Time to whinge about your pet hate. I'll start with number one of 999.

I hate jaywalkers.

I hate 4WD's in suburbia.  The owners are the most inconsiderate, aggressive and hopeless drivers on our roads.  They block our vision, push in and use their sheer size to dominate our roads.  They cause more damage in a smash than the ordinary sedan - but their monstrosity saves their butt - at the expense of those on the receiving end of a king hit from the usual idiot driver of these pests.

They should be banned from the city and suburbs.

I hate people who call for bans on anything and everything

I hate people who hate 4WDs.

Deepthought says:  I hate people who hate 4WDs.

IQ says:  I hate people who call for bans on anything and everything

How predictable!  ;D

Predictable would be you calling for an irrational ban on a particular type of vehicle.

Even more predictable is you being irrational about anything

If you had read my post properly - I said 4WD's should be banned in suburbia and the city.  They are a nuisance - bit like you.  Obviously they're necessary for country roads, off road driving etc.  but definitely not needed to create chaos in our already overburdened streets, where good vision is essential.

deepthought wrote on Feb 24^th, 2008 at 4:33pm:

I hate people who hate 4WDs.

I hate people who say they hate people who hate 4WDs and I hate IQ.

I also hate roo shooters.

deepthought mate , there is help for the male menopause. ;)

Good post, boxing.  

I hate roo shooters as well, particularly those who leave the babies to die slowly in the dead mother's pouch!  

boxingkangaroo wrote on Feb 24^th, 2008 at 5:14pm:

deepthought wrote on Feb 24th, 2008 at 4:33pm: I hate people who hate 4WDs. I hate people who say they hate people who hate 4WDs and I hate IQ. I also hate roo shooters. deepthought mate , there is help for the male menopause. ;)

Yes.  It's called a trade in on a younger model.

mantra wrote on Feb 24^th, 2008 at 4:55pm:

Deepthought says:  I hate people who hate 4WDs. IQ says:  I hate people who call for bans on anything and everything How predictable!  ;D

Why any particular vehicle?  What next - Volvos?  Or women with "Baby On Board" stickers who drive incredibly dangerously.  How about greenies as drivers because they don't believe in anything at all progressive?

I hate 4WDers.
These trucks are inefficient, polluting, inappropriate, dangerous and unwarrantd in 95% of the cases.

I hate people who use pc language, saying one "nice" thing and meaning anything at all.
I hate it how our right to freedom of speech has been strangled by apologetics, uni educated idiots and school teachers.
I hate the way some weak wristed parents feel "there should be no losers" in sports.


What a great thread Ray_A. You're a genius

mantra wrote on Feb 24^th, 2008 at 5:11pm:

If you had read my post properly - I said 4WD's should be banned in suburbia and the city.  They are a nuisance - bit like you.  Obviously they're necessary for country roads, off road driving etc.  but definitely not needed to create chaos in our already overburdened streets, where good vision is essential.

I read your post. It was irrational.

mantra wrote on Feb 24^th, 2008 at 3:42pm:

They should be banned from the city and suburbs.

So when I drive 1200 kms to the city in my 4wd I should have to hire a car in order to travell the city?
You reinforce your "moron" satus with every post, maybe you need to learn how to drive or are you just reiterating something you have heard is popular opinion from other morons who can't drive?

merou wrote on Feb 24^th, 2008 at 8:11pm:

mantra wrote on Feb 24th, 2008 at 3:42pm: They should be banned from the city and suburbs. So when I drive 1200 kms to the city in my 4wd I should have to hire a car in order to travell the city? You reinforce your "moron" satus with every post, maybe you need to learn how to drive or are you just reiterating something you have heard is popular opinion from other morons who can't drive?

I love the way you think posters just make off the cuff remarks for no good reason and then go on to condecend to them merou.

Your no genuis mate in case you didnt notice. Most 4 wheel drivers in the city have no real use for them. They are status symbols with the exception of maybe a handful.

Lighten up   >:(

Quote:

So when I drive 1200 kms to the city in my 4wd I should have to hire a car in order to travell the city? You reinforce your "moron" satus with every post, maybe you need to learn how to drive or are you just reiterating something you have heard is popular opinion from other morons who can't drive?

Merou - you are very rude and I have ignored it so far and made no personal attacks towards you.

I should have gone into more detail of course giving more reasons for my dislike, but didn't realise that you would take my opinion of 4WD's so personally.  This thread was only a lighthearted one, I assumed.

You haven't abused Sprintcyclist yet - he has a dislike of them too.  So what's your problem - we are only talking about cars?  

If I wasn't a driver - obviously I wouldn't be complaining.

boxingkangaroo wrote on Feb 24^th, 2008 at 8:25pm:

merou wrote on Feb 24th, 2008 at 8:11pm: mantra wrote on Feb 24th, 2008 at 3:42pm: They should be banned from the city and suburbs. So when I drive 1200 kms to the city in my 4wd I should have to hire a car in order to travell the city? You reinforce your "moron" satus with every post, maybe you need to learn how to drive or are you just reiterating something you have heard is popular opinion from other morons who can't drive? I love the way you think posters just make off the cuff remarks for no good reason and then go on to condecend to them merou. Your no genuis mate in case you didnt notice. Most 4 wheel drivers in the city have no real use for them. They are status symbols with the exception of maybe a handful. Lighten up   >:(

So status symbols are next on the banning list?  What is it with leftoids that everyone has to be like them or they get banned.  Just cause Bob Brown drives a pink Smart car everyone should?

http://www.pinklily.com.au/images/media/smartcar.jpg

4WDs in the suburbs: http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1202435868

I hate this thread.

Wht don't we just ban everything that may be misused or might possibly cause damage to someone one day. Lets ban trucks on the roads, ban driving after 11:00 in case we fall asleep, ban walking on the road.
Status symbol or not so smacking what, people are going to be killed by idiots driving mazda 121's aswell should we just ban driving of motor vehicles full stop. That will save lives and the environment, kill two birds with one stone, whoops that's animal cruelty.
Did sprint call for the banning too?

