankle-monitors/106126136

With all this free time from not scrolling TikTok, what are kids supposed to do other than turn to crime?

you kids should probably make the most of school holidays coming up, rather than spending it scrolling on your phone; start a new sport, learn a new instrument or read that book that’s been sitting there on your shelf for some time, spend quality time with your friends and your family

nevah had no scrolly phone thingy until I was too old to use it.

I’m so glad Mini Me isn’t interested in social media. She only watches cake decorating videos on YouTube kids.

Divine Angel said:

I’m so glad Mini Me isn’t interested in social media. She only watches cake decorating videos on YouTube kids.

THEY HAVE CAKE DECORATING VIDEOS?!!!

Divine Angel said:

Children as young as 10 who break the law in Queensland could be fitted with electronic ankle monitors under new legislation.

A 2021 trial, launched by the former Labor government, saw serious repeat youth offenders aged 15 and older on bail ordered to wear the devices in regions including south-east Queensland, Townsville and Cairns.

But under proposed laws introduced to state parliament on Wednesday, any child aged 10 years or older who is convicted of an offence could be fitted with the monitors statewide.

The legislation also removes the requirement for either the child, or their parent or guardian, to consent to wearing the device.

Premier David Crisafulli said the trial had shown the monitors reduced offending rates.

“I’m sure it’s uncomfortable, and I’m sure it’s a little embarrassing to wear one, but there is a pretty easy solution around that — don’t offend,” he said.
“I’m not walking away from rehabilitation or early intervention, that’s important to me. But if somebody doesn’t want to wear one of these, the best way to do that is to stay on the straight and narrow.”

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-10/queensland-proposed-laws-crime-children-ankle-monitors/106126136

With all this free time from not scrolling TikTok, what are kids supposed to do other than turn to crime?

Its not cheap to monitor offenders in this manner
It seems to be a stop gap measure as our prisons are full
For adults its serious offences not petty crime

Cymek said:

Divine Angel said:

Children as young as 10 who break the law in Queensland could be fitted with electronic ankle monitors under new legislation.

A 2021 trial, launched by the former Labor government, saw serious repeat youth offenders aged 15 and older on bail ordered to wear the devices in regions including south-east Queensland, Townsville and Cairns.

But under proposed laws introduced to state parliament on Wednesday, any child aged 10 years or older who is convicted of an offence could be fitted with the monitors statewide.

The legislation also removes the requirement for either the child, or their parent or guardian, to consent to wearing the device.

Premier David Crisafulli said the trial had shown the monitors reduced offending rates.

“I’m sure it’s uncomfortable, and I’m sure it’s a little embarrassing to wear one, but there is a pretty easy solution around that — don’t offend,” he said.
“I’m not walking away from rehabilitation or early intervention, that’s important to me. But if somebody doesn’t want to wear one of these, the best way to do that is to stay on the straight and narrow.”

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-10/queensland-proposed-laws-crime-children-ankle-monitors/106126136

With all this free time from not scrolling TikTok, what are kids supposed to do other than turn to crime?

Its not cheap to monitor offenders in this manner
It seems to be a stop gap measure as our prisons are full
For adults its serious offences not petty crime

They used to track them with their mobile phones, but they can’t do that anymore, for some reason…

captain_spalding said:

Divine Angel said:

I’m so glad Mini Me isn’t interested in social media. She only watches cake decorating videos on YouTube kids.

THEY HAVE CAKE DECORATING VIDEOS?!!!

Steady lad, steady.

captain_spalding said:

Divine Angel said:

I’m so glad Mini Me isn’t interested in social media. She only watches cake decorating videos on YouTube kids.

THEY HAVE CAKE DECORATING VIDEOS?!!!

Wait til you see Is It Cake? on Netflix.

furious said:

Cymek said:

Divine Angel said:

Children as young as 10 who break the law in Queensland could be fitted with electronic ankle monitors under new legislation.

A 2021 trial, launched by the former Labor government, saw serious repeat youth offenders aged 15 and older on bail ordered to wear the devices in regions including south-east Queensland, Townsville and Cairns.

But under proposed laws introduced to state parliament on Wednesday, any child aged 10 years or older who is convicted of an offence could be fitted with the monitors statewide.

The legislation also removes the requirement for either the child, or their parent or guardian, to consent to wearing the device.

Premier David Crisafulli said the trial had shown the monitors reduced offending rates.

“I’m sure it’s uncomfortable, and I’m sure it’s a little embarrassing to wear one, but there is a pretty easy solution around that — don’t offend,” he said.
“I’m not walking away from rehabilitation or early intervention, that’s important to me. But if somebody doesn’t want to wear one of these, the best way to do that is to stay on the straight and narrow.”

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-10/queensland-proposed-laws-crime-children-ankle-monitors/106126136

With all this free time from not scrolling TikTok, what are kids supposed to do other than turn to crime?

Its not cheap to monitor offenders in this manner
It seems to be a stop gap measure as our prisons are full
For adults its serious offences not petty crime

They used to track them with their mobile phones, but they can’t do that anymore, for some reason…

We use GPS anklets and they have a base unit at their home.
Its a 24 / 7 setup

Many children have already been able to get around the ban in various ways, with age assurance systems misclassifying users and workarounds such as VPNs and makeup tricks being used.

The government admitted the ban wouldn’t be perfect or instantaneous but said the loopholes that allow teens to circumvent the ban would not stay open forever.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-10/social-media-ban-day-one-teen-access/106126706

roughbarked said:

Many children have already been able to get around the ban in various ways, with age assurance systems misclassifying users and workarounds such as VPNs and makeup tricks being used.

The government admitted the ban wouldn’t be perfect or instantaneous but said the loopholes that allow teens to circumvent the ban would not stay open forever.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-10/social-media-ban-day-one-teen-access/106126706

and children have never smoked whole drinking alcohol damn this is a 600% failure already

Divine Angel said:

Peak Warming Man said:

captain_spalding said:

Divine Angel said:

I’m so glad Mini Me isn’t interested in social media. She only watches cake decorating videos on YouTube kids.

THEY HAVE CAKE DECORATING VIDEOS?!!!

Steady lad, steady.

Wait til you see Is It Cake? on Netflix.

we’re more concerned at how if you try it on YouTube nonkids you get 2 cake decorating videos and then after another 2 wtfvideos you end up watching imperialists of whatever country committing war crimes on whatever country and that’s a less gory example too

roughbarked said:

Many children have already been able to get around the ban in various ways, with age assurance systems misclassifying users and workarounds such as VPNs and makeup tricks being used.

The government admitted the ban wouldn’t be perfect or instantaneous but said the loopholes that allow teens to circumvent the ban would not stay open forever.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-10/social-media-ban-day-one-teen-access/106126706

Parents’ accounts. You’re not gonna close that loophole.

SCIENCE said:

Divine Angel said:

Peak Warming Man said:

Steady lad, steady.

Wait til you see Is It Cake? on Netflix.

we’re more concerned at how if you try it on YouTube nonkids you get 2 cake decorating videos and then after another 2 wtfvideos you end up watching imperialists of whatever country committing war crimes on whatever country and that’s a less gory example too

YouTube Kids has very strict content rules. You’ve got to have a certain number of subscribers, with G-rated content, no comments allowed on YTK, but you can subscribe.

Cymek said:

Divine Angel said:

Children as young as 10 who break the law in Queensland could be fitted with electronic ankle monitors under new legislation.

A 2021 trial, launched by the former Labor government, saw serious repeat youth offenders aged 15 and older on bail ordered to wear the devices in regions including south-east Queensland, Townsville and Cairns.

But under proposed laws introduced to state parliament on Wednesday, any child aged 10 years or older who is convicted of an offence could be fitted with the monitors statewide.

The legislation also removes the requirement for either the child, or their parent or guardian, to consent to wearing the device.

Premier David Crisafulli said the trial had shown the monitors reduced offending rates.

“I’m sure it’s uncomfortable, and I’m sure it’s a little embarrassing to wear one, but there is a pretty easy solution around that — don’t offend,” he said.
“I’m not walking away from rehabilitation or early intervention, that’s important to me. But if somebody doesn’t want to wear one of these, the best way to do that is to stay on the straight and narrow.”

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-10/queensland-proposed-laws-crime-children-ankle-monitors/106126136

With all this free time from not scrolling TikTok, what are kids supposed to do other than turn to crime?

Its not cheap to monitor offenders in this manner
It seems to be a stop gap measure as our prisons are full
For adults its serious offences not petty crime

it’s a bit rough to say ‘don’t offend’ as if it’s a simple choice for these individuals.

people with supportive, positive lives that do not involve marginalization and discrimination generally aren’t the ones who are offending

Divine Angel said:

I’m so glad Mini Me isn’t interested in social media. She only watches cake decorating videos on YouTube kids.

some of those show cake decorating but the commentary is very much not something you might want your child listening to.

Arts said:

Divine Angel said:

I’m so glad Mini Me isn’t interested in social media. She only watches cake decorating videos on YouTube kids.

some of those show cake decorating but the commentary is very much not something you might want your child listening to.

It’s always on mute, she doesn’t care for the commentary or horrid music

Arts said:

Cymek said:

Divine Angel said:

Children as young as 10 who break the law in Queensland could be fitted with electronic ankle monitors under new legislation.

A 2021 trial, launched by the former Labor government, saw serious repeat youth offenders aged 15 and older on bail ordered to wear the devices in regions including south-east Queensland, Townsville and Cairns.

But under proposed laws introduced to state parliament on Wednesday, any child aged 10 years or older who is convicted of an offence could be fitted with the monitors statewide.

The legislation also removes the requirement for either the child, or their parent or guardian, to consent to wearing the device.

Premier David Crisafulli said the trial had shown the monitors reduced offending rates.

“I’m sure it’s uncomfortable, and I’m sure it’s a little embarrassing to wear one, but there is a pretty easy solution around that — don’t offend,” he said.
“I’m not walking away from rehabilitation or early intervention, that’s important to me. But if somebody doesn’t want to wear one of these, the best way to do that is to stay on the straight and narrow.”

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-10/queensland-proposed-laws-crime-children-ankle-monitors/106126136

With all this free time from not scrolling TikTok, what are kids supposed to do other than turn to crime?

Its not cheap to monitor offenders in this manner
It seems to be a stop gap measure as our prisons are full
For adults its serious offences not petty crime

it’s a bit rough to say ‘don’t offend’ as if it’s a simple choice for these individuals.

people with supportive, positive lives that do not involve marginalization and discrimination generally aren’t the ones who are offending

I’m not a psychologist but I’m not sure 10 year olds have a complete adult idea of responsibility, let alone a comprehensive knowledge of the statutes.

dv said:

I’m not a psychologist but I’m not sure 10 year olds have a complete adult idea of responsibility, let alone a comprehensive knowledge of the statutes.

IIRC this was a big thing when Jame Bulger’s murderers were on trial.

dv said:

Arts said:

Cymek said:

Its not cheap to monitor offenders in this manner
It seems to be a stop gap measure as our prisons are full
For adults its serious offences not petty crime

it’s a bit rough to say ‘don’t offend’ as if it’s a simple choice for these individuals.

people with supportive, positive lives that do not involve marginalization and discrimination generally aren’t the ones who are offending

I’m not a psychologist but I’m not sure 10 year olds have a complete adult idea of responsibility, let alone a comprehensive knowledge of the statutes.

do 50 year old legal scholars though

dv said:

Arts said:

Cymek said:

Its not cheap to monitor offenders in this manner
It seems to be a stop gap measure as our prisons are full
For adults its serious offences not petty crime

it’s a bit rough to say ‘don’t offend’ as if it’s a simple choice for these individuals.

people with supportive, positive lives that do not involve marginalization and discrimination generally aren’t the ones who are offending

I’m not a psychologist but I’m not sure 10 year olds have a complete adult idea of responsibility, let alone a comprehensive knowledge of the statutes.

agreed

Divine Angel said:

dv said:

I’m not a psychologist but I’m not sure 10 year olds have a complete adult idea of responsibility, let alone a comprehensive knowledge of the statutes.

IIRC this was a big thing when Jame Bulger’s murderers were on trial.

I dee dive into this case in one of my units. one of the boys asked the police if they were going to the hospital to make James better.

Arts said:

Divine Angel said:

dv said:

I’m not a psychologist but I’m not sure 10 year olds have a complete adult idea of responsibility, let alone a comprehensive knowledge of the statutes.

IIRC this was a big thing when Jame Bulger’s murderers were on trial.

I dee dive into this case in one of my units. one of the boys asked the police if they were going to the hospital to make James better.

Oof.

Divine Angel said:

Arts said:

Divine Angel said:

IIRC this was a big thing when Jame Bulger’s murderers were on trial.

I dee dive into this case in one of my units. one of the boys asked the police if they were going to the hospital to make James better.

Oof.

so what if it’s an adult that allegedly accidentally negligently killed a student with a vehicle

SCIENCE said:

Divine Angel said:

Arts said:

I dee dive into this case in one of my units. one of the boys asked the police if they were going to the hospital to make James better.

Oof.

so what if it’s an adult that allegedly accidentally negligently killed a student with a vehicle

You mentioned this yesterday. Is this the one in Melbourne’s East with the car going into a school yard near play equipment?

roughbarked said:

Many children have already been able to get around the ban in various ways, with age assurance systems misclassifying users and workarounds such as VPNs and makeup tricks being used.

