PM Abbott helping fight bush fires

Discussion in 'Current Affairs' started by Byron, Oct 21, 2013.

  1. Shaddam IV

    Shaddam IV Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    Messages:
    7,173
    Likes Received:
    1,889
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    House Corrino
    So now that you have insulted 90% of the people here, and then indulged yourself in some superior self righteousness, I have to ask, why are you here at all? Smug moral superiority and passive aggressive victim role playing are actually quite tedious. If people disagree with your point of view then maybe you had better meditate on why rather than throwing your toys out of the pram and carrying on this way.
     
  2. wrcmad

    wrcmad Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2012
    Messages:
    6,107
    Likes Received:
    220
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Northern NSW
    +1
     
  3. Shaddam IV

    Shaddam IV Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    Messages:
    7,173
    Likes Received:
    1,889
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    House Corrino
    What exactly are the "poor" though? In a country like Australia people can find themselves in financial difficulty or even poverty for many reasons. Obviously children, the aged and the sick are especially vulnerable and both sides of government basically work to help those demographics, compared to most of the world both Liberal and Labor do a pretty reasonable job providing a basic safety net for them.

    The conceptual trap that I see though is the idea of the Noble Poor and the Greedy Rich. Indeed there are plenty of poor people that are indeed noble, that share what they have and act decently. They are the saints in our society. On the other hand there are many, many poor people who are greedy, venal, lazy, dishonest and who game the system, rip off their friends and are sometimes very violent and who simply will not work to better themselves and demand a living be given to them and who resent anyone who has what they do not. There are also the slum lords and the tenants that mistreat their slums. The newspapers are filled with them and their exploits.

    There are of course the same personality types among the "wealthy" - Those who give time and money to charities, who found and endow funds and charities themselves, who provide foster care, who work on community projects and so on. And then there are those who are the classic caricature of the Wall St. 1%, we all know what they do and the obscene amount of wealth that they control and the suffering that they leave in their wake.

    Getting back to your point Credit Crunch, no-one here wants to see us in a situation like 18th century England, though there is indeed a danger of that, we are seeing it already in some US cities and to some extent in places like Greece. No-one on this forum is part of the 1%, no doubt there are a few members here who are very, very well off but I think that it is drawing a long bow to write of 90% of the people here as greedy and venal and uncaring, it simply isn't true.



    .
     
  4. AngloSaxon

    AngloSaxon Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2012
    Messages:
    1,863
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Sydney
    While I disagree with JulieW and Big AD on many things, I believe (and I hope they do) that when I disagree we put forward rational points that try to counter what each other says and it is quite cordial.

    As opposed to what I see above where if you disagree you obviously want to return to the worst pages of Dickens and live on the backs of the shoe-less orphans walking on big wheels that turn to function as the power source for milling machines.

    Interestingly, Credit Crunch, the 18th Century saw the growth of mutual funds, friendly societies (described well by Bordsilver in another thread) and the first of what we would recognise as charities, to counter the worst social effects of the new urban society as people moved from the countryside to the cities. Government was far removed compared to today, and the mentioned groups were the societal response to the observed hardship. Poverty rose to be almost inexistent due to caplitalism taking so many people away from the squalor of subsistence farming. Rates of literacy, sanitation and other positive metrics improved steadilly until the welfare state came along after WWII and started throwing inefficient government money at the problem. Now, the US finds that the more it spends on 'poverty', the more people are trapped in it, denied the earlier social mobility their grandparents' and previous generations enjoyed.
     
  5. bordsilver

    bordsilver Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    May 23, 2012
    Messages:
    9,618
    Likes Received:
    314
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    The rocks
    ^ Exactly. Many people see a developing country with hardship without official welfare system and a developed country with much less hardship with official welfare system and think that the official welfare system is what made the hardship disappear or made the country developed.

    Also an official welfare system is centrally measured while an unofficial welfare system isn't and many people fall into the trap of thinking the latter doesn't exist. I'd refer the to the topic of the thread as a starting point.
     
  6. nonrecourse

    nonrecourse Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2011
    Messages:
    1,544
    Likes Received:
    51
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Melbourne Australia

    ^^^^+++++++1

    Kind Regards
    non recourse
     
  7. mmm....shiney!

    mmm....shiney! Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2010
    Messages:
    18,543
    Likes Received:
    1,879
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    昆士蘭
    I'm happy to label you a "socialist", "lefty" or even an "ignorant pinko". I'm also happy to label you as someone who finds the paternalistic model of government so appealing because it promotes the immediate gratification of needs (which might I point out is instinctive in man) rather than any long term solution or delayed gratification, and in doing so causes much damage and endangers liberty.

    You misunderstand our Libertarian ideologies because you misunderstand the importance of individual rights and how they are threatened by governments unwilling to pursue the real solutions to our crises. It's not a "I'm right so screw everyone else mentality" at all.

    Have a read of this Credit Crunch.

    http://jppfaustralia.weebly.com/
     
  8. bordsilver

    bordsilver Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    May 23, 2012
    Messages:
    9,618
    Likes Received:
    314
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    The rocks
    Dude. Hadn't seen the JPP before. Thanks. A lot of familiar names and for only $25/yr I should probably get a subscription.
     
  9. greyman68

    greyman68 New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2010
    Messages:
    371
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Australia
    I want Goober Grape ;)
     
  10. Lovey80

    Lovey80 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2011
    Messages:
    2,442
    Likes Received:
    38
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Sunshine Coast, QLD
    Wow it seems I've been away for a while and not much has changed. A few advocating that government leave them alone a few advocating that government do everything and one adding not much more than vitriol to the pages in ridiculous multiple posts.

    On topic, I honestly want to know something. How is it in 2013 that people still have their homes burnt to the ground by bushfire? Bushfire isn't a new phenomena that came along with the latest AGW phase. Bushfire has been a consistent part of the Australian landscape since well before white man landed here.

    We talk about Ash Wednesday as a national tragedy. Kids are taught about it in school. Yet here we are all these decades on and people are still building homes in areas dense in bushland. Not clearing enough around their homes. Not building watering systems for their homes may save it in a bush fire.

    And what is the result? They endanger other peoples lives who need to put themselves in harms way in order to try to save said homes.

    So I guess what I want to know is why is it that the policy for bushfire in Australia not to just GTF out of the way and let it burn itself out?
     
  11. Clawhammer

    Clawhammer Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2010
    Messages:
    9,311
    Likes Received:
    75
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Gone Fishin'
    ^^^
    Well we learned again during the Victorian Bushfires just a few short years ago...and then promptly forgot again.
    And what was relearned in the Victorian experience was staying at home means staying to fight... for hours. Before and after the fire front passes.

    You can retreat into your house to temporarily escape the radiated heat of the passing firestorm...but you've got to get straight back out there to extinguish the raining embers that collect in nooks and crannies or blow into houses under doors and in gaps in windows etc. (Curtains and carpets should be well dampened but not removed as they offer great insulation against radiated heat once wet))

    That's assuming your roof doesn't get blown off in the firestorm.

    Rigging up a 5.5 hp petrol powered fire fighting pump to some pipe and sprays on your roof and guttering takes less than half a day. Been there...done that.
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
     

Share This Page