Mantra, sorry I do tend to overreact at times and go off on tangents :-[ but I still think the call for banning 4WD's in the city is a moronic one.

I don't see any real point in banning 4WDs. Trucks could be considered more of a nuisance, but we can't live without trucks. What gets up my nose is aggressive young males doing burnouts, and in the process endangering the lives of others. My youngest son has a turbo-charged Skyline, and just lost his licence for six months. I'm glad the law can do what I couldn't, stop him from killing himself.

Quote:

My youngest son has a turbo-charged Skyline, and just lost his licence for six months. I'm glad the law can do what I couldn't, stop him from killing himself.

I think they're being made illegal in NSW for P-platers - if your son is still on P-plates.  I know a couple of the boys around my area drive them - and they are their pride and joy, but I can think of 3 fatal accidents in the last 12 months as a result of inexperienced boys not being able to handle the power of this particular car.

Thanks Merou - I get a bit sensitive at times, although after all the abuse thrown around in different forums - I should be used to it by now.  My real problem is that I drive a smallish car and when a large 4WD is parked near a street corner that I'm turning out of, it blocks your vision - so you can't turn left or right.  There are a lot of young men and "mothers" who drive them in my area and they drive quite aggressively and badly.  This happens of course with all cars - but it's the sheer size and weight of some of the older 4WD's that can be intimidating, not to mention that if you're behind one, you nearly choke on the diesel fumes.  

So I will amend my original post and say that I hate those huge older 4WD's, driven by inexperienced,  aggressive and inconsiderate people who think they own the road.

mantra wrote on Feb 25^th, 2008 at 9:05am:

I think they're being made illegal in NSW for P-platers - if your son is still on P-plates.  I know a couple of the boys around my area drive them - and they are their pride and joy, but I can think of 3 fatal accidents in the last 12 months as a result of inexperienced boys not being able to handle the power of this particular car.

My son is not on P-plates anymore, and acquired the Skyline just before they banned P-platers from driving them. I don't begrudge their "fun", but I don't think they realise how dangerous it is. The make my son has is an R32, which can reach 200KPH over 400 metres, or about 11 seconds. Fortunately he's still in one piece, and I hope the six month ban slows him down.

deepthoughts veiw

So status symbols are next on the banning list?  What is it with leftoids that everyone has to be like them or they get banned.  Just cause Bob Brown drives a pink Smart car everyone should?



Dont make assumptions about my political leanings mudblood, worry about your own deluded beliefs.

4WDs in the city are a menace and dangerous, do some research and stop raving on making it up as you go.
They pollute and obstruct other road users and have low reverse visibility. The numbers  of kids reversed over behind 4WDs is highly disproportionate.

The numbers  of kids reversed over behind 4WDs is highly disproportionate.

B.S- but if that really is the case, I'll chip in and buy your parents one. You can wait for delivery at the end of the driveway

Quote:

The numbers  of kids reversed over behind 4WDs is highly disproportionate

That is another serious problem BK - a kid dies every couple of weeks, although you have to wonder why people leave their young kids unsupervised long enough for them to be run over.


Quote:

The make my son has is an R32, which can reach 200KPH over 400 metres, or about 11 seconds. Fortunately he's still in one piece, and I hope the six month ban slows him down

I couldn't sleep at night if my son loved speed and drove one of those charged up Nissan Skylines.  Fortunately for him he drives an older 4WD  :-[, which doesn't have much speed - but he does live in Cairns and spends a lot of time in the bush.  Not that that I'm excusing him, I still hate them.

IQSRLOW wrote on Feb 25^th, 2008 at 11:03am:

The numbers  of kids reversed over behind 4WDs is highly disproportionate. B.S- but if that really is the case, I'll chip in and buy your parents one. You can wait for delivery at the end of the driveway

HA HA HA HA HA ;D ;D ;D ;D

boxingkangaroo wrote on Feb 25^th, 2008 at 10:39am:

deepthoughts veiw So status symbols are next on the banning list?  What is it with leftoids that everyone has to be like them or they get banned.  Just cause Bob Brown drives a pink Smart car everyone should? Dont make assumptions about my political leanings mudblood, worry about your own deluded beliefs. 4WDs in the city are a menace and dangerous, do some research and stop raving on making it up as you go. They pollute and obstruct other road users and have low reverse visibility. The numbers  of kids reversed over behind 4WDs is highly disproportionate.

I apologise if you are a rightie then - but in my experience leftoids are generally the least tolerant of the species.  If people want to be different they want to ban them, expose them or launch a crusade in the senate about them.

But I am not certain you are right with your hysterical statement "4WDs in the city are a menace and dangerous, do some research and stop raving on making it up as you go".  Care to put your mouth where your mouth is and provide the research you relied on when berating me?

And also the research which backs your claim that "they pollute and obstruct other road users" to a greater degree than many other vehicles - cars with dark tinted glass, delivery vans and trucks.  And other distractions like cars with pretty girls in.

IQSRLOW wrote on Feb 25^th, 2008 at 11:03am:

The numbers  of kids reversed over behind 4WDs is highly disproportionate. B.S- but if that really is the case, I'll chip in and buy your parents one. You can wait for delivery at the end of the driveway

I dont think" chipping in" means too much with $2.50 from your welfare cheque IQ...so you live with your parents stupid ?..yes it all fits.

deepthought wrote on Feb 25^th, 2008 at 5:49pm:

boxingkangaroo wrote on Feb 25th, 2008 at 10:39am: deepthoughts veiw So status symbols are next on the banning list?  What is it with leftoids that everyone has to be like them or they get banned.  Just cause Bob Brown drives a pink Smart car everyone should? Dont make assumptions about my political leanings mudblood, worry about your own deluded beliefs. 4WDs in the city are a menace and dangerous, do some research and stop raving on making it up as you go. They pollute and obstruct other road users and have low reverse visibility. The numbers  of kids reversed over behind 4WDs is highly disproportionate. I apologise if you are a rightie then - but in my experience leftoids are generally the least tolerant of the species.  If people want to be different they want to ban them, expose them or launch a crusade in the senate about them. But I am not certain you are right with your hysterical statement "4WDs in the city are a menace and dangerous, do some research and stop raving on making it up as you go".  Care to put your mouth where your mouth is and provide the research you relied on when berating me? And also the research which backs your claim that "they pollute and obstruct other road users" to a greater degree than many other vehicles - cars with dark tinted glass, delivery vans and trucks.  And other distractions like cars with pretty girls in.