The government admitted the ban wouldn’t be perfect or instantaneous but said the loopholes that allow teens to circumvent the ban would not stay open forever.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-10/social-media-ban-day-one-teen-access/106126706

I’m somewhat surprised that the social media companies didn’t decide to flex their muscles and simply deny social media access to all Australians, sending the message to the Australian government and any other government looking on that instead of implementing age verification, it is much easier to impose a geoblock.

Witty Rejoinder said:

SCIENCE said:

Divine Angel said:

Oof.

so what if it’s an adult that allegedly accidentally negligently killed a student with a vehicle

You mentioned this yesterday. Is this the one in Melbourne’s East with the car going into a school yard near play equipment?

That’s the one we read about, and we were just confused because putting someone in gaol doesn’t reincarnate a kid, sorry.

SCIENCE said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

SCIENCE said:

so what if it’s an adult that allegedly accidentally negligently killed a student with a vehicle

You mentioned this yesterday. Is this the one in Melbourne’s East with the car going into a school yard near play equipment?

That’s the one we read about, and we were just confused because putting someone in gaol doesn’t reincarnate a kid, sorry.

Sure. I was just seeking confirmation. I hadn’t noticed anything in the news myself.

Divine Angel said:

roughbarked said:

Many children have already been able to get around the ban in various ways, with age assurance systems misclassifying users and workarounds such as VPNs and makeup tricks being used.

The government admitted the ban wouldn’t be perfect or instantaneous but said the loopholes that allow teens to circumvent the ban would not stay open forever.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-10/social-media-ban-day-one-teen-access/106126706

Parents’ accounts. You’re not gonna close that loophole.

Yes. My granddaughters use mum’s accouunt.

roughbarked said:

Divine Angel said:

roughbarked said:

Many children have already been able to get around the ban in various ways, with age assurance systems misclassifying users and workarounds such as VPNs and makeup tricks being used.

The government admitted the ban wouldn’t be perfect or instantaneous but said the loopholes that allow teens to circumvent the ban would not stay open forever.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-10/social-media-ban-day-one-teen-access/106126706

Parents’ accounts. You’re not gonna close that loophole.

Yes. My granddaughters use mum’s accouunt.

sorry we thought

Australia’s grand social media experiment is finally live. Teens say nothing has changed

the world was going to end and every single last person was going to collapse in hyperactivity when this dropped, we thought it was an absolute disaster going to happen

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-11/social-media-ban-under-16s-day-one/106120020

SCIENCE said:

roughbarked said:

Divine Angel said:

Parents’ accounts. You’re not gonna close that loophole.

Yes. My granddaughters use mum’s accouunt.

sorry we thought

Australia’s grand social media experiment is finally live. Teens say nothing has changed

the world was going to end and every single last person was going to collapse in hyperactivity when this dropped, we thought it was an absolute disaster going to happen

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-11/social-media-ban-under-16s-day-one/106120020

They never said it was perfect.

Not so long ago, Trump banned TikTok. Teens were grieving. They wrote things about TikTok that, if you didn’t know, sounded like their best friend had died. Some had suicidal ideation.

That ban lasted what, less than 24 hours?

roughbarked said:

SCIENCE said:

roughbarked said:

Yes. My granddaughters use mum’s accouunt.

sorry we thought

Australia’s grand social media experiment is finally live. Teens say nothing has changed

the world was going to end and every single last person was going to collapse in hyperactivity when this dropped, we thought it was an absolute disaster going to happen

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-11/social-media-ban-under-16s-day-one/106120020

They never said it was perfect.

wait are you saying you wanted to see teenagers cannibalising each other in the streets

¿

maybe it would be perfect

SCIENCE said:

Divine Angel said:

roughbarked said:

SCIENCE said:

roughbarked said:

Yes. My granddaughters use mum’s accouunt.

sorry we thought

Australia’s grand social media experiment is finally live. Teens say nothing has changed

the world was going to end and every single last person was going to collapse in hyperactivity when this dropped, we thought it was an absolute disaster going to happen

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-11/social-media-ban-under-16s-day-one/106120020

They never said it was perfect.

Not so long ago, Trump banned TikTok. Teens were grieving. They wrote things about TikTok that, if you didn’t know, sounded like their best friend had died. Some had suicidal ideation.

That ban lasted what, less than 24 hours?

wait are you saying you wanted to see teenagers cannibalising each other in the streets

¿

maybe it would be perfect

we mean obviously we’ve never been teenagers ourselves but we’ve taught plenty and we’ve never heard a teenager say

no you can’t do that you can’t stop us from going to that party everyone’s going to the party and the world will be over if we can’t go we’re going to die if we don’t go

now thankfully we haven’t heard of any of our student teenagers having died or ended the world yet but maybe that’s because they hate us so much we wouldn’t be notified

anyway word on Irl Street is that everyone’s on discord just like we fkn told you before this all happened

SCIENCE said:

anyway word on Irl Street is that everyone’s on discord just like we fkn told you before this all happened

Knew it would strike a sour note?

ooh nice

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-11/two-way-tolls-60-dollar-cap-sydney-harbour-bridge-and-tunnel/106127264

Drivers using Sydney’s harbour bridge and harbour tunnel will be tolled in both directions from late 2028, the New South Wales government has confirmed.

Divine Angel said:

Not so long ago, Trump banned TikTok. Teens were grieving. They wrote things about TikTok that, if you didn’t know, sounded like their best friend had died. Some had suicidal ideation.

That ban lasted what, less than 24 hours?

speaking of

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-11/us-republicans-democrats-praise-australias-u16-social-media-ban/106128242

LOL

if turning everything one comes near into faeces is the measure then

Walter Sofronoff loses appeal against finding he engaged in corrupt conduct during inquiry into Bruce Lehrmann’s prosecution

guess we know who the next USSA Glorious Leader should be

SCIENCE said:

if turning everything one comes near into faeces is the measure then

Walter Sofronoff loses appeal against finding he engaged in corrupt conduct during inquiry into Bruce Lehrmann’s prosecution

guess we know who the next USSA Glorious Leader should be

I reckon chanting U – S – S – A works even better then U-S-A

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-11/political-donations-qld-property-developers/106130862

Let the bribes commence

Cymek said:

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-11/political-donations-qld-property-developers/106130862

Let the bribes commence

bullshit, everyone here knows and will tell yous that it’s best practice to run

Governance failures at overly corporatised Australian universities have let down staff, students and the public with legislation needed to restore trust, according to a long-running bipartisan Senate report. The final report from the year-long senate inquiry made eight recommendations for change, building on an interim report released three months ago that called for caps on vice-chancellor salaries. “It is painstakingly clear that governance failures at our universities have let staff, students and the public down,” Senate committee chair Labor Senator Marielle Smith said. “Universities are public institutions, established for the public good, and their governance standards must reflect this.”

them as corporations for maximal profit to deliver to shareholders and top executives

SCIENCE said:

bullshit, everyone here knows and will tell yous that it’s best practice to run

Governance failures at overly corporatised Australian universities have let down staff, students and the public with legislation needed to restore trust, according to a long-running bipartisan Senate report. The final report from the year-long senate inquiry made eight recommendations for change, building on an interim report released three months ago that called for caps on vice-chancellor salaries. “It is painstakingly clear that governance failures at our universities have let staff, students and the public down,” Senate committee chair Labor Senator Marielle Smith said. “Universities are public institutions, established for the public good, and their governance standards must reflect this.”

them as corporations for maximal profit to deliver to shareholders and top executives

there are no shareholders if they are public(ly-owned) institutions.

so where is the money going…?

At a press conference held at a school in Canberra to promote the under-16s social media ban, Albanese was asked repeatedly about Guardian Australia’s reporting that senior politicians like himself, Anika Wells and Don Farrell enjoy essentially “unlimited” entitlements to fly their spouses around the country. Twice he said: “I haven’t changed the rule.”

“They’ve been in place for some time and we haven’t changed the rules. We haven’t added to any entitlements,” Albanese said. He declined multiple times to answer whether his Labor government would now change those rules, saying “I’m not the finance minister”.

—-

I suspect Albanicus is at risk of misreading the mood on this one.

dv said:

At a press conference held at a school in Canberra to promote the under-16s social media ban, Albanese was asked repeatedly about Guardian Australia’s reporting that senior politicians like himself, Anika Wells and Don Farrell enjoy essentially “unlimited” entitlements to fly their spouses around the country. Twice he said: “I haven’t changed the rule.”

“They’ve been in place for some time and we haven’t changed the rules. We haven’t added to any entitlements,” Albanese said. He declined multiple times to answer whether his Labor government would now change those rules, saying “I’m not the finance minister”.

—-

I suspect Albanicus is at risk of misreading the mood on this one.

I suspect this might be a bit of an own goal for the opposition to pursue too far.

If there is a serious case for reform it is going to affect all of them too. As soon all entitlements generally (including theirs) are under threat, I expect the issue will be quietly dropped.

party_pants said:

dv said:

At a press conference held at a school in Canberra to promote the under-16s social media ban, Albanese was asked repeatedly about Guardian Australia’s reporting that senior politicians like himself, Anika Wells and Don Farrell enjoy essentially “unlimited” entitlements to fly their spouses around the country. Twice he said: “I haven’t changed the rule.”

“They’ve been in place for some time and we haven’t changed the rules. We haven’t added to any entitlements,” Albanese said. He declined multiple times to answer whether his Labor government would now change those rules, saying “I’m not the finance minister”.

——

I suspect Albanicus is at risk of misreading the mood on this one.

I suspect this might be a bit of an own goal for the opposition to pursue too far.

If there is a serious case for reform it is going to affect all of them too. As soon all entitlements generally (including theirs) are under threat, I expect the issue will be quietly dropped.

look look if “just following orders” is a good defence then surely “just following the rules” is as … wait … wait

wait

Michael V said:

ruby said:

:)

kind of agree we mean these arguments support restricting the reach of those poison addiction feeds to adults as well as nonadults so to frame it as “children should be given easy access to harmful things because adults have easy access to harmful things” seems a reach

party_pants said:

SCIENCE said:

bullshit, everyone here knows and will tell yous that it’s best practice to run

Governance failures at overly corporatised Australian universities have let down staff, students and the public with legislation needed to restore trust, according to a long-running bipartisan Senate report. The final report from the year-long senate inquiry made eight recommendations for change, building on an interim report released three months ago that called for caps on vice-chancellor salaries. “It is painstakingly clear that governance failures at our universities have let staff, students and the public down,” Senate committee chair Labor Senator Marielle Smith said. “Universities are public institutions, established for the public good, and their governance standards must reflect this.”

them as corporations for maximal profit to deliver to shareholders and top executives

there are no shareholders if they are public(ly-owned) institutions.

so where is the money going…?

sorry don’t know we haven’t been auditing universities

In short
A ban on property developers making political donations in state elections will be lifted under legislation introduced to Queensland parliament.
Premier David Crisafulli foreshadowed the change ahead of the 2024 election.

What’s next?
The bill has been referred to a parliamentary committee to consider, with debate to begin when parliament returns next year.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-11/political-donations-qld-property-developers/106130862

Divine Angel said:

In short
A ban on property developers making political donations in state elections will be lifted under legislation introduced to Queensland parliament.
Premier David Crisafulli foreshadowed the change ahead of the 2024 election.

What’s next?
The bill has been referred to a parliamentary committee to consider, with debate to begin when parliament returns next year.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-11/political-donations-qld-property-developers/106130862

Seems a retrograde step.

Michael V said:

Divine Angel said:

In short
A ban on property developers making political donations in state elections will be lifted under legislation introduced to Queensland parliament.
Premier David Crisafulli foreshadowed the change ahead of the 2024 election.

What’s next?
The bill has been referred to a parliamentary committee to consider, with debate to begin when parliament returns next year.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-11/political-donations-qld-property-developers/106130862

Seems a retrograde step.

But He Kept His Promises¡

Michael V said:

Divine Angel said:

In short
A ban on property developers making political donations in state elections will be lifted under legislation introduced to Queensland parliament.
Premier David Crisafulli foreshadowed the change ahead of the 2024 election.

What’s next?
The bill has been referred to a parliamentary committee to consider, with debate to begin when parliament returns next year.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-11/political-donations-qld-property-developers/106130862

Seems a retrograde step.

Hello and welcome to the LNP.

SCIENCE said:

Michael V said:

Divine Angel said:

In short
A ban on property developers making political donations in state elections will be lifted under legislation introduced to Queensland parliament.
Premier David Crisafulli foreshadowed the change ahead of the 2024 election.

What’s next?
The bill has been referred to a parliamentary committee to consider, with debate to begin when parliament returns next year.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-11/political-donations-qld-property-developers/106130862

Seems a retrograde step.

But He Kept His Promises¡

Me n Mr Mutant were talking about election promises the other day. It was promised to provide more funding for specialist teachers (like behaviour, for example), support staff, and TAs.

Not only has that not eventuated, the govt is actively rejecting union offers for better pay and conditions.

The TA union has reached a good deal, which members got to vote on last week. I hear teachers are close to a deal, but nothing official has been released yet. Certainly nothing about providing more funding for specialist staff.