AAwwww gee deepfort I dont think I can match your literary prowess..with big words like 'berating' and  'reiterate' etc..you are far too smart..Im sure I couldnt impress you at all.. ;D ;D ;D ;D

boxingkangaroo wrote on Feb 26^th, 2008 at 9:21am:

IQSRLOW wrote on Feb 25th, 2008 at 11:03am: The numbers  of kids reversed over behind 4WDs is highly disproportionate. B.S- but if that really is the case, I'll chip in and buy your parents one. You can wait for delivery at the end of the driveway I dont think" chipping in" means too much with $2.50 from your welfare cheque IQ...so you live with your parents stupid ?..yes it all fits.

Oh the wit is just amazing  ::)

http://www.strangecosmos.com/images/content/107195.gif

A gold star for you today IQ.  Your restraint is commendable.  Yours' too BK.  :)

IQSRLOW wrote on Feb 26^th, 2008 at 10:01am:

boxingkangaroo wrote on Feb 26th, 2008 at 9:21am: IQSRLOW wrote on Feb 25th, 2008 at 11:03am: The numbers  of kids reversed over behind 4WDs is highly disproportionate. B.S- but if that really is the case, I'll chip in and buy your parents one. You can wait for delivery at the end of the driveway I dont think" chipping in" means too much with $2.50 from your welfare cheque IQ...so you live with your parents stupid ?..yes it all fits. Oh the wit is just amazing  ::) http://www.strangecosmos.com/images/content/107195.gif

You lose spewbucket.. I love that di ckhead from The Office...lol

Oh yeah...you're a real winner  ::)

http://img380.imageshack.us/img380/2882/owned9wz.jpg

[quote author=Ray_A link=1203830565/15#21 date=1203897080
My son is not on P-plates anymore, and acquired the Skyline just before they banned P-platers from driving them.
[/quote]

When did this ban take effect? And what state? I just saw a 19 year old complete with Corey hat and sunglasses driving a Skyline on P-plates only this weekend. He was driving like he had something to prove.

boxingkangaroo wrote on Feb 25^th, 2008 at 10:39am:

Dont make assumptions about my political leanings mudblood, worry about your own deluded beliefs.

He he. He going all Harry Potter on us.

;) ;D ;D

deepthought wrote on Feb 25^th, 2008 at 5:49pm:

I apologise if you are a rightie then - but in my experience leftoids are generally the least tolerant of the species.

It's has been my experience and opinion that that righties are the least tolerant... christian right, KKK, Nationalist Front, Scientology etc. Lol.

;)

Acid Monkey wrote on Feb 26^th, 2008 at 5:09pm:

When did this ban take effect? And what state? I just saw a 19 year old complete with Corey hat and sunglasses driving a Skyline on P-plates only this weekend. He was driving like he had something to prove.

Was it red, or green Ps?

RTA website: http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/licensing/gettingalicence/200707_p2.html


Quote:

Vehicles – You must not drive any vehicle with: Eight or more cylinders. A turbocharged or supercharged engine (diesel powered engines exempt). Modifications that increase engine performance. Any other vehicle identified by the RTA – further details available on the RTA website.

Updated:


Quote:

Prohibited vehicles are those with: Eight or more cylinders (except diesel). A turbocharged engine (except diesel). A supercharged engine (except diesel). Engine performance modifications. Certain high performance six cylinder engine vehicles or other vehicles as described in the publication Novice Drivers - High Performance Vehicle Restrictions.

What is off the banned list: http://racv.goauto.com.au/mellor/mellor.nsf/story2/FFB0A26E1F869820CA2571070026C09B

If he's on his green Ps he may have got it when it was still legal.                                                                  

boxingkangaroo wrote on Feb 26^th, 2008 at 9:23am:

AAwwww gee deepfort I dont think I can match your literary prowess..with big words like 'berating' and  'reiterate' etc..you are far too smart..Im sure I couldnt impress you at all.. ;D ;D ;D ;D

I'm not suggesting you impress me - simply back your harsh words of criticism with facts.  What research did you rely on which concludes that "4WDs in the city are a menace and dangerous" and where can I find the figures which suggest "they pollute and obstruct other road users" to a greater degree than many other vehicles?

I do hope derision is not the sole reason for posting.

Acid Monkey wrote on Feb 26^th, 2008 at 5:16pm:

deepthought wrote on Feb 25th, 2008 at 5:49pm: I apologise if you are a rightie then - but in my experience leftoids are generally the least tolerant of the species. It's has been my experience and opinion that that righties are the least tolerant... christian right, KKK, Nationalist Front, Scientology etc. Lol. ;)

I expect you haven't heard of Stalin, Mao Tse Tung and Pol Pot then.

deepthought wrote on Feb 26^th, 2008 at 7:17pm:

I expect you haven't heard of Stalin, Mao Tse Tung and Pol Pot then.

Oh I've heard of them. I was citing groups more relevant to our times.

If it's history you want, then what about Bennito Mussolini, Pope Leo XIII, Augusto Pinochet, Idi Amin, Francisco Franco, Manuel Noriega, the entire Christian crusaders which includes kings and lords from Spain, France, England, Germany & Italy, Joseph McCarthy, Malcolm X, Elijah Muhammad, and the big guy Adolf Hitler.

;)

Ray_A wrote on Feb 26^th, 2008 at 5:34pm:

Was it red, or green Ps?

Red or green Ps? OK, I'm in Vic so I guess that ban hasn't been implemented here yet. We don't have coloured coded P-plates.
;)

I hate people who have to have the last say.

RecFisher wrote on Feb 27^th, 2008 at 5:30pm:

I hate people who have to have the last say.

well your in for a life full of headaches then...

Acid Monkey wrote on Feb 27^th, 2008 at 1:40pm:

deepthought wrote on Feb 26th, 2008 at 7:17pm: I expect you haven't heard of Stalin, Mao Tse Tung and Pol Pot then. Oh I've heard of them. I was citing groups more relevant to our times. If it's history you want, then what about Bennito Mussolini, Pope Leo XIII, Augusto Pinochet, Idi Amin, Francisco Franco, Manuel Noriega, the entire Christian crusaders which includes kings and lords from Spain, France, England, Germany & Italy, Joseph McCarthy, Malcolm X, Elijah Muhammad, and the big guy Adolf Hitler. ;)

Yes thanks for mentioning those other socialists.  I expect the Kings and Queens etc you mention had no particular political leaning though.

I agree with you that when it comes to leftys they are superior in their persecution of those who are different - you would be aware that just the three I mentioned are responsible for more deaths than both of the 20th century's World Wars.  I have little time for leftys and their hatred.  

Oh, how many did McCarthy execute again?

deepthought wrote on Feb 27^th, 2008 at 9:29pm:

Oh, how many did McCarthy execute again?

You're changing the goal posts. We were talking about intolerance not body count. A person can be a intolerant without having killed anyone. If Joseph McCarthy was living in say Kenya; had absolute power with no accountability (I'd imagine that ) he'll probably kill his enemies as opposed to merely subjecting them to congressional hearings.

The death toll attributed to Hitler was approx 50 million people (Jews, homosexuals, handicaps, intellectuals, Russians, Romanians, Hungarians & Lithuanian POWs).

The death toll attributed to Idi Amin was 500,000 people.

The persecution death toll attributed to Stalin was approx 20 million people.

The persecution death toll attributed to Pol Pot was approx. 1.7 million people.

The persecution death toll attributed to Mao Zedong was approx 30 million people (not to be confused with another 72 million people who died from starvation due to drought and famine prior to The Great Leap Forward.)

You will find that although Stalin operated under the Communist doctrine (left wing, society, collectivism) his ego was most definitely right wing (meglomania, self, individualism, and singularism).

However, I'm not going to argue the political spectrum based on death count - both left and right have an equally deplorable human rights record. I'm talking more on the philosophical points of left/right. I talking more about the average citizen.



Lifted out of wikipedia:

Public control of the means of production (left), or private control of the means of production (right).

Workers' self-management (left), or employment (right).

Redistribution of wealth and income (left), or acceptance of inequalities as a result of the free market (right).

Whether the government's policy on the economy should be interventionist (left) or laissez-faire (right).

Support for widened lifestyle choices (left), or support for traditional values (right).

Whether human nature is more malleable (left) or intrinsic (right).

Whether an individual's locus of control is more external (left) or internal (right).

Personal philosophy and liberal spiritualism (left) versus traditional religious morality (right).

Collectivism (left) versus individualism (right).

Support for internationalism (left), or national cultural and economic autonomy (right).

Belief in class conflict (left), or in class collaboration/class ambivalence (right).



Left wing = redistribution of wealth, internationalism, liberal spiritualism, malleable, collectivism.
Right wing = intrinsic, religious morality, nationalistic and economic autonomy, individualism.
Left wing = pluralism, society.
Right wing = monoism, individualism.

Which sounds more capable of intollerance?

The left wing argument for the recent Haneef case: whether he is guilty or not he has his right to civil liberty.
The right wing argument: bugger his rights, we don't care that he might be innocent. Better to be safe than sorry.

Which sounds more intollerant?

Left winger are often called bleeding hearts and do-gooders.
Right wingers are often called warmongers.

Which sounds more intollerant?

;) :)

Long post. Sorry.

;) ::)

I'm talking more on the philosophical points of left/right.

That was what all those socialists were doing right before they started killing lots of people.

You raise some interesting points and I would like to explore them further - however I have a full day of work and uni today which begins in 1 hour and ends in 12.

I would make the immediate comment that merely being intolerant is no worse than ideological bigotry, but doing something about it gives it substance.  People like Bob Brown relentlessly exercising his power as a senator to persecute a group with no political power at all is an example of acting upon your intolerance.  This is measurable intolerance.

But to execute people is measurable intolerance in the extreme - death counts count.

I would pretty well dispute almost all of the idealistic qualities you have given the lefty - philosophically.  But time is short.

IQSRLOW wrote on Feb 27^th, 2008 at 11:54pm:

I'm talking more on the philosophical points of left/right. That was what all those socialists were doing right before they started killing lots of people.

The despots cited by deepthought operates under the communist regime. Communism on paper looks good in the point of view of the citizenry however, doesn't work. Under the communist program one body of govt decides for the masses and one person determines the govt direction. Therefore, too much (or absolute) power rest on one or a few individuals. It's true the saying about absolute power and corruption. It takes a very benevolent person(s) to resist temptation or to not act on their primal urges. The communist structure without an oversight body provides the perfect environment for such corruption.

In the case of the socialist individuals (I assume that you mean Mao, Stalin, et al) the communism environment is the cause of despotry not left wing ideology itself.

Hitler's Nazi regime initially had the hallmarks of socialism. His speeches talk of people power, raising the state through combined effort and community cohesion and work. He motivated the citizens to concerntrate on building Germany up from the ashes of WWI; and to do so as a community and to disregard individual aspirations. Groups such as the Hitler Youths (to the people) were all about community identity and interaction. He (and through him, his henchmens) were given almost absolute power for his vision. I believe that Hitler's personal ideology were extreme-right. They strived under this false socialism which gave them power and enacted Hitler's extreme right vision. Even now many Germans didn't understand how that could have happened. His ideas for the nation was very left wing, but (unknown to them) his beliefs were the opposite. And suddenly, Germany became a rogue fascist state.

To bring it down to street level (and to put it very basically, generally  and philosophically), one could say that the nature of work a social or charity worker does is left-wing while an entrepeneur is more right wing orientated. Community vs free enterprise. Pluralism vs Individualism.