Divine Angel said:

Michael V said:

Divine Angel said:

In short
A ban on property developers making political donations in state elections will be lifted under legislation introduced to Queensland parliament.
Premier David Crisafulli foreshadowed the change ahead of the 2024 election.

What’s next?
The bill has been referred to a parliamentary committee to consider, with debate to begin when parliament returns next year.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-11/political-donations-qld-property-developers/106130862

Seems a retrograde step.

Hello and welcome to the LNP.

Yeah. Unfortunate.

:(

:(

:(

Divine Angel said:

Hello and welcome to the LNP.

meanwhile in COMMUNIST NEW SOUTH WALES they’ll compulsorily kill your living breathing days
fetus sacred human being with full legal rights but

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-12/document-reveals-plan-to-limit-blocking-of-abortions/106091562

if it starts leaking out yous should just man up and dry out yourself

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-12/women-denied-period-products-in-hospital/106121588

Nobody Ever

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-12/emma-mason-reflects-on-tilly-legacy-social-media-ban-australia/106116832

Bullied Anyone

“For Tilly, this is such a massive win. It makes no difference, I know she’s gone. But for kids who are being subjected to bullying on social media, it stops now.”

On Discord

SCIENCE said:

Divine Angel said:

Hello and welcome to the LNP.

meanwhile in COMMUNIST NEW SOUTH WALES they’ll compulsorily kill your living breathing days
fetus sacred human being with full legal rights but

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-12/document-reveals-plan-to-limit-blocking-of-abortions/106091562

if it starts leaking out yous should just man up and dry out yourself

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-12/women-denied-period-products-in-hospital/106121588

The other day on Reddit, someone said they’d gone to Logan Hospital ED and sat next to a woman actively miscarrying right there on the seat while waiting to be seen. It was not mentioned whether the person received products to “stop the leak”.

SCIENCE said:

Nobody Ever

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-12/emma-mason-reflects-on-tilly-legacy-social-media-ban-australia/106116832

Bullied Anyone

“For Tilly, this is such a massive win. It makes no difference, I know she’s gone. But for kids who are being subjected to bullying on social media, it stops now.”

On Discord

Yet.

SCIENCE said:

Nobody Ever

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-12/emma-mason-reflects-on-tilly-legacy-social-media-ban-australia/106116832

Bullied Anyone

“For Tilly, this is such a massive win. It makes no difference, I know she’s gone. But for kids who are being subjected to bullying on social media, it stops now.”

On Discord

I’ve heard, from a cybercrime cop, that pedos prefer Discord to find victims.

Divine Angel said:

SCIENCE said:

Michael V said:

Seems a retrograde step.

But He Kept His Promises¡

Me n Mr Mutant were talking about election promises the other day. It was promised to provide more funding for specialist teachers (like behaviour, for example), support staff, and TAs.

Not only has that not eventuated, the govt is actively rejecting union offers for better pay and conditions.

The TA union has reached a good deal, which members got to vote on last week. I hear teachers are close to a deal, but nothing official has been released yet. Certainly nothing about providing more funding for specialist staff.

Well, Crisafulli was a Minister in the previous LNP government. They absolutely gutted the education sector. Thousands and thousands of jobs went.

I have never trusted the man. I also object to him spending significant sums of our money on TV ads telling us how great they are.

Divine Angel said:

SCIENCE said:

Divine Angel said:

Hello and welcome to the LNP.

meanwhile in COMMUNIST NEW SOUTH WALES they’ll compulsorily kill your living breathing days
fetus sacred human being with full legal rights but

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-12/document-reveals-plan-to-limit-blocking-of-abortions/106091562

if it starts leaking out yous should just man up and dry out yourself

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-12/women-denied-period-products-in-hospital/106121588

The other day on Reddit, someone said they’d gone to Logan Hospital ED and sat next to a woman actively miscarrying right there on the seat while waiting to be seen. It was not mentioned whether the person received products to “stop the leak”.

FMD

:(

Michael V said:

Divine Angel said:

SCIENCE said:

But He Kept His Promises¡

Me n Mr Mutant were talking about election promises the other day. It was promised to provide more funding for specialist teachers (like behaviour, for example), support staff, and TAs.

Not only has that not eventuated, the govt is actively rejecting union offers for better pay and conditions.

The TA union has reached a good deal, which members got to vote on last week. I hear teachers are close to a deal, but nothing official has been released yet. Certainly nothing about providing more funding for specialist staff.

Well, Crisafulli was a Minister in the previous LNP government. They absolutely gutted the education sector. Thousands and thousands of jobs went.

I have never trusted the man. I also object to him spending significant sums of our money on TV ads telling us how great they are.

I’ve never trusted him and I don’t live in QLD.

Michael V said:

Divine Angel said:

In short
A ban on property developers making political donations in state elections will be lifted under legislation introduced to Queensland parliament.
Premier David Crisafulli foreshadowed the change ahead of the 2024 election.

What’s next?
The bill has been referred to a parliamentary committee to consider, with debate to begin when parliament returns next year.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-11/political-donations-qld-property-developers/106130862

Seems a retrograde step.

A step towards corruption.

roughbarked said:

Michael V said:

Divine Angel said:

Me n Mr Mutant were talking about election promises the other day. It was promised to provide more funding for specialist teachers (like behaviour, for example), support staff, and TAs.

Not only has that not eventuated, the govt is actively rejecting union offers for better pay and conditions.

The TA union has reached a good deal, which members got to vote on last week. I hear teachers are close to a deal, but nothing official has been released yet. Certainly nothing about providing more funding for specialist staff.

Well, Crisafulli was a Minister in the previous LNP government. They absolutely gutted the education sector. Thousands and thousands of jobs went.

I have never trusted the man. I also object to him spending significant sums of our money on TV ads telling us how great they are.

I’ve never trusted him and I don’t live in QLD.

is that like those Australian foreign interferers who insist that Zohran Mamdani is not their mayor

SCIENCE said:

roughbarked said:

Michael V said:

Well, Crisafulli was a Minister in the previous LNP government. They absolutely gutted the education sector. Thousands and thousands of jobs went.

I have never trusted the man. I also object to him spending significant sums of our money on TV ads telling us how great they are.

I’ve never trusted him and I don’t live in QLD.

is that like those Australian foreign interferers who insist that Zohran Mamdani is not their mayor

That is so true. He’s not my mayor either.

looks like propaganda pushers have indoctrinated their children with the dirty COMMUNIST ways

On day one of Australia’s social media ban, my 13-year-old son said the most unexpected thing. “It’s a good start — but it doesn’t go far enough.” This from the kid who, like so many of his peers, had been rolling his eyes at the “lame” attempts by the federal government to restrict what has become open access by predators to kids on almost every social media and messaging site. Highly criticised online gaming platforms like Roblox are also required to implement facial age assurance tests, and my son noted that this was in place and was smartly executed. Chat restrictions were immediately obvious.

This is where we parents should remind ourselves of the power of the loving boundary: not to bind and constrain, but to properly demonstrate that we hold our kids and their safety in our mind, and that they do not slip out of our mind. And that’s what this might just turn out to be. Not a watertight seal of safety against predators. Nor an onerous restriction of business of the tech giants. But a good first step.

Jonathan Haidt, the author of the book The Anxious Generation, and a powerful critic of young people having access to phones, is a huge fan of the change. He calls it “the most vital law on the planet” and says it doesn’t matter if the rollout is messy and imperfect — “the alternative is far worse. Without action we leave yet another generation to grow up under the rule of a handful of tech companies whose business models depend on capturing as much of children’s time and attention as possible.”

SCIENCE said:

looks like propaganda pushers have indoctrinated their children with the dirty COMMUNIST ways

On day one of Australia’s social media ban, my 13-year-old son said the most unexpected thing. “It’s a good start — but it doesn’t go far enough.” This from the kid who, like so many of his peers, had been rolling his eyes at the “lame” attempts by the federal government to restrict what has become open access by predators to kids on almost every social media and messaging site. Highly criticised online gaming platforms like Roblox are also required to implement facial age assurance tests, and my son noted that this was in place and was smartly executed. Chat restrictions were immediately obvious.

This is where we parents should remind ourselves of the power of the loving boundary: not to bind and constrain, but to properly demonstrate that we hold our kids and their safety in our mind, and that they do not slip out of our mind. And that’s what this might just turn out to be. Not a watertight seal of safety against predators. Nor an onerous restriction of business of the tech giants. But a good first step.

Jonathan Haidt, the author of the book The Anxious Generation, and a powerful critic of young people having access to phones, is a huge fan of the change. He calls it “the most vital law on the planet” and says it doesn’t matter if the rollout is messy and imperfect — “the alternative is far worse. Without action we leave yet another generation to grow up under the rule of a handful of tech companies whose business models depend on capturing as much of children’s time and attention as possible.”

Let kids play in an artificial reality environment with other kids?

Or does that make it worse?

Tau.Neutrino said:

Let kids play in an artificial reality environment with other kids?

Or does that make it worse?

Young people being on social media has a range of problems. One, obviously, is predators. Another huge one is the effect on their development due to endless scrolling.

It’s proven that social development and key cognitive skills are negatively affected by social media. Then there’s also body dysmorphia. We’re already seeing pre-teen girls spending hundreds of dollars on skincare they don’t need. They’re asking their mums for Botox. They’re getting diet tips and other shitty health advice from TikTok. You’ve got boys on Roblox who have fancy gear bought with real money, and the boys who feel excluded because their parents won’t/can’t afford to get them fancy things.

A virtual reality playground still has the issue of predators, how do you keep them out? You may be taking away the bad health advice and dysmorphia part, but you’re still not addressing actual social skills translating into real life: bullying increases at school when people don’t know how to interact.

Divine Angel said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

Let kids play in an artificial reality environment with other kids?

Or does that make it worse?

Young people being on social media has a range of problems. One, obviously, is predators. Another huge one is the effect on their development due to endless scrolling.

It’s proven that social development and key cognitive skills are negatively affected by social media. Then there’s also body dysmorphia. We’re already seeing pre-teen girls spending hundreds of dollars on skincare they don’t need. They’re asking their mums for Botox. They’re getting diet tips and other shitty health advice from TikTok. You’ve got boys on Roblox who have fancy gear bought with real money, and the boys who feel excluded because their parents won’t/can’t afford to get them fancy things.

A virtual reality playground still has the issue of predators, how do you keep them out? You may be taking away the bad health advice and dysmorphia part, but you’re still not addressing actual social skills translating into real life: bullying increases at school when people don’t know how to interact.

Maybe a future psychology framework of some kind that addresses those issues?

It’s difficult, I remember as a kid that I did not like being around 😕 other certain kids which for me was most of them.

Divine Angel said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

Let kids play in an artificial reality environment with other kids?

Or does that make it worse?

Young people being on social media has a range of problems. One, obviously, is predators. Another huge one is the effect on their development due to endless scrolling.

It’s proven that social development and key cognitive skills are negatively affected by social media. Then there’s also body dysmorphia. We’re already seeing pre-teen girls spending hundreds of dollars on skincare they don’t need. They’re asking their mums for Botox. They’re getting diet tips and other shitty health advice from TikTok. You’ve got boys on Roblox who have fancy gear bought with real money, and the boys who feel excluded because their parents won’t/can’t afford to get them fancy things.

A virtual reality playground still has the issue of predators, how do you keep them out? You may be taking away the bad health advice and dysmorphia part, but you’re still not addressing actual social skills translating into real life: bullying increases at school when people don’t know how to interact.

Basically, children drive spending. So market a whole heap of stuff aimed at children on TV. They plead with their parents to buy me a Barbie. and so it foes. Give them the internet and away it goes.

roughbarked said:

Divine Angel said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

Let kids play in an artificial reality environment with other kids?

Or does that make it worse?

Young people being on social media has a range of problems. One, obviously, is predators. Another huge one is the effect on their development due to endless scrolling.

It’s proven that social development and key cognitive skills are negatively affected by social media. Then there’s also body dysmorphia. We’re already seeing pre-teen girls spending hundreds of dollars on skincare they don’t need. They’re asking their mums for Botox. They’re getting diet tips and other shitty health advice from TikTok. You’ve got boys on Roblox who have fancy gear bought with real money, and the boys who feel excluded because their parents won’t/can’t afford to get them fancy things.

A virtual reality playground still has the issue of predators, how do you keep them out? You may be taking away the bad health advice and dysmorphia part, but you’re still not addressing actual social skills translating into real life: bullying increases at school when people don’t know how to interact.

Basically, children drive spending. So market a whole heap of stuff aimed at children on TV. They plead with their parents to buy me a Barbie. and so it foes. Give them the internet and away it goes.

Hence the rise of influencers. Have a look at Ryan. Started out doing toy reviews on YouTube, now is a multi-million dollar enterprise with his own branded toys, games, and apps.

Divine Angel said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

Let kids play in an artificial reality environment with other kids?

Or does that make it worse?

Young people being on social media has a range of problems. One, obviously, is predators. Another huge one is the effect on their development due to endless scrolling.

It’s proven that social development and key cognitive skills are negatively affected by social media. Then there’s also body dysmorphia. We’re already seeing pre-teen girls spending hundreds of dollars on skincare they don’t need. They’re asking their mums for Botox. They’re getting diet tips and other shitty health advice from TikTok. You’ve got boys on Roblox who have fancy gear bought with real money, and the boys who feel excluded because their parents won’t/can’t afford to get them fancy things.