These are my opinions so far, base on my philosophical and anthropological studies research.

:)

I have a tendency towards long posts. Sorry again. Cheers!

::) ::) ;) ;) :) :)

To bring it down to street level (and to put it very basically, generally  and philosophically), one could say that the nature of work a social or charity worker does is left-wing while an entrepeneur is more right wing orientated. Community vs free enterprise. Pluralism vs Individualism.

One of which cannot exist without the other- Generally the left is parasitic of the the right

Quote:

One of which cannot exist without the other- Generally the left is parasitic of the the right

Oh really IQ!  I would say that generally the right is exploitive of the left.   This is possibly why we have a new conservative government who believes in taking the middle road.

;D ;D ;D

The left doesn't do anything, so how they be exploited? The are only reactive not pro-active

Quote:

The left doesn't do anything, so how they be exploited? The are only reactive not pro-active

Hilarious IQ.  I always get a laugh out of your disturbed perspective on those to the left of politics, but this time there is a little truth in what you say.  Yes those who support left leaning governments tend to be reactive, especially to the exploitation of others.  But on the flip side - we have the hyperactive capitalists who believe in trampling over anyone and everything, regardless of the destruction left in their path, to grab that extra little bit of glittery gold that is so essential to the maintenance of their artificially inflated egos.

Give me less money, but a humane government anyday.

Give me less money, but a humane government anyday.

You should re-phrase that for accuracy to addressing the right who actually pay for the whims of the left

"I want to take more of your money to fund what I think should be a more humane govt (but as yet have failed to achieve anything) and I will try everything possible to stop you grabbing that extra little bit of glittery gold but fail to realise that is so essential to the maintenance of the Left- who else will pay for our whims?"

mantra wrote on Feb 28^th, 2008 at 11:08am:

Quote: One of which cannot exist without the other- Generally the left is parasitic of the the right Oh really IQ!  I would say that generally the right is exploitive of the left.   This is possibly why we have a new conservative government who believes in taking the middle road.

I agree IQ, in reality one cannot exist without the other. Which is why hybrid societies like say Sweden and the Netherlands (and other EU countries) work well. The govt policies are very liberal and people orientated. And yet within their governance a free enterprise strive. Whereas say Australia where most if not all public utilities are privatised to the determent of the people (ie: public transport).

I also agree with mantra. I believe that the opposite of IQ's statement is true. The right (free enterprise) is parasitic (exploits) of the left (workers). Where private enterprise tries to exploit workers to enhance their bottom line for the company's benefit. Society's benefit of private enterprise is incidental because company profit comes first before society.

deepthought wrote on Feb 28^th, 2008 at 6:33am:

But time is short.

I hear you, deep. I'll have to disappear again for a few months as I have another trip ahead. I'm trying to complete what work I have and plan for the journey within a short time frame. Under the pump, one would say.

Lol.

;D ;)

Quote:

want to take more of your money to fund what I think should be a more humane govt

Now let's be realistic here IQ!  How could you compare dividends from shares in a multinational mining company to saving the endangered golden spotted dragonfly nesting in rare marshlands in the middle of a proposed open cut mine.

You have no argument - now. :)

IQSRLOW wrote on Feb 28^th, 2008 at 11:40am:

Give me less money, but a humane government anyday. You should re-phrase that for accuracy to addressing the right who actually pay for the whims of the left "I want to take more of your money to fund what I think should be a more humane govt (but as yet have failed to achieve anything) and I will try everything possible to stop you grabbing that extra little bit of glittery gold but fail to realise that is so essential to the maintenance of the Left- who else will pay for our whims?"

I think you will find that people of the left pay tax, whilst those of the right do all they can to avoid it.

Quote:

I think you will find that people of the left pay tax, whilst those of the right do all they can to avoid it

I think you've hit the nail on the head - atheist.  That's why we can hear the loud wailing from the right.  

I think you will find that people of the left pay tax, whilst those of the right do all they can to avoid it.

What a completely absurd statement- Australian citizens earning an income are all required to pay tax. Do you lefties give more than your required share of tax to the taxman?

That's why we can hear the loud wailing from the right.

That wailing is at the ridiculousness of stopping a billion dollar venture and the flow on effects to society in creating jobs and income streams for all Australians, bringing some out of poverty based on the crys from govt funded NGO's over an insect.

It is now recognised as a tactic used to attack many developments- you can drop the pretence of the importance of a dragonfly. It is simply leftist ideology trying to get their own way

Quote:

It is now recognised as a tactic used to attack many developments- you can drop the pretence of the importance of a dragonfly. It is simply leftist ideology trying to get their own way

It was only a little joke IQ.  You've still missed the point though.  You talk about multi-million developments creating income streams for all Australians.  On the surface it may appear that way, but in the long term it isn't.  It creates a false sense of wealth to the ordinary person, although it creates real wealth for the major shareholders.  Once the company reaches it's peak, it's usually sliced up and sold - often it collapses as a result.  Do you know how many thousands and internationally, millions of "little" people get hurt by these greedy multinationals when they've sucked the life blood out of their source.  Not to mention the destruction of our environment in the process.

If an insect can prevent this - so be it.

IQSRLOW wrote on Feb 28^th, 2008 at 12:24pm:

I think you will find that people of the left pay tax, whilst those of the right do all they can to avoid it. What a completely absurd statement- Australian citizens earning an income are all required to pay tax. Do you lefties give more than your required share of tax to the taxman? That's why we can hear the loud wailing from the right. That wailing is at the ridiculousness of stopping a billion dollar venture and the flow on effects to society in creating jobs and income streams for all Australians, bringing some out of poverty based on the crys from govt funded NGO's over an insect. It is now recognised as a tactic used to attack many developments- you can drop the pretence of the importance of a dragonfly. It is simply leftist ideology trying to get their own way

Well I'll say it slowly as your IQ must suit your name,most left wingers are hard working tax payers, whilst most right whingers  do all they can to avoid tax. The richer they are the more is tunnelled overseas. I dont expect you will get it, but I can only try.

IQSRLOW wrote on Feb 28^th, 2008 at 12:24pm:

I think you will find that people of the left pay tax, whilst those of the right do all they can to avoid it. What a completely absurd statement- Australian citizens earning an income are all required to pay tax. Do you lefties give more than your required share of tax to the taxman?

Lol. I'm sorry mantra, but I have to agree with IQ on that one.

I'm sure the left is just as inclined to avoid tax when possible as much as the next right person.

That said, I'll add that the right is every bit as honest as the left as much as the left is every bit as dishonest as the right.

;)

Well I'll say it slowly as your IQ must suit your name,most left wingers are hard working tax payers, whilst most right whingers  do all they cam to avoid tax. The richer they are the more is tunnelled overseas. I dont expect you will get it, but I can only try.

You can say it as slowly as you like- it may help the little comprehension skills that you have but it still doesn't make it true.

The fact that you make generalised statements such as 'most left wingers are hard working tax payers' only proves your lack of understanding of facts. Everyone knows that most left wingers are on the dole because they are unemployable.

You talk about multi-million developments creating income streams for all Australians.  On the surface it may appear that way, but in the long term it isn't.

I hear Cuba is nice this time of year comrade  ::)

IQSRLOW wrote on Feb 28^th, 2008 at 12:50pm:

Well I'll say it slowly as your IQ must suit your name,most left wingers are hard working tax payers, whilst most right whingers  do all they cam to avoid tax. The richer they are the more is tunnelled overseas. I dont expect you will get it, but I can only try. You can say it as slowly as you like- it may help the little comprehension skills that you have but it still doesn't make it true. The fact that you make generalised statements such as 'most left wingers are hard working tax payers' only proves your lack of understanding of facts. Everyone knows that most left wingers are on the dole because they are unemployable. You talk about multi-million developments creating income streams for all Australians.  On the surface it may appear that way, but in the long term it isn't. I hear Cuba is nice this time of year comrade  ::)

Yes the generalised statement is wrong, there are of course rightwhingers like yourself who make no contribution to society and have no need to minimalise tax, as they dont pay any on a benifit.

acidmonkey - yes, I see no reason why lefties should pay all the taxes they possibly can, while the righties avoid all they can.
Fact is, entrepreneurs add more to the society than dole bludging pot smoking unemployable surfies

Quote:

I'm sure the left is just as inclined to avoid tax when possible as much as the next right person.

You may be right AcidMonkey - but we'll never know.  I'm not quite as left as IQ likes to infer, but there's a bit of satisfaction in annoying her anyway.  :)

Of course righties make a contribution to society- who's else is going to give you parasites a nipple to greedily suckle at?

Yes the generalised statement is wrong, there of course rightwhingers like yourself who make no contribution to society and have no need to minimalise tax, as they dont pay any on a benifit.

Engrish?

Sprintcyclist wrote on Feb 28^th, 2008 at 12:56pm:

acidmonkey - yes, I see no reason why lefties should pay all the taxes they possibly can, while the righties avoid all they can. Fact is, entrepreneurs add more to the society than dole bludging pot smoking unemployable surfies

Ofcourse like Alan Bond and Skase, great australians, and I'd suggest if you right whingers didn't spend so much time drunk you too could learn to surf.

athiest - there is also the packers, who publically and openly avoid all the tax they can.
And Dick Smith who donates generously.
Alan Bond won the americas cup for us.
Not all right wingers are stingy and mean hearted. They do get worse publicity though.

many of the rich right wingers are philanthropists. Most donations are from the wealthy.
Any country is better with more rich people living there.
or would you like to live in somalia ?

We are too busy having to earn an extra dollar to support your lazy ar*se so you can go surfing- meanwhile we are be productive members of society while your ilk whines and sponges of the rest, then complains when you see how successful we are and you want a pieces of that too.

I feel sad for you, it must feel horrible to live with your hand out all the time begging

Sprintcyclist wrote on Feb 28^th, 2008 at 1:12pm:

athiest - there is also the packers, who publically and openly avoid all the tax they can. And Dick Smith who donates generously. Alan Bond won the americas cup for us. Not all right wingers are stingy and mean hearted. They do get worse publicity though. many of the rich right wingers are philanthropists. Most donations are from the wealthy. Any country is better with more rich people living there. or would you like to live in somalia ?

I agree on dick Smith, but my point is not about rich people I'm far from poor myself, and I expect dick has voted for Labor as much if not more than he has for the torys, Smith is an honest good man who cares about his country and its people, pity there are not more rich people like him.

IQSRLOW wrote on Feb 28^th, 2008 at 1:12pm:

We are too busy having to earn an extra dollar to support your lazy ar*se so you can go surfing- meanwhile we are be productive members of society while your ilk whines and sponges of the rest, then complains when you see how successful we are and you want a pieces of that too. I feel sad for you, it must feel horrible to live with your hand out all the time begging

Well if it were true, which it is not, I think I would prefer it to laying on my back like yourself to earn a dollar or 50 cents, whatever the case may be.

The problem with such absurdly simplistic caricatures is that they are, well, absurd.

Determine your political philosophy.

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1167869241

I think I would prefer it to laying on my back like yourself to earn a dollar or 50 cents, whatever the case may be.

Just because that is all you can afford is no reason to blame the rest of society...or is that the type of woman you go for?

Sprintcyclist wrote on Feb 28^th, 2008 at 12:56pm:

acidmonkey - yes, I see no reason why lefties should pay all the taxes they possibly can, while the righties avoid all they can. Fact is, entrepreneurs add more to the society than dole bludging pot smoking unemployable surfies

Fact? You say?

Lol, I hear IQ, mantra and athiest arguing about generalisation. I suggest you enter that discussion with them.

So, I guess that you're saying that social and charity workers, and philanthropists all smoke pot and do not contribute to society.

Entrepeneur's contribution to society is worthy. I've never said otherwise. However, consider that their contribution is not altruistic but is one of self - only when it suits them (ie: when they're making a profit). The benefit to society is incidental and only when they are making a profit. I'm not criticising entrepeneurs but merely a metaphor to illustrate the difference between left and right.