A virtual reality playground still has the issue of predators, how do you keep them out? You may be taking away the bad health advice and dysmorphia part, but you’re still not addressing actual social skills translating into real life: bullying increases at school when people don’t know how to interact.

Well said.

Michael V said:

Divine Angel said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

Let kids play in an artificial reality environment with other kids?

Or does that make it worse?

Young people being on social media has a range of problems. One, obviously, is predators. Another huge one is the effect on their development due to endless scrolling.

It’s proven that social development and key cognitive skills are negatively affected by social media. Then there’s also body dysmorphia. We’re already seeing pre-teen girls spending hundreds of dollars on skincare they don’t need. They’re asking their mums for Botox. They’re getting diet tips and other shitty health advice from TikTok. You’ve got boys on Roblox who have fancy gear bought with real money, and the boys who feel excluded because their parents won’t/can’t afford to get them fancy things.

A virtual reality playground still has the issue of predators, how do you keep them out? You may be taking away the bad health advice and dysmorphia part, but you’re still not addressing actual social skills translating into real life: bullying increases at school when people don’t know how to interact.

Well said.

Bullying begets itself. It entrenches itself. The only real way to counter it is to wall it out.

roughbarked said:

Michael V said:

Divine Angel said:

Young people being on social media has a range of problems. One, obviously, is predators. Another huge one is the effect on their development due to endless scrolling.

It’s proven that social development and key cognitive skills are negatively affected by social media. Then there’s also body dysmorphia. We’re already seeing pre-teen girls spending hundreds of dollars on skincare they don’t need. They’re asking their mums for Botox. They’re getting diet tips and other shitty health advice from TikTok. You’ve got boys on Roblox who have fancy gear bought with real money, and the boys who feel excluded because their parents won’t/can’t afford to get them fancy things.

A virtual reality playground still has the issue of predators, how do you keep them out? You may be taking away the bad health advice and dysmorphia part, but you’re still not addressing actual social skills translating into real life: bullying increases at school when people don’t know how to interact.

Well said.

Bullying begets itself. It entrenches itself. The only real way to counter it is to wall it out.

Bullying is not a rite of passage. It is not something that happens to everyone. Whatever “wall it out” means, that’s not the answer.

(I happen to be writing about bullying for my essay. I’m armed with a truckload of academic references. Go ahead, make my day.)

Divine Angel said:

roughbarked said:

Michael V said:

Well said.

Bullying begets itself. It entrenches itself. The only real way to counter it is to wall it out.

Bullying is not a rite of passage. It is not something that happens to everyone. Whatever “wall it out” means, that’s not the answer.

(I happen to be writing about bullying for my essay. I’m armed with a truckload of academic references. Go ahead, make my day.)

Didn’t suggest any rite of passage.

roughbarked said:

Bullying begets itself. It entrenches itself. The only real way to counter it is to wall it out.

In the junior years of high school, there was this dopey kid, a year or so younger than me, who apparently thought that, because my dad worked for his dad, he was entitled to bully me.

I put up with it for a while, told him to f*** off a few times, all that sort of thing.

But, it got tired of it, so, when he tried it one day, i approached him with my hand out, and said let’s shake hands, be friends, and when i got close enough i kicked him in the groin.

Then, when he was on the ground, i kicked him at least once, maybe twice more, and told his idiot mates to clean up the mess.

That seemed to counter it.

captain_spalding said:

roughbarked said:

Bullying begets itself. It entrenches itself. The only real way to counter it is to wall it out.

In the junior years of high school, there was this dopey kid, a year or so younger than me, who apparently thought that, because my dad worked for his dad, he was entitled to bully me.

I put up with it for a while, told him to f*** off a few times, all that sort of thing.

But, it got tired of it, so, when he tried it one day, i approached him with my hand out, and said let’s shake hands, be friends, and when i got close enough i kicked him in the groin.

Then, when he was on the ground, i kicked him at least once, maybe twice more, and told his idiot mates to clean up the mess.

That seemed to counter it.

Bullies like to win fights. They love a pushover and will keep coming back until he/she won’t be pushed over again and makes sure the point is taken.

Just heard about anti bullying legislation on abc news.

captain_spalding said:

roughbarked said:

Bullying begets itself. It entrenches itself. The only real way to counter it is to wall it out.

In the junior years of high school, there was this dopey kid, a year or so younger than me, who apparently thought that, because my dad worked for his dad, he was entitled to bully me.

I put up with it for a while, told him to f*** off a few times, all that sort of thing.

But, it got tired of it, so, when he tried it one day, i approached him with my hand out, and said let’s shake hands, be friends, and when i got close enough i kicked him in the groin.

Then, when he was on the ground, i kicked him at least once, maybe twice more, and told his idiot mates to clean up the mess.

That seemed to counter it.

Humphrey & Hebron (2014) assert one of the “essential ingredients” of bullying is an imbalance of power, so by you gaining the upper hand (so to speak), you’ve inverted the imbalance, thus creating yourself as the bully.

Divine Angel said:

captain_spalding said:

roughbarked said:

Bullying begets itself. It entrenches itself. The only real way to counter it is to wall it out.

In the junior years of high school, there was this dopey kid, a year or so younger than me, who apparently thought that, because my dad worked for his dad, he was entitled to bully me.

I put up with it for a while, told him to f*** off a few times, all that sort of thing.

But, it got tired of it, so, when he tried it one day, i approached him with my hand out, and said let’s shake hands, be friends, and when i got close enough i kicked him in the groin.

Then, when he was on the ground, i kicked him at least once, maybe twice more, and told his idiot mates to clean up the mess.

That seemed to counter it.

Humphrey & Hebron (2014) assert one of the “essential ingredients” of bullying is an imbalance of power, so by you gaining the upper hand (so to speak), you’ve inverted the imbalance, thus creating yourself as the bully.

Meh. Humphrey & Hebron clearly went to a different school, where philosophies of social interaction counted for something out on the battleplaying field

He went away. That’s all i wanted. I didn’t bother him again, and he didn’t bother me.

Divine Angel said:

captain_spalding said:

roughbarked said:

Bullying begets itself. It entrenches itself. The only real way to counter it is to wall it out.

In the junior years of high school, there was this dopey kid, a year or so younger than me, who apparently thought that, because my dad worked for his dad, he was entitled to bully me.

I put up with it for a while, told him to f*** off a few times, all that sort of thing.

But, it got tired of it, so, when he tried it one day, i approached him with my hand out, and said let’s shake hands, be friends, and when i got close enough i kicked him in the groin.

Then, when he was on the ground, i kicked him at least once, maybe twice more, and told his idiot mates to clean up the mess.

That seemed to counter it.

Humphrey & Hebron (2014) assert one of the “essential ingredients” of bullying is an imbalance of power, so by you gaining the upper hand (so to speak), you’ve inverted the imbalance, thus creating yourself as the bully.

meh – it is better to bully than to be bullied.

captain_spalding said:

Divine Angel said:

captain_spalding said:

In the junior years of high school, there was this dopey kid, a year or so younger than me, who apparently thought that, because my dad worked for his dad, he was entitled to bully me.

I put up with it for a while, told him to f*** off a few times, all that sort of thing.

But, it got tired of it, so, when he tried it one day, i approached him with my hand out, and said let’s shake hands, be friends, and when i got close enough i kicked him in the groin.

Then, when he was on the ground, i kicked him at least once, maybe twice more, and told his idiot mates to clean up the mess.

That seemed to counter it.

Humphrey & Hebron (2014) assert one of the “essential ingredients” of bullying is an imbalance of power, so by you gaining the upper hand (so to speak), you’ve inverted the imbalance, thus creating yourself as the bully.

Meh. Humphrey & Hebron clearly went to a different school, where philosophies of social interaction counted for something out on the battleplaying field

He went away. That’s all i wanted. I didn’t bother him again, and he didn’t bother me.

Yeah. there’s a lot in there I don’t agree with, but that’s not my job. I just pull out relevant things and write about them.

My own experience with stopping a bully was vastly different. My high school had approximately seventy billion stairs (no lifts then, but it does now). A girl who bullied me every single day sprained her ankle at school, I saw her carted away in an ambulance. Next day, she rocks up using crutches. Now, because I’d used crutches at the school before and knew how difficult it was, I offered to carry her bag. She looked at me as though wondering if I was going to pee on it or something, then accepted the offer. I carried her bag inside, placed it gently on her desk, went back to my own desk.

When her partner in crime turned up, he started digging into me as usual, but she stopped him. I assume she told him what happened, and neither of them bullied me ever again.

I don’t know why I decided to be nice to her, other than I knew what a giant PITA crutches were.

Anti-bullying review recommends making kids ‘upstanders’. Does it work?

New national standard to be brought in for schools bullying | 9 News Australia

Divine Angel said:

When her partner in crime turned up, he started digging into me as usual, but she stopped him. I assume she told him what happened, and neither of them bullied me ever again.

I don’t know why I decided to be nice to her, other than I knew what a giant PITA crutches were.

There you go. A polar opposite of an approach.

The young lady was, apparently, of sufficient intelligence as to be able to reassess her attitude towards you.

In my case, the lad was as thick as two short planks. Even the old-style Qld Police would have probably rejected him as ‘too stupid’.

I gave him more than one opportunity, on several occasions, to desist, with things like questioning his motives for his behaviour.

Appealing to intelligence and conscience was, i’m afraid, never really an effective option.

One thing I’ve learned from my school is that behavioural issues are usually the result of environmental factors. The school’s approach to tackling those factors is paying off, but obviously you can’t change their home life so there will always be undesirable behaviours. Particularly at the end of term when kids realise they’ve got no school to feel safe and supported.

Divine Angel said:

One thing I’ve learned from my school is that behavioural issues are usually the result of environmental factors. The school’s approach to tackling those factors is paying off, but obviously you can’t change their home life so there will always be undesirable behaviours. Particularly at the end of term when kids realise they’ve got no school to feel safe and supported.

so summer and boarding schools are the best

roughbarked said:

captain_spalding said:

roughbarked said:

Bullying begets itself. It entrenches itself. The only real way to counter it is to wall it out.

In the junior years of high school, there was this dopey kid, a year or so younger than me, who apparently thought that, because my dad worked for his dad, he was entitled to bully me.

I put up with it for a while, told him to f*** off a few times, all that sort of thing.

But, it got tired of it, so, when he tried it one day, i approached him with my hand out, and said let’s shake hands, be friends, and when i got close enough i kicked him in the groin.

Then, when he was on the ground, i kicked him at least once, maybe twice more, and told his idiot mates to clean up the mess.

That seemed to counter it.

Bullies like to win fights. They love a pushover and will keep coming back until he/she won’t be pushed over again and makes sure the point is taken.

people who bully are trying to get empowerment back, usually because they are disempowered in other aspects of their life. it’s a lack of control over their world in most places that create a need for control in the small spaces they can. So the way to deal with someone who engages in bullying Behaviour is to give them some control in a prosocial way.. some autonomy in their world… this helps reduce the need to take power.

captain_spalding said:

roughbarked said:

Bullying begets itself. It entrenches itself. The only real way to counter it is to wall it out.

In the junior years of high school, there was this dopey kid, a year or so younger than me, who apparently thought that, because my dad worked for his dad, he was entitled to bully me.

I put up with it for a while, told him to f*** off a few times, all that sort of thing.

But, it got tired of it, so, when he tried it one day, i approached him with my hand out, and said let’s shake hands, be friends, and when i got close enough i kicked him in the groin.

Then, when he was on the ground, i kicked him at least once, maybe twice more, and told his idiot mates to clean up the mess.

That seemed to counter it.

so you style yourself Ender Wiggin do you

Arts said:

roughbarked said:

captain_spalding said:

In the junior years of high school, there was this dopey kid, a year or so younger than me, who apparently thought that, because my dad worked for his dad, he was entitled to bully me.

I put up with it for a while, told him to f*** off a few times, all that sort of thing.

But, it got tired of it, so, when he tried it one day, i approached him with my hand out, and said let’s shake hands, be friends, and when i got close enough i kicked him in the groin.

Then, when he was on the ground, i kicked him at least once, maybe twice more, and told his idiot mates to clean up the mess.

That seemed to counter it.

Bullies like to win fights. They love a pushover and will keep coming back until he/she won’t be pushed over again and makes sure the point is taken.

people who bully are trying to get empowerment back, usually because they are disempowered in other aspects of their life. it’s a lack of control over their world in most places that create a need for control in the small spaces they can. So the way to deal with someone who engages in bullying Behaviour is to give them some control in a prosocial way.. some autonomy in their world… this helps reduce the need to take power.

hence Donny and Elone exist

SCIENCE said:

captain_spalding said:

roughbarked said:

Bullying begets itself. It entrenches itself. The only real way to counter it is to wall it out.

In the junior years of high school, there was this dopey kid, a year or so younger than me, who apparently thought that, because my dad worked for his dad, he was entitled to bully me.

I put up with it for a while, told him to f*** off a few times, all that sort of thing.

But, it got tired of it, so, when he tried it one day, i approached him with my hand out, and said let’s shake hands, be friends, and when i got close enough i kicked him in the groin.

Then, when he was on the ground, i kicked him at least once, maybe twice more, and told his idiot mates to clean up the mess.