IQ is a girl?

And, "Thingy Smith".... LOL.

;) :)

Acid Monkey wrote on Feb 28^th, 2008 at 1:50pm:

IQ is a girl? And, "Thingy Smith".... LOL. ;) :)

Well it seems Mr Smiths cristian name is unacceptable, as far as IQ being a" girl" I think you use the term loosely.

I am male- I thought you would have realised that when I b!tch slapped you

IQSRLOW wrote on Feb 28^th, 2008 at 2:11pm:

I am male- I thought you would have realised that when I b!tch slapped you

IQ is female..

Although you'd like me to be, because you like being all up in my crotch- you'd be in for a surprise when I teabag you...although I gather this wouldn't be the first time for you

IQSRLOW wrote on Feb 28^th, 2008 at 2:11pm:

I am male- I thought you would have realised that when I b!tch slapped you

LOL @ the teabag. No disrespect, but I noticed that mantra refered to you as "her". That's all.

Cheers!

:)

Quote:

LOL @ the teabag. No disrespect, but I noticed that mantra refered to you as "her". That's all.

Oh - must have been a typo!  Someone else used that excuse recently.

Mantra gets confused easily- she is a woman but she has a pen!s growing from her forehead so she get confused at what is male or female

IQ - you're getting a bit carried away, don't you think?  If you want to get down and dirty - go somewhere else.  

I was being kind to you.  I know you like to view yourself as a male, and I try to remember this, but today I forgot.  Sorry.  

Feel a bit better now.  :)

IQ - you're getting a bit carried away, don't you think?

No..not at all.

I can though if you want to continue?

IQ = male
mantra = female

Got it. Back to normal now.

A thingy on her forehead. LOL. I guest her avatar should be a unicorn instead of a witch.  

;)

Acid Monkey wrote on Feb 27^th, 2008 at 11:43pm:

Which sounds more intollerant? Left winger are often called bleeding hearts and do-gooders. Right wingers are often called warmongers. Which sounds more intollerant?

My whinge: I hate people who spell intolerant with two Ls.

No I don't. Only joking, AcidMonkey. What I hate is smileys.

Not too comfortable fellow-travelling with LOWIQ and thoughtfreezone, either. Any minute now those two will be telling us that before the left abolished slavery the slaves were exploiting and bludging from their masters. But I have to concede their point that leftists often lean towards social control and intolerance. The Nazis were a socialist labour party (Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei); and Mussolini edited a socialist newspaper before he became a Fascist dictator. And all those rabid-rightwing Neocons who pulled the idiot puppet Bush's strings were reformed radical socialist activists.

Here in Australia the despicable White Australia Policy was vigourously defended by the Labor Party, until Whitlam watered it down a bit. We had to wait for a Liberal government before it was finally flushed down the toilet.

Not too comfortable fellow-travelling with LOWIQ and thoughtfreezone, either.

Of course you're not comfortable. That's just human nature when you admit that your way of thinking has been wrong.

Kudos to you for having the strength to own up to it

IQ are you trying to sound like Deepfort?

Are you trying to sound like Oceans?

I'll take that as a yes. You do seem to be leaning further towards his 'style' lately.

I'll take that as a compliment

Cracticus wrote on Feb 28^th, 2008 at 5:36pm:

Acid Monkey wrote on Feb 27th, 2008 at 11:43pm: Which sounds more intollerant? Left winger are often called bleeding hearts and do-gooders. Right wingers are often called warmongers. Which sounds more intollerant? My whinge: I hate people who spell intolerant with two Ls. No I don't. Only joking, AcidMonkey. What I hate is smileys. Not too comfortable fellow-travelling with LOWIQ and thoughtfreezone, either. Any minute now those two will be telling us that before the left abolished slavery the slaves were exploiting and bludging from their masters. But I have to concede their point that leftists often lean towards social control and intolerance. The Nazis were a socialist labour party (Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei); and Mussolini edited a socialist newspaper before he became a Fascist dictator. And all those rabid-rightwing Neocons who pulled the idiot puppet Bush's strings were reformed radical socialist activists. Here in Australia the despicable White Australia Policy was vigourously defended by the Labor Party, until Whitlam watered it down a bit. We had to wait for a Liberal government before it was finally flushed down the toilet.

Hi Cracticus,

My point exactly, communism generates the perfect environment for right wing despots to strive. That's the irony I've been trying to put forth; that Stalin was really a fascist in a communist environment, fascists like Hitler and Mussolini rose up under the guise of socialism, and as you've said the fascist White Australia Policy brought forth by a purported socialist party. In my studies, facism often raises its head under the guise of social reform.

As for smileys..... yeah, I actually don't like using them as well. However, it's been my experience when posting in forums such as OzPolitics where opinions often clash and debates get heated it helps to use smileys. Often, something said in jest can be read as an attack.  ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;)

LOL.

Also, spelling - yeah, my bad. I try to be accurate but sometimes i miss a few words.

I don't mind IQ. He/she (just jkg, IQ!) makes good points. I take some of his comments but not all. As long as he's civil and constructive I'll travel with him.

IQ - Oh dear.

AcidMoneky - I think that is just a reflection of the limitations of the left/right labels. Extremists are defined more by being extreme than by their ideology, so they use the same methods. However, even ideologically the far left and the far right have a lot in common. Some people describe is as 'coming full circle' and meeting up again on the other side. Take Hitler for example - his scapegoating and attacks on Jews is classic right wing stuff. But he was a 'labor-type' person with typically left wing economic ideas, but still managed to do great things with the economy - perhaps because of the war setting.

Agree wholeheartedly. There is a whole uni semester dedicated to the paradox of the extremes. Labels are constricting and unyielding but can only work around or within them.

However, I think I may have steered away from the original point (or at least lead away by IQ et al). I started off talking about about intolerance on the average level. Somehow we ended up talking about world domination and genocide. LOL!

IQSRLOW wrote on Feb 28^th, 2008 at 5:44pm:

Not too comfortable fellow-travelling with LOWIQ and thoughtfreezone, either. Of course you're not comfortable. That's just human nature when you admit that your way of thinking has been wrong. Kudos to you for having the strength to own up to it

And when did I admit that my way of thinking has been wrong? A bit of fee advice — stop listening to those little voices in your head and try to concentrate on what is actually written.

As to discomfort, we of the tribe Cracticus have never been comfortable in the company of Dicrurus aldabranus.

I only lay the trail of bread crumbs out...others make the choice to follow

Perhaps an attack on the nasty corporations that make millions supplying bread at the cost of the poor worker would solve this dilemma?
:D

Cracticus wrote on Feb 28^th, 2008 at 7:02pm:

IQSRLOW wrote on Feb 28th, 2008 at 5:44pm: Not too comfortable fellow-travelling with LOWIQ and thoughtfreezone, either. Of course you're not comfortable. That's just human nature when you admit that your way of thinking has been wrong. Kudos to you for having the strength to own up to it And when did I admit that my way of thinking has been wrong? A bit of fee advice — stop listening to those little voices in your head and try to concentrate on what is actually written. As to discomfort, we of the tribe Cracticus have never been comfortable in the company of Dicrurus aldabranus.

Oh dear Stickupyourarticus- perhaps pay attention to who I am replying to and it might make a bit of sense...or are those little voices inside your head- the quote in italics was from Acid Monkey

Reading comprehensions owns you- but here's a hint. Before you try to parry and thrust away with the smart @rse comments, it would pay to double check before making a complete goose of yourself.

Well done this time though...(translated= quack quack)
::)

deepthought wrote on Feb 26^th, 2008 at 7:16pm:

boxingkangaroo wrote on Feb 26th, 2008 at 9:23am: AAwwww gee deepfort I dont think I can match your literary prowess..with big words like 'berating' and  'reiterate' etc..you are far too smart..Im sure I couldnt impress you at all.. ;D ;D ;D ;D I'm not suggesting you impress me - simply back your harsh words of criticism with facts.....

Aaaww Deepfort..really..

Harsh words???, my word old mate..you've lived a sheltered life havent you..???

Some cream for all the "rash inducing harshness "..your life will bring to you  ;D





                                              http://www.kidsmoda.com/image/goods-bath_clean/47174.jpg

simply back your harsh words of criticism with facts.....

How surprising that this is way beyond BK's ability  ::)

Well this thread collapsed in a heap.  Hope you all had fun.  I feel ripped off having read it all though.  I'd better go and make some more money to make myself feel better.

IQSRLOW wrote on Feb 28^th, 2008 at 8:00pm:

simply back your harsh words of criticism with facts..... How surprising that this is way beyond BK's ability  ::)

Be a little more like Deepfort IQ and......(to be contd)

IQ

;D ;D ;D ;Di



http://www.michaelsampson.net/images/200608/20060830productivity.jpg

Yes DT...reading any thread where BK is involved tends to drop the standards...as evidence by the above.

Do you have no thought process BK? (rhetorical question)

Dear Quack Quack,

"Not too comfortable fellow-travelling with LOWIQ and thoughtfreezone, either" are my words, not anyone else's. When you reply to them, quoting my words and no one elses, you are replying to me. Anyone can see that.

Well …anyone with a reasonable IQ can see it. Do you EVER know what you are talking about?

IQSRLOW wrote on Feb 28^th, 2008 at 8:49pm:

Do you have no thought process BK? (rhetorical question)

Im waiting for the answer stthhhhoooopid. :D

rhetorically speaking dreary.

Cracticus wrote on Feb 28^th, 2008 at 10:03pm:

Dear Quack Quack, "Not too comfortable fellow-travelling with LOWIQ and thoughtfreezone, either" are my words, not anyone else's. When you reply to them, quoting my words and no one elses, you are replying to me. Anyone can see that. Well …anyone with a reasonable IQ can see it. Do you EVER know what you are talking about?

I do apologise stickupyourarticus, I was mistaken. Being a lefty, I would assume that you would allow a mistake or twenty? You lot have made enough apologies for Kruddy so far I figured it was (and here's something that should tickle your fancy) quid pro quo

I should have realised that Acid Monkey is much more intelligent than you and would never have resorted to the lameness that you seem to embrace with such abandon.

My bad

IQSRLOW wrote on Feb 28^th, 2008 at 10:34pm:

[quote author=Cracticus link=1203830565/105#106 date=1204200228]Dear Quack Quack, I do apologise stickupyourarticus, I was mistaken. Being a lefty, I would assume that you would allow a mistake or twenty? You lot have made enough apologies for Kruddy so far I figured it was (and here's something that should tickle your fancy) quid pro quo I should have realised that Acid Monkey is much more intelligent than you and would never have resorted to the lameness that you seem to embrace with such abandon. My bad

You're a laugh, I'll say that for you, Quack. Now you're telling me that you're a lefty. Must be that superior intelligence of yours. I repeat, do you EVER know what you're talking about?

And when did I make any apologies for Kruddy? Yet again I must repeat myself: stop listening to those little voices in your head. None of them are mine!

Why is Stickupyourarticus and Quack Quack throwing my name around?

I know that both of you like me and anything..... but there's no need to fight over me. I'll be friends with both of you.

LOL.

;)

Now you're telling me that you're a lefty.

Read it again stickupyourarticus and get back to me when you can understand it- I won't be holding my breath

IQSRLOW wrote on Feb 29^th, 2008 at 9:17am:

Now you're telling me that you're a lefty. ..........I won't be holding my breath

Thats because MAGGOTS dont have lungs.    ::)

BK, quit insulting people. The rest of you, chill out. Anyone who participates in this sort of childish nonsense and calls someone else stupid is a hypocrit.

LOL.

The headmaster comes into the room to smack a few heads - just when it was getting entertaining.

;)

I've just noticed that I've become a "Full Member". When did that happen?

:D

When you submitted your 100th post.

Cool. Ok.

So what is the next milestone?

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1172847761/3#3

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?action=ml;sort=posts

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1173004761/4#4

EDIT: Thread closed due to constant bitching.