That seemed to counter it.

so you style yourself Ender Wiggin do you

Is that from a Terry Pratchett book or something???

SCIENCE said:

Arts said:

roughbarked said:

Bullies like to win fights. They love a pushover and will keep coming back until he/she won’t be pushed over again and makes sure the point is taken.

people who bully are trying to get empowerment back, usually because they are disempowered in other aspects of their life. it’s a lack of control over their world in most places that create a need for control in the small spaces they can. So the way to deal with someone who engages in bullying Behaviour is to give them some control in a prosocial way.. some autonomy in their world… this helps reduce the need to take power.

hence Donny and Elone exist

classic model

captain_spalding said:

roughbarked said:

Bullying begets itself. It entrenches itself. The only real way to counter it is to wall it out.

In the junior years of high school, there was this dopey kid, a year or so younger than me, who apparently thought that, because my dad worked for his dad, he was entitled to bully me.

I put up with it for a while, told him to f*** off a few times, all that sort of thing.

But, it got tired of it, so, when he tried it one day, i approached him with my hand out, and said let’s shake hands, be friends, and when i got close enough i kicked him in the groin.

Then, when he was on the ground, i kicked him at least once, maybe twice more, and told his idiot mates to clean up the mess.

That seemed to counter it.

Seems a bit extreme when a punch in the head would have done the job.

Witty Rejoinder said:

Seems a bit extreme when a punch in the head would have done the job.

Reflecting on the incident, i recall that he was getting progressively more aggressive with each occasion.

You didn’t need to have a crystal ball to see what it would eventually lead to.

It seemed prudent to strike first, and in a manner which would obviate any debate about whether it had been a strategic, or merely a tactical, defeat.

Put the bullies into a catapult.

Fixed.

Divine Angel said:

captain_spalding said:

roughbarked said:

Bullying begets itself. It entrenches itself. The only real way to counter it is to wall it out.

In the junior years of high school, there was this dopey kid, a year or so younger than me, who apparently thought that, because my dad worked for his dad, he was entitled to bully me.

I put up with it for a while, told him to f*** off a few times, all that sort of thing.

But, it got tired of it, so, when he tried it one day, i approached him with my hand out, and said let’s shake hands, be friends, and when i got close enough i kicked him in the groin.

Then, when he was on the ground, i kicked him at least once, maybe twice more, and told his idiot mates to clean up the mess.

That seemed to counter it.

Humphrey & Hebron (2014) assert one of the “essential ingredients” of bullying is an imbalance of power, so by you gaining the upper hand (so to speak), you’ve inverted the imbalance, thus creating yourself as the bully.

Yes. If only briefly.

Divine Angel said:

captain_spalding said:

Divine Angel said:

Humphrey & Hebron (2014) assert one of the “essential ingredients” of bullying is an imbalance of power, so by you gaining the upper hand (so to speak), you’ve inverted the imbalance, thus creating yourself as the bully.

Meh. Humphrey & Hebron clearly went to a different school, where philosophies of social interaction counted for something out on the battleplaying field

He went away. That’s all i wanted. I didn’t bother him again, and he didn’t bother me.

Yeah. there’s a lot in there I don’t agree with, but that’s not my job. I just pull out relevant things and write about them.

My own experience with stopping a bully was vastly different. My high school had approximately seventy billion stairs (no lifts then, but it does now). A girl who bullied me every single day sprained her ankle at school, I saw her carted away in an ambulance. Next day, she rocks up using crutches. Now, because I’d used crutches at the school before and knew how difficult it was, I offered to carry her bag. She looked at me as though wondering if I was going to pee on it or something, then accepted the offer. I carried her bag inside, placed it gently on her desk, went back to my own desk.

When her partner in crime turned up, he started digging into me as usual, but she stopped him. I assume she told him what happened, and neither of them bullied me ever again.

I don’t know why I decided to be nice to her, other than I knew what a giant PITA crutches were.

It is nice to be nice. Nicer to be nicer.

Tau.Neutrino said:

Put the bullies into a catapult.

Fixed.

roughbarked said:

Divine Angel said:

captain_spalding said:

In the junior years of high school, there was this dopey kid, a year or so younger than me, who apparently thought that, because my dad worked for his dad, he was entitled to bully me.

I put up with it for a while, told him to f*** off a few times, all that sort of thing.

But, it got tired of it, so, when he tried it one day, i approached him with my hand out, and said let’s shake hands, be friends, and when i got close enough i kicked him in the groin.

Then, when he was on the ground, i kicked him at least once, maybe twice more, and told his idiot mates to clean up the mess.

That seemed to counter it.

Humphrey & Hebron (2014) assert one of the “essential ingredients” of bullying is an imbalance of power, so by you gaining the upper hand (so to speak), you’ve inverted the imbalance, thus creating yourself as the bully.

Yes. If only briefly.

Perhaps that accounts for why i’ve had so much trouble sleeping at night for all these decades.

captain_spalding said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

Put the bullies into a catapult.

Fixed.

Show that episode before school starts.

Divine Angel said:

One thing I’ve learned from my school is that behavioural issues are usually the result of environmental factors. The school’s approach to tackling those factors is paying off, but obviously you can’t change their home life so there will always be undesirable behaviours. Particularly at the end of term when kids realise they’ve got no school to feel safe and supported.

Home life is the main issue though. It is well and good if the children can take concepts home from school and help reeducate their parents. However it is most often the other way around.

Arts said:

roughbarked said:

captain_spalding said:

In the junior years of high school, there was this dopey kid, a year or so younger than me, who apparently thought that, because my dad worked for his dad, he was entitled to bully me.

I put up with it for a while, told him to f*** off a few times, all that sort of thing.

But, it got tired of it, so, when he tried it one day, i approached him with my hand out, and said let’s shake hands, be friends, and when i got close enough i kicked him in the groin.

Then, when he was on the ground, i kicked him at least once, maybe twice more, and told his idiot mates to clean up the mess.

That seemed to counter it.

Bullies like to win fights. They love a pushover and will keep coming back until he/she won’t be pushed over again and makes sure the point is taken.

people who bully are trying to get empowerment back, usually because they are disempowered in other aspects of their life. it’s a lack of control over their world in most places that create a need for control in the small spaces they can. So the way to deal with someone who engages in bullying Behaviour is to give them some control in a prosocial way.. some autonomy in their world… this helps reduce the need to take power.

That might be true in some instances, but in general, I’m sorry, but that’s BS…

furious said:

Arts said:

roughbarked said:

Bullies like to win fights. They love a pushover and will keep coming back until he/she won’t be pushed over again and makes sure the point is taken.

people who bully are trying to get empowerment back, usually because they are disempowered in other aspects of their life. it’s a lack of control over their world in most places that create a need for control in the small spaces they can. So the way to deal with someone who engages in bullying Behaviour is to give them some control in a prosocial way.. some autonomy in their world… this helps reduce the need to take power.

That might be true in some instances, but in general, I’m sorry, but that’s BS…

the research disagrees with you…

Arts said:

furious said:

Arts said:

people who bully are trying to get empowerment back, usually because they are disempowered in other aspects of their life. it’s a lack of control over their world in most places that create a need for control in the small spaces they can. So the way to deal with someone who engages in bullying Behaviour is to give them some control in a prosocial way.. some autonomy in their world… this helps reduce the need to take power.

That might be true in some instances, but in general, I’m sorry, but that’s BS…

the research disagrees with you…

what have the scientists ever done for us???

furious said:

Arts said:

people who bully are trying to get empowerment back, usually because they are disempowered in other aspects of their life. it’s a lack of control over their world in most places that create a need for control in the small spaces they can. So the way to deal with someone who engages in bullying Behaviour is to give them some control in a prosocial way.. some autonomy in their world… this helps reduce the need to take power.

That might be true in some instances, but in general, I’m sorry, but that’s BS…

It’s a very sound and rational assessment of causes, and of potential solutions, and it should, without any sarcasm or joking intended, be given every chance.

On the other hand, you may find yourself in a situation where your primary concern is ‘what is there within reach that i can use as a weapon?’.

captain_spalding said:

roughbarked said:

Divine Angel said:

Humphrey & Hebron (2014) assert one of the “essential ingredients” of bullying is an imbalance of power, so by you gaining the upper hand (so to speak), you’ve inverted the imbalance, thus creating yourself as the bully.

Yes. If only briefly.

Perhaps that accounts for why i’ve had so much trouble sleeping at night for all these decades.

I think you are fabricating tales now.

Arts said:

furious said:

Arts said:

people who bully are trying to get empowerment back, usually because they are disempowered in other aspects of their life. it’s a lack of control over their world in most places that create a need for control in the small spaces they can. So the way to deal with someone who engages in bullying Behaviour is to give them some control in a prosocial way.. some autonomy in their world… this helps reduce the need to take power.

That might be true in some instances, but in general, I’m sorry, but that’s BS…

the research disagrees with you…

The research is flawed. Plenty of bullies have the power already, they, in fact, use their power as a tool to bully…

captain_spalding said:

furious said:

Arts said:

people who bully are trying to get empowerment back, usually because they are disempowered in other aspects of their life. it’s a lack of control over their world in most places that create a need for control in the small spaces they can. So the way to deal with someone who engages in bullying Behaviour is to give them some control in a prosocial way.. some autonomy in their world… this helps reduce the need to take power.

That might be true in some instances, but in general, I’m sorry, but that’s BS…

It’s a very sound and rational assessment of causes, and of potential solutions, and it should, without any sarcasm or joking intended, be given every chance.

On the other hand, you may find yourself in a situation where your primary concern is ‘what is there within reach that i can use as a weapon?’.

I will add clarity that I am speaking in a long term treatment and aversion sense… in immediate situations the issue of handing control might mean physical harm… which should be deflected with the best one has…

but it does not negate that the root cause of bullying Behaviour is lack of control or feelings of powerlessness. Usually inclusive of being a victim themselves.

captain_spalding said:

furious said:

Arts said:

people who bully are trying to get empowerment back, usually because they are disempowered in other aspects of their life. it’s a lack of control over their world in most places that create a need for control in the small spaces they can. So the way to deal with someone who engages in bullying Behaviour is to give them some control in a prosocial way.. some autonomy in their world… this helps reduce the need to take power.

That might be true in some instances, but in general, I’m sorry, but that’s BS…

It’s a very sound and rational assessment of causes, and of potential solutions, and it should, without any sarcasm or joking intended, be given every chance.

On the other hand, you may find yourself in a situation where your primary concern is ‘what is there within reach that i can use as a weapon?’.

Too often.

Arts said:

captain_spalding said:

furious said:

That might be true in some instances, but in general, I’m sorry, but that’s BS…

It’s a very sound and rational assessment of causes, and of potential solutions, and it should, without any sarcasm or joking intended, be given every chance.

On the other hand, you may find yourself in a situation where your primary concern is ‘what is there within reach that i can use as a weapon?’.

I will add clarity that I am speaking in a long term treatment and aversion sense… in immediate situations the issue of handing control might mean physical harm… which should be deflected with the best one has…

but it does not negate that the root cause of bullying Behaviour is lack of control or feelings of powerlessness. Usually inclusive of being a victim themselves.

This is what I meant about begets itself. Violence breeds more of the same.

captain_spalding said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

captain_spalding said:

SCIENCE said:

captain_spalding said:

In the junior years of high school, there was this dopey kid, a year or so younger than me, who apparently thought that, because my dad worked for his dad, he was entitled to bully me.

I put up with it for a while, told him to f*** off a few times, all that sort of thing.

But, it got tired of it, so, when he tried it one day, i approached him with my hand out, and said let’s shake hands, be friends, and when i got close enough i kicked him in the groin.

Then, when he was on the ground, i kicked him at least once, maybe twice more, and told his idiot mates to clean up the mess.

That seemed to counter it.

so you style yourself Ender Wiggin do you

Is that from a Terry Pratchett book or something???

Seems a bit extreme when a punch in the head would have done the job.

Reflecting on the incident, i recall that he was getting progressively more aggressive with each occasion.

You didn’t need to have a crystal ball to see what it would eventually lead to.

It seemed prudent to strike first, and in a manner which would obviate any debate about whether it had been a strategic, or merely a tactical, defeat.

Ah no, Shakespeare, we think.

Ender Wiggin: No. Knocking him down was the first fight. I wanted to win all the next ones too, so that he’d leave me alone.

Divine Angel said:

captain_spalding said:

Divine Angel said:

Humphrey & Hebron (2014) assert one of the “essential ingredients” of bullying is an imbalance of power, so by you gaining the upper hand (so to speak), you’ve inverted the imbalance, thus creating yourself as the bully.

Meh. Humphrey & Hebron clearly went to a different school, where philosophies of social interaction counted for something out on the battleplaying field

He went away. That’s all i wanted. I didn’t bother him again, and he didn’t bother me.

Yeah. there’s a lot in there I don’t agree with, but that’s not my job. I just pull out relevant things and write about them.

My own experience with stopping a bully was vastly different. My high school had approximately seventy billion stairs (no lifts then, but it does now). A girl who bullied me every single day sprained her ankle at school, I saw her carted away in an ambulance. Next day, she rocks up using crutches. Now, because I’d used crutches at the school before and knew how difficult it was, I offered to carry her bag. She looked at me as though wondering if I was going to pee on it or something, then accepted the offer. I carried her bag inside, placed it gently on her desk, went back to my own desk.

When her partner in crime turned up, he started digging into me as usual, but she stopped him. I assume she told him what happened, and neither of them bullied me ever again.

I don’t know why I decided to be nice to her, other than I knew what a giant PITA crutches were.

What a great story.

:)

I wish that that had happened for me. But no. I was bashed virtually daily from infants school through to high school. Probably because I was a bit different.

furious said:

Arts said:

furious said:

That might be true in some instances, but in general, I’m sorry, but that’s BS…

the research disagrees with you…

The research is flawed. Plenty of bullies have the power already, they, in fact, use their power as a tool to bully…

oh come on it’s going to be like the tax office or something, the vast majority of people not paying their taxes are people with annual income of less than $100000000 so that’s who’s not paying the taxes

Michael V said:

Divine Angel said:

captain_spalding said:

Meh. Humphrey & Hebron clearly went to a different school, where philosophies of social interaction counted for something out on the battleplaying field

He went away. That’s all i wanted. I didn’t bother him again, and he didn’t bother me.

Yeah. there’s a lot in there I don’t agree with, but that’s not my job. I just pull out relevant things and write about them.

My own experience with stopping a bully was vastly different. My high school had approximately seventy billion stairs (no lifts then, but it does now). A girl who bullied me every single day sprained her ankle at school, I saw her carted away in an ambulance. Next day, she rocks up using crutches. Now, because I’d used crutches at the school before and knew how difficult it was, I offered to carry her bag. She looked at me as though wondering if I was going to pee on it or something, then accepted the offer. I carried her bag inside, placed it gently on her desk, went back to my own desk.

When her partner in crime turned up, he started digging into me as usual, but she stopped him. I assume she told him what happened, and neither of them bullied me ever again.

I don’t know why I decided to be nice to her, other than I knew what a giant PITA crutches were.

What a great story.

:)

I wish that that had happened for me. But no. I was bashed virtually daily from infants school through to high school. Probably because I was a bit different.

There’s no shame in being different. Even though it seemed that everyone was trying to bash it into your head to fit the box.

A well known bully from my neighbourhood would pick a fight with almost anybody who walked past. I asked him one night we happened to be at the same table, “You fought everybody in the place but never picked a fight with me?”. He replied, “I only pick fights I know I can win. Saw you do your lolly with Stephen off the school bus. There’s no stopping you once you start. We all had to pull you off him”.

furious said:

Arts said:

furious said:

That might be true in some instances, but in general, I’m sorry, but that’s BS…

the research disagrees with you…

The research is flawed. Plenty of bullies have the power already, they, in fact, use their power as a tool to bully…

the behavior is because of powerlessness in other places/ areas of their life. Sure social learning theory is a factor, but the top down effect is a part of that.. the victimhood creates the antisocial behaviour

however, if you think the research is flawed it would be a great paper to read refuting the majority.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-13/modern-slavery-migrant-hearings-in-nsw/106130342

“PALM workers complain of slavery like conditions“https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-13/modern-slavery-migrant-hearings-in-nsw/106130342

being ripped off with employers deductions, poor accommodation, workers who complain being sent home – and all that sort of stuff.

Some people are just arseholes I guess. It is a disgrace that this is going on in Australia in this day and age, and governments turn a blind eye.

If you want migrant workers you have to look after them properly. If that costs money then it costs money.

party_pants said:

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-13/modern-slavery-migrant-hearings-in-nsw/106130342

PALM workers complain of slavery like conditions

being ripped off with employers deductions, poor accommodation, workers who complain being sent home – and all that sort of stuff.

Some people are just arseholes I guess. It is a disgrace that this is going on in Australia in this day and age, and governments turn a blind eye.

If you want migrant workers you have to look after them properly. If that costs money then it costs money.

Ooops, that was supposed to be a link

• the behavior is because of powerlessness in other places/ areas of their life

That’s a cop out. Some people are just a-holes…

furious said:

• the behavior is because of powerlessness in other places/ areas of their life

That’s a cop out. Some people are just a-holes…

I agree that some people are just arseholes… but I don’t agree with your ratios.

furious said:

• the behavior is because of powerlessness in other places/ areas of their life

That’s a cop out. Some people are just a-holes…

It’s why I don’t like Disney humanising their villains as just misunderstood. Cruella de Vil ain’t “misunderstood”, she’s downright fucking evil.

captain_spalding said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

Seems a bit extreme when a punch in the head would have done the job.

Reflecting on the incident, i recall that he was getting progressively more aggressive with each occasion.

You didn’t need to have a crystal ball to see what it would eventually lead to.

It seemed prudent to strike first, and in a manner which would obviate any debate about whether it had been a strategic, or merely a tactical, defeat.

I reckon only half of the end of the bullying was due to the base standing up for yourself with the rest the result of your new status as someone who could not be trusted to engage in a fair fight where the social niceties of combat were adhered to. This is not to state that kicking another male in the balls was not called for but it certainly doesn’t hurt to be considered a little unhinged.

My story: when I was about 17yo and my younger brother 12yo there were a few local undesirables who would come cause trouble by engaging in intimidation to my brother and his friends. Not violent but stuff like cutting people off on their bicycles etc

Now I was a bit of a shrinking violet when it came to physical violence at that age so I was a bit of at a loss on how to counter these louts. Son though I discovered that the older brother of two years of one of the offending 14yo hoods had a slight intellectual disability and I took that and ran with it. Whenever he turned up I would ask ‘where’s your brother?’, ‘How’s your brother <name>?’ etc. In a few weeks they ask stopped coming around. I’m sure I didn’t scar him but I certainly achieved my aim by not following the rules.</name>

Witty Rejoinder said:

captain_spalding said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

Seems a bit extreme when a punch in the head would have done the job.

Reflecting on the incident, i recall that he was getting progressively more aggressive with each occasion.

You didn’t need to have a crystal ball to see what it would eventually lead to.

It seemed prudent to strike first, and in a manner which would obviate any debate about whether it had been a strategic, or merely a tactical, defeat.

I reckon only half of the end of the bullying was due to the base standing up for yourself with the rest the result of your new status as someone who could not be trusted to engage in a fair fight where the social niceties of combat were adhered to. This is not to state that kicking another male in the balls was not called for but it certainly doesn’t hurt to be considered a little unhinged.

My story: when I was about 17yo and my younger brother 12yo there were a few local undesirables who would come cause trouble by engaging in intimidation to my brother and his friends. Not violent but stuff like cutting people off on their bicycles etc

Now I was a bit of a shrinking violet when it came to physical violence at that age so I was a bit of at a loss on how to counter these louts. Soon though I discovered that the older brother of two years of one of the offending 14yo hoods had a slight intellectual disability and I took that and ran with it. Whenever he turned up I would ask ‘where’s your brother?’, ‘How’s your brother his name’‘ etc. In a few weeks they all stopped coming around. I’m sure I didn’t scar him but I certainly achieved my aim by not following the rules.

Fixed the spelling.

I’m a bit surprised that this didn’t attract any comments, even if only someone calling me a massive cnut for being so malicious about someone with a disability. I was busy earlier when I posted so my post was lacking some context.

Fleshing it out of a little bit, remembering that this was a very, very long time ago, I think I must have noticed that the bully was uncomfortable, perhaps slightly embarrassed when his older intellectually disabled older brother was around and I decided to weaponise this to achieve my aim of getting them to leave my family alone. I wasn’t some ableist arsehole either since I had a cousin with Down Syndrome.

Basically AFAIWC. bullying was such moronic behaviour, with my perhaps presumptuous attitude that someone who didn’t follow the golden rule by age 10 was seriously stupid, and deserved everything they got. I was perhaps a little judgemental as a youth.

Anyway I might address bullying in general and my comment about physical violence being something I wasn’t used to. For some reason, though I had a lisp till age ten, and was a bit of a nerd no one ever laid a finger on me throughout my school years. I was certainly subject to bullying but it was only intimidation and teasing, nothing physical.

The irony is that by around age 30yo I can’t to realise that had I been physically attacked I would have discovered that I scored the double whammy in life of having a very high pain tolerance coupled with extremely fast reflexes and would have made an excellent boxer. Bit of a bummer really considering I would have enjoyed it as a sport with a lot of discipline and without the sometimes grating comradery of team sports. So there we have it: I coulda been a contender… :-p

Witty Rejoinder said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

captain_spalding said:

Reflecting on the incident, i recall that he was getting progressively more aggressive with each occasion.

You didn’t need to have a crystal ball to see what it would eventually lead to.

It seemed prudent to strike first, and in a manner which would obviate any debate about whether it had been a strategic, or merely a tactical, defeat.

I reckon only half of the end of the bullying was due to the base standing up for yourself with the rest the result of your new status as someone who could not be trusted to engage in a fair fight where the social niceties of combat were adhered to. This is not to state that kicking another male in the balls was not called for but it certainly doesn’t hurt to be considered a little unhinged.

My story: when I was about 17yo and my younger brother 12yo there were a few local undesirables who would come cause trouble by engaging in intimidation to my brother and his friends. Not violent but stuff like cutting people off on their bicycles etc

Now I was a bit of a shrinking violet when it came to physical violence at that age so I was a bit of at a loss on how to counter these louts. Soon though I discovered that the older brother of two years of one of the offending 14yo hoods had a slight intellectual disability and I took that and ran with it. Whenever he turned up I would ask ‘where’s your brother?’, ‘How’s your brother his name’‘ etc. In a few weeks they all stopped coming around. I’m sure I didn’t scar him but I certainly achieved my aim by not following the rules.

Fixed the spelling.

I’m a bit surprised that this didn’t attract any comments, even if only someone calling me a massive cnut for being so malicious about someone with a disability. I was busy earlier when I posted so my post was lacking some context.

Fleshing it out of a little bit, remembering that this was a very, very long time ago, I think I must have noticed that the bully was uncomfortable, perhaps slightly embarrassed when his older intellectually disabled older brother was around and I decided to weaponise this to achieve my aim of getting them to leave my family alone. I wasn’t some ableist arsehole either since I had a cousin with Down Syndrome.

Basically AFAIWC. bullying was such moronic behaviour, with my perhaps presumptuous attitude that someone who didn’t follow the golden rule by age 10 was seriously stupid, and deserved everything they got. I was perhaps a little judgemental as a youth.

Anyway I might address bullying in general and my comment about physical violence being something I wasn’t used to. For some reason, though I had a lisp till age ten, and was a bit of a nerd no one ever laid a finger on me throughout my school years. I was certainly subject to bullying but it was only intimidation and teasing, nothing physical.

The irony is that by around age 30yo I can’t to realise that had I been physically attacked I would have discovered that I scored the double whammy in life of having a very high pain tolerance coupled with extremely fast reflexes and would have made an excellent boxer. Bit of a bummer really considering I would have enjoyed it as a sport with a lot of discipline and without the sometimes grating comradery of team sports. So there we have it: I coulda been a contender… :-p

ah but how would the witty part go after multiple concussion

SCIENCE said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

I reckon only half of the end of the bullying was due to the base standing up for yourself with the rest the result of your new status as someone who could not be trusted to engage in a fair fight where the social niceties of combat were adhered to. This is not to state that kicking another male in the balls was not called for but it certainly doesn’t hurt to be considered a little unhinged.

My story: when I was about 17yo and my younger brother 12yo there were a few local undesirables who would come cause trouble by engaging in intimidation to my brother and his friends. Not violent but stuff like cutting people off on their bicycles etc

Now I was a bit of a shrinking violet when it came to physical violence at that age so I was a bit of at a loss on how to counter these louts. Soon though I discovered that the older brother of two years of one of the offending 14yo hoods had a slight intellectual disability and I took that and ran with it. Whenever he turned up I would ask ‘where’s your brother?’, ‘How’s your brother his name’‘ etc. In a few weeks they all stopped coming around. I’m sure I didn’t scar him but I certainly achieved my aim by not following the rules.

Fixed the spelling.

I’m a bit surprised that this didn’t attract any comments, even if only someone calling me a massive cnut for being so malicious about someone with a disability. I was busy earlier when I posted so my post was lacking some context.

Fleshing it out of a little bit, remembering that this was a very, very long time ago, I think I must have noticed that the bully was uncomfortable, perhaps slightly embarrassed when his older intellectually disabled older brother was around and I decided to weaponise this to achieve my aim of getting them to leave my family alone. I wasn’t some ableist arsehole either since I had a cousin with Down Syndrome.

Basically AFAIWC. bullying was such moronic behaviour, with my perhaps presumptuous attitude that someone who didn’t follow the golden rule by age 10 was seriously stupid, and deserved everything they got. I was perhaps a little judgemental as a youth.

Anyway I might address bullying in general and my comment about physical violence being something I wasn’t used to. For some reason, though I had a lisp till age ten, and was a bit of a nerd no one ever laid a finger on me throughout my school years. I was certainly subject to bullying but it was only intimidation and teasing, nothing physical.

The irony is that by around age 30yo I can’t to realise that had I been physically attacked I would have discovered that I scored the double whammy in life of having a very high pain tolerance coupled with extremely fast reflexes and would have made an excellent boxer. Bit of a bummer really considering I would have enjoyed it as a sport with a lot of discipline and without the sometimes grating comradery of team sports. So there we have it: I coulda been a contender… :-p

ah but how would the witty part go after multiple concussion

Oh yeah I forgot: I take a beating really well.

“For some reason, though I had a lisp till age ten, and was a bit of a nerd no one ever laid a finger on me throughout my school years. I was certainly subject to bullying but it was only intimidation and teasing, nothing physical.”

No lisp, but major nerd. No physical violence. Kids made fun of my name, my hair (it was awfully greasy throughout puberty; in year 7 one kid told me she was going to liquid paper my hair in the class photo), my weight (I was skinny, so one kid started a rumour I had AIDS), and my smarts.

I got sent to the school counsellor, who said I should treat the bullies “like a tree”. When asked what he meant by that, he said I should ignore them, like I would a tree. Huh?

Nowadays it’s changed a bit. At Mini Me’s school, they take care of it as soon as it’s reported. Zero tolerance for bullying. Before the change in leadership a few years ago, I knew people who changed schools because of the bullying. New leadership made a huge difference.

Here’s a hot take: the real winners of the social media ban is News Corp.

https://johnmenadue.com/post/2025/12/the-kids-are-the-cover-story-news-corps-triumph/

Divine Angel said:

Here’s a hot take: the real winners of the social media ban is News Corp.

https://johnmenadue.com/post/2025/12/the-kids-are-the-cover-story-news-corps-triumph/

doesn’t take too much consideration to realise that the solution to that is to ban News Corp as well, not to deban social manipulation media but what would we know we don’t corp any news and we don’t media any social

not sure about this war of words here

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-14/coles-woolworths-hit-back-at-price-gouging-ban/106141094

sorry we

Australia’s major supermarkets are furious they are being targeted with more regulations, with Coles crying poor about making about $2.50 for every $100 a customer spends. In March, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission found the near-duopoly enjoyed by Coles and Woolworths gave them little incentive to compete vigorously. They were among the most profitable supermarkets in the world, an inquiry found.

don’t understand

The federal government has introduced rules to limit “excessive pricing of groceries”, and Australia’s major supermarkets are furious they are being targeted with more regulations. But the report never directly accused the supermarkets of gouging customers, something both Coles and Woolworths have consistently denied. It did not make a finding on, or seek to define whether supermarket prices were “excessive”, since high margins are not prohibited under consumer laws.

we mean if they’re not actually gouging then banning gouging shouldn’t harm them right

SCIENCE said:

not sure about this war of words here

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-14/coles-woolworths-hit-back-at-price-gouging-ban/106141094

sorry we

Australia’s major supermarkets are furious they are being targeted with more regulations, with Coles crying poor about making about $2.50 for every $100 a customer spends. In March, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission found the near-duopoly enjoyed by Coles and Woolworths gave them little incentive to compete vigorously. They were among the most profitable supermarkets in the world, an inquiry found.

don’t understand

The federal government has introduced rules to limit “excessive pricing of groceries”, and Australia’s major supermarkets are furious they are being targeted with more regulations. But the report never directly accused the supermarkets of gouging customers, something both Coles and Woolworths have consistently denied. It did not make a finding on, or seek to define whether supermarket prices were “excessive”, since high margins are not prohibited under consumer laws.

we mean if they’re not actually gouging then banning gouging shouldn’t harm them right

How true.

SCIENCE said:

not sure about this war of words here

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-14/coles-woolworths-hit-back-at-price-gouging-ban/106141094

sorry we

Australia’s major supermarkets are furious they are being targeted with more regulations, with Coles crying poor about making about $2.50 for every $100 a customer spends. In March, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission found the near-duopoly enjoyed by Coles and Woolworths gave them little incentive to compete vigorously. They were among the most profitable supermarkets in the world, an inquiry found.

don’t understand

The federal government has introduced rules to limit “excessive pricing of groceries”, and Australia’s major supermarkets are furious they are being targeted with more regulations. But the report never directly accused the supermarkets of gouging customers, something both Coles and Woolworths have consistently denied. It did not make a finding on, or seek to define whether supermarket prices were “excessive”, since high margins are not prohibited under consumer laws.

we mean if they’re not actually gouging then banning gouging shouldn’t harm them right

Let’s look at Coca Cola, for example. Every week it’s on special at either Woolies or Coles. One week it’s Woolies, the next week, it’s Coles. Sometimes, like this week, Woolies pulls “member pricing” stunt where it’s cheaper if you have the Woolies Rewards card/app. This week, Coles has 1.25L bottles for $4 on special, but Woolies has 1.25L bottles as “members price” of $4. (Side note: 600mL bottles are $3.80 at both.)

Now, sometimes I buy a 10 pack of cans. Regular price, $20 for 10 cans. “On special”, it’s half price (although I notice Coles’ “on special” price is $11). Nobody’s paying $20 for 10 cans, they’ll either stock up at half price, or they wait a week til it’s on special again.

You can’t tell me Woolies and Coles aren’t making money from half price cola if it’s on special literally every second week.

Divine Angel said:

You can’t tell me Woolies and Coles aren’t making money from half price cola if it’s on special literally every second week.

It’s called ‘high-low price averaging’.

They cycle between the higher and lower prices, fully expecting to sell more when it’s ‘on special’ and less when it’s not.

However, the ‘on special ‘ periods are always much shorter than the ‘not-on-special’ periods.

The ‘on-special’ times are there to keep you interested, and to encourage you to buy when it’s cheaper.

It’s partial reinforcement psychology, same as for poker machines. You get a ‘win’ just often enough to keep you interested.

They really don’t care if we buy less when it’s dearer, because they know we’ll by more when it’s cheaper.

Their profit forecast are based on an average sales volume, which take into account both the high price periods, and the low price periods.

Also, they’re ripping you off where you are, DA.

Here in Toowoomba, popular cola drinks are $3.80 for a 2 lt bottle (never, or only rarely, ‘specials’ on those items), but 1.25 lt bottles will fluctuate from $1.75 ea to $3.50 ea (they will do a ‘two for $5.80’ deal, which is a pretty lousy ‘special’ price, at $2.90 per 1.25 lt bottle), and they’re typically around $3.50 or a bit less.

Reminder about what Saint Gough would say about all these travel expense lurks.

dv said:

Reminder about what Saint Gough would say about all these travel expense lurks.

Possibly the last of the great Labor politicians?

That is, the last great who was truly a ‘Labor’ person.

captain_spalding said:

dv said:

Reminder about what Saint Gough would say about all these travel expense lurks.

Possibly the last of the great Labor politicians?

That is, the last great who was truly a ‘Labor’ person.

How do you define a ‘Labor’ person? Hawke was a tried and true unionist unlike Gough who was a barrister.

Mother hit by Liberal pamphlets tells inquiry Brethren made voting ‘unsafe’

By Michael Bachelard
December 15, 2025 — 11.10am

A young mother has given evidence of being hit repeatedly with Liberal National Party pamphlets as she and her three-year-old child ran a gauntlet of Exclusive Brethren men on the way to vote at the May federal election.

Voter Cassandra Barrett, who at the time was a victim of domestic violence at home, said the behaviour from a throng of young men canvassing for the LNP candidate outside a polling place in Queensland had left her son terrified and her on the verge of tears.

“I felt really intimidated and unsafe – I just wanted to cry,” she told a hearing of the parliament’s post-election inquiry. “I was trying to vote… people should feel safe to vote.”

Barrett’s is one of dozens of shocking stories from around the country provided in submissions and evidence to the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters, which is holding an inquiry into the conduct of the federal election.

Members of the religious sect, now known as the Plymouth Brethren Christian Church, turned out in huge numbers in marginal electorates to campaign for then-Opposition Leader Peter Dutton. The effort prompted Prime Minister Anthony Albanese to label the church a cult, to ask what was the arrangement between them and Dutton, and to suggest there was a policy “quid pro quo”.

The committee inquiry is exploring whether the Brethren effort nationwide amounted to “domestic interference” in the poll, and whether the church should have been registered under electoral law as an “independent third-party campaigner,” given its large cash and in-kind investment.

The joint committee has heard evidence from voters and volunteers nationwide that the church members’ presence overwhelmed and intimidated people, creating a threatening atmosphere in many polling booths.

A hearing of the committee on December 11 suggested ground zero for poor behaviour in Queensland was the marginal Labor seat of Blair – an outer-suburban electorate of the kind targeted by Dutton.

“It was like a war zone, it didn’t feel like an election campaign,” Labor campaign director, Madonna Stott, told this masthead after giving evidence to the committee.

“I really like campaigning. I like the challenge, I love the adrenaline – everything that goes with it. But the thought of an election now sends a shiver down my spine. And yeah, it profoundly changed the way we look at campaigns.”

The Australian Electoral Commission’s acting deputy electoral commissioner Kath Gleeson agreed in her evidence that “there were challenges” from the behaviour of Plymouth Brethren Christian Church members.

“It really disappoints and concerns the AEC because we want voters to feel safe, and we want our staff to feel safe in their workplace,” Gleeson said in October. However, she said most of the problems had happened outside the six-metre zone around polling places controlled by the AEC.

In the commission’s view, she added, “there was not interference in the election such that the integrity of the election was compromised or Australians wouldn’t trust the result”.

In its submission, the Brethren church made a complicated argument that the church was not involved in coordinating the campaign, but its “community” did coordinate after “senior members … said that they would be volunteering”. The church’s leader, Bruce Hales, encouraged their involvement in a church-wide message in April.

The submission revealed that individual parishioners donated approximately $700,000 to the political entity “Advance”.

Cassandra Barrett told the inquiry that, on the footpath leading to the pre-polling station she encountered a “sea of blue” – the colour of the Liberal t-shirts. As she walked down the path, the tunnel of Brethren members leaned in, crowding her and her son, who clung to her leg. After she declined to take one of their how-to-vote cards, they “started hitting me in the back with the cards”.

“It was like a tap, but startling,” she told this masthead, “and it was multiple times. I didn’t expect it. It was very jarring. I froze for a second trying to figure out what to do, then I grabbed my son and picked him up, clinging to him as I tried to get through this gauntlet.

“It was very overwhelming. I felt like crying.”

Once inside, Barrett said she had complained to an AEC official. “He sighed and said, ‘Yeah, we’ve gotten heaps of complaints about that’, and then he walked off,” she said.

Barrett, who after the election began working in the office of Labor’s MP for Blair, Shayne Neumann, said she had brought her son to the booth because, “I want him to be part of the process as he grows up … but then it was horrible experience”. In future, she was likely to postal vote.

Former ALP state MP Rachel Nolan said elections should be celebrations of democracy, but the Brethren behaviour in Blair in 2025 had “changed the tone”.

“People won’t want to vote … if people feel that they have to run a gauntlet in order to vote, that obviously has quite a profound consequence for community acceptance of the act of voting,” she told the inquiry.

Labor campaign manager Madonna Stott said Labor campaigners, including her, had been followed at night by Brethren volunteers in large work utes, to the point where she once drove into a police station carpark to seek refuge.

Labor election posters were “systematically destroyed” within an hour of being put up and Stott said another female Labor volunteer had been told by a Brethren member, “I know your car and I know where you live”.

Stott said she had seen voters having Labor how-to-vote cards pulled out of their hands, being told “you don’t need that”, or those who resisted accepting the Liberal candidate’s card being told “you can’t enter the booth if you’re not carrying one of these cards”.

“Women with prams or people in a wheelchair, they’d throw them in the baby’s prams or into the lap in the wheelchair, or wave them in people’s face, saying, ‘C’mon, c’mon you have to take this’,” Stott said.

If Neumann, the Labor member, came to the booth, “there would be a chant, ‘Shame, Shayne,’ and they’d gather around and yell at him, ‘You’ve done nothing, you’re lazy, what’s he done’?”

Stott said she was used to occasional catcalling, but this was different: “It was en masse … whole hordes of people screaming the same stuff together in unison. And they’d gather really close to make sure Shayne couldn’t get close to people. You can’t put into words what it was like.”

She also said one Brethren businessman had tried to infiltrate the Labor campaign. The man, Leon Attwood, contacted the campaign and asked to join “Labor chats or forums”. Text messages reviewed by this masthead show Attwood asking for “a list of activities where I could put my name down to”.

Stott said her “spidey senses tingled” and she asked to meet Attwood in person. He did not show up.

Attwood, a general manager at Brethren-owned company Atlan Stormwater, responded to questions saying: “You can’t blame a guy for trying! … I can’t believe you called this an infiltration.” He said it had “nothing to do with any political party, church, or where I work”, however, this masthead can confirm the company is owned by the Hales family, and its chief executive was coordinating the Brethren’s pro-LNP Blair campaign.

The deputy chairman of the electoral matters committee, Tasmanian Liberal senator Richard Colbeck, asked a Labor witness to the inquiry if she was “just having a bit of a whinge because you were outnumbered?” and that union volunteers were regularly flown in to Tasmania to campaign for Labor.

Contacted later, however, Colbeck agreed what he had heard of the experience at Blair appeared to be worse.

“I think the point is … if it is coordinated, it should be declared. Unions are a registered third party, and if we’re looking at it in the right context – and I think we are – should be declared,” he told this masthead. “They had registered material and … members of the Plymouth Brethren were volunteering through the Liberal Party. The question was ‘were they completely coordinated through that process’?”

In 260 submissions and eight days of public hearings, the electoral matters committee has heard stark stories from independent, teal and Labor campaigners around the country.

Dr Deborah Campbell, a volunteer in the Victorian regional seat of Wannon, wrote that “groups of youngish Brethren men monstered, harassed and jeered at” other volunteers and voters. She described them as “Brethren bros”.

Catherine Duloy, a volunteer in the Sydney seat of Bennelong wrote Brethren volunteers would “jeer at voters who did not take their material or who took material for another candidate, for example yelling at them they were ‘an idiot’ or ‘un-Australian’, or that they wanted to ‘ruin Australia’.”

Carol Berry, the new Labor member for Whitlam in NSW and former disability worker, said a group of Liberal volunteers including at least some Brethren members, acted as “a pack of men” mounting a “running commentary on … what I was wearing”.

“I was jeered at and belittled. It felt hostile, tedious, sexist and unpleasant.”

An unnamed candidate for the seat of Forrest in Western Australia described Brethren members being brought in by bus. They “aggressively shouted slogans and harassed electors” and in one case “abused about her party’s position on gay and trans rights”.

Nicolette Boele, the successful independent candidate for the Sydney seat of Bradfield, told the committee via video link; that Brethren activists “would stand in between me and potential people who wanted to come and talk to me and make sure I didn’t have a good spot to engage with people as they approached the booths”.

In Bradfield, Airtags attached to eight stolen Labor election signs led police to the house of a Brethren man. The signs later ended up in landfill. The day after the theft, the anonymous submitter says, “a large bag of dirty nappies placed over the locked gate on my property (from where one corflute had been removed). I found this act both disgusting and frightening”.

An anonymous submission from the seat of Calare, in regional NSW, said a group of about 20 Brethren members followed two of the candidates as they moved from one booth to another.

“The actions of the church community are separate to the church.”

“They had obvious instructions to position themselves in such a way as to obstruct volunteers for candidates other than the party’s and to be as noisy and intimidating as possible,” the submission said. “Their aim was to negate the presence of other candidates by surrounding and isolating them, then shouting them down.”

Another submission, from an unidentified electorate, said Brethren members had “ambushed a street walk” by the MP, “aggressively jostled staff and volunteers, surrounded the and tried to drown out his conversations with local residents and his media interviews”.

The Plymouth Brethren Christian Church ignored a question from this masthead about whether it had offered its members pastoral counselling about their behaviour. Instead, it made a submission it said was prompted in part by “the unprecedented assault which has been launched against us by members of Parliament”.

“Australia is a free country, where people quite rightly expect to be able to practice their religion free from persecution, discrimination, name-calling or anything of that nature,” the submission said.

It argued the church “did not participate in the election nor coordinate the political involvement of those who did”. However, it conceded that its members “clearly were” coordinated.

“The actions of the church community are separate to the church,” the submission argued.

“There were senior members of our church who said that they would be volunteering … What followed here was a strong showing of volunteers from members of our church. But to say that was organised by the church would be wrong.”

This masthead revealed in June that the world leader of the Plymouth Brethren Christian Church, Sydney-based Bruce Hales – who is regarded as next to Jesus in godliness – told his members via their central communication channel in April that “Australia needs to smile again”.

Shortly afterwards, compulsory gatherings played a video of three of Hale’s sons, Gareth, Charles and Dean saying: “Make sure our booths are manned and volunteers fired up each day to dominate the play … It’s game on … Make sure we don’t leave any gas in the tank!”

The submission from the Liberal Party, national director Andrew Hirst contains no mention of the Brethren, adding: “Liberal Party volunteers have been the subject of aggressive bullying, physical and verbal abuse from the Left for decades”.

The National Party’s federal director Lincoln Folo also does not mention the Brethren but expressed concern that public commentary had “devolved into faith-based discrimination,” saying Labor’s critique had “degenerated to labelling people of faith as a cult”.

A church spokesman said 61 members of his church had reported “being bullied, filmed, name-called and so on”. He did not answer questions about whether his parishioners’ the behaviour constituted interference in the election, nor whether it should affect the church’s charitable status.

https://www.theage.com.au/national/mother-hit-by-liberal-pamphlets-tells-inquiry-brethren-made-voting-unsafe-20251208-p5nlu2.html

Witty Rejoinder said:

Members of the religious sect, now known as the Plymouth Brethren Christian Church, turned out in huge numbers in marginal electorates to campaign for then-Opposition Leader Peter Dutton. The effort prompted Prime Minister Anthony Albanese to label the church a cult, to ask what was the arrangement between them and Dutton, and to suggest there was a policy “quid pro quo”. The committee inquiry is exploring whether the Brethren effort nationwide amounted to “domestic interference” in the poll, and whether the church should have been registered under electoral law as an “independent third-party campaigner,” given its large cash and in-kind investment. The joint committee has heard evidence from voters and volunteers nationwide that the church members’ presence overwhelmed and intimidated people, creating a threatening atmosphere in many polling booths.

In its submission, the Brethren church made a complicated argument that the church was not involved in coordinating the campaign, but its “community” did coordinate after “senior members … said that they would be volunteering”. The church’s leader, Bruce Hales, encouraged their involvement in a church-wide message in April. The submission revealed that individual parishioners donated approximately $700,000 to the political entity “Advance”.

Labor campaign manager Madonna Stott said Labor campaigners, including her, had been followed at night by Brethren volunteers in large work utes, to the point where she once drove into a police station carpark to seek refuge. Labor election posters were “systematically destroyed” within an hour of being put up and Stott said another female Labor volunteer had been told by a Brethren member, “I know your car and I know where you live”. Stott said she had seen voters having Labor how-to-vote cards pulled out of their hands, being told “you don’t need that”, or those who resisted accepting the Liberal candidate’s card being told “you can’t enter the booth if you’re not carrying one of these cards”. “Women with prams or people in a wheelchair, they’d throw them in the baby’s prams or into the lap in the wheelchair, or wave them in people’s face, saying, ‘C’mon, c’mon you have to take this’,” Stott said.

She also said one Brethren businessman had tried to infiltrate the Labor campaign. The man, Leon Attwood, contacted the campaign and asked to join “Labor chats or forums”. Text messages reviewed by this masthead show Attwood asking for “a list of activities where I could put my name down to”. Stott said her “spidey senses tingled” and she asked to meet Attwood in person. He did not show up. Attwood, a general manager at Brethren-owned company Atlan Stormwater, responded to questions saying: “You can’t blame a guy for trying! … I can’t believe you called this an infiltration.” He said it had “nothing to do with any political party, church, or where I work”, however, this masthead can confirm the company is owned by the Hales family, and its chief executive was coordinating the Brethren’s pro-LNP Blair campaign.

In Bradfield, Airtags attached to eight stolen Labor election signs led police to the house of a Brethren man. The signs later ended up in landfill. The day after the theft, the anonymous submitter says, “a large bag of dirty nappies placed over the locked gate on my property (from where one corflute had been removed). I found this act both disgusting and frightening”.

“The actions of the church community are separate to the church,” the submission argued. “There were senior members of our church who said that they would be volunteering … What followed here was a strong showing of volunteers from members of our church. But to say that was organised by the church would be wrong.”

https://www.theage.com.au/national/mother-hit-by-liberal-pamphlets-tells-inquiry-brethren-made-voting-unsafe-20251208-p5nlu2.html

gross

what a bunch of shitty economic managers

The new figures will show the 2025-26 budget deficit is now due to reach $36.8 billion, which is $5.3 billion lower than was forecast at the election. It will be $8.4 billion better off between now and 2028-29 due to a combination of savings and higher tax takes from stronger employment and wages, as well as net higher commodity prices.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-16/myefo-budget-update-show-deficit-improvement/106150778

The proposed legislation would also reclassify straight shotguns and prohibit belt-fed ammunition magazines in those weapons.

What? How did such things occur after John Howard stopped automatic weapons?

link

The Rev Dodgson said:

Spiny Norman said:

Onya Susss.

Seems reasonable.

Who is this woman who looks so much like the leader of the Liberal party?

wait dirty communist Labor are the party that have no value no direction no integrity and will say anything to get views and likes and clout and votes right

wait could they really

The reform announcement included new federal offences of “aggravated hate speech” aimed at preachers that promote violence and “serious vilification” based on race and/or racism supremacy. He also unveiled plans to increase the penalties for hate speech that promoted violence, the introduction of “hate” as an aggravating factor in sentencing in cases of online threats and harassment and a framework for listing organisations whose leaders engaged in hate speech. “It is clear we need to do more to combat this evil scourge, much more,” Mr Albanese said, before declaring that the government could have done more in the years leading up to Sunday’s attack. “I, of course, acknowledge that more could have been done, and I accept my responsibility for my part in that as Prime Minister of Australia.”

we thought all the votes were for freedom and freedom and freedom of speech and freedom and small government and no government overreach and lifting restrictions and no more lockdowns and loosening rules

“could have done more” LOL tell the libertarians that lets go

SCIENCE said:

wait could they really

The reform announcement included new federal offences of “aggravated hate speech” aimed at preachers that promote violence and “serious vilification” based on race and/or racism supremacy. He also unveiled plans to increase the penalties for hate speech that promoted violence, the introduction of “hate” as an aggravating factor in sentencing in cases of online threats and harassment and a framework for listing organisations whose leaders engaged in hate speech. “It is clear we need to do more to combat this evil scourge, much more,” Mr Albanese said, before declaring that the government could have done more in the years leading up to Sunday’s attack. “I, of course, acknowledge that more could have been done, and I accept my responsibility for my part in that as Prime Minister of Australia.”

we thought all the votes were for freedom and freedom and freedom of speech and freedom and small government and no government overreach and lifting restrictions and no more lockdowns and loosening rules

“could have done more” LOL tell the libertarians that lets go

Hopefully this wedges the right wing arsehole like no end. ‘Wot we can’t vilify Muslims now….?!?’…

Witty Rejoinder said:

SCIENCE said:

wait could they really

The reform announcement included new federal offences of “aggravated hate speech” aimed at preachers that promote violence and “serious vilification” based on race and/or racism supremacy. He also unveiled plans to increase the penalties for hate speech that promoted violence, the introduction of “hate” as an aggravating factor in sentencing in cases of online threats and harassment and a framework for listing organisations whose leaders engaged in hate speech. “It is clear we need to do more to combat this evil scourge, much more,” Mr Albanese said, before declaring that the government could have done more in the years leading up to Sunday’s attack. “I, of course, acknowledge that more could have been done, and I accept my responsibility for my part in that as Prime Minister of Australia.”

we thought all the votes were for freedom and freedom and freedom of speech and freedom and small government and no government overreach and lifting restrictions and no more lockdowns and loosening rules

“could have done more” LOL tell the libertarians that lets go

Hopefully this wedges the right wing arsehole like no end. ‘Wot we can’t vilify Muslims now….?!?’…

Which RW arsehole do you mean?

Michael V said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

SCIENCE said:

wait could they really

The reform announcement included new federal offences of “aggravated hate speech” aimed at preachers that promote violence and “serious vilification” based on race and/or racism supremacy. He also unveiled plans to increase the penalties for hate speech that promoted violence, the introduction of “hate” as an aggravating factor in sentencing in cases of online threats and harassment and a framework for listing organisations whose leaders engaged in hate speech. “It is clear we need to do more to combat this evil scourge, much more,” Mr Albanese said, before declaring that the government could have done more in the years leading up to Sunday’s attack. “I, of course, acknowledge that more could have been done, and I accept my responsibility for my part in that as Prime Minister of Australia.”

we thought all the votes were for freedom and freedom and freedom of speech and freedom and small government and no government overreach and lifting restrictions and no more lockdowns and loosening rules

“could have done more” LOL tell the libertarians that lets go

Hopefully this wedges the right wing arsehole like no end. ‘Wot we can’t vilify Muslims now….?!?’…

Which RW arsehole do you mean?

Sorry I meant the plural ‘arseholes’ but didn’t review my post properly.

Witty Rejoinder said:

Michael V said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

Hopefully this wedges the right wing arsehole like no end. ‘Wot we can’t vilify Muslims now….?!?’…

Which RW arsehole do you mean?

Sorry I meant the plural ‘arseholes’ but didn’t review my post properly.

Thanks.

:)

The spouses of Victorian Labor premiers are a public menace:

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-19/jacinta-allan-victoria-premier-husband-drink-driving/106161956?

Witty Rejoinder said:

The spouses of Victorian Labor premiers are a public menace:

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-19/jacinta-allan-victoria-premier-husband-drink-driving/106161956?

Nick Greiner’s missus got caught for precisely the same thing. Frightfully pissed behind the wheel.

Went to court, said sorry, asked for no conviction to be recorded. magistrate said ‘no worries, Mrs. G.’, she walked out, no penalty, all forgotten in a week or so.

captain_spalding said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

The spouses of Victorian Labor premiers are a public menace:

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-19/jacinta-allan-victoria-premier-husband-drink-driving/106161956?

Nick Greiner’s missus got caught for precisely the same thing. Frightfully pissed behind the wheel.

Went to court, said sorry, asked for no conviction to be recorded. magistrate said ‘no worries, Mrs. G.’, she walked out, no penalty, all forgotten in a week or so.

s556a of the NSW Crimes Act.