Australian Politics Forum - Time to overhaul political donations

Dnarever

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 61265
Here
Gender: male

Re: Time to overhaul political donations
Reply #165 - Jan 20^th, 2016 at 10:46am

mariacostel wrote on Jan 20^th, 2016 at 10:40am:

Dnarever wrote on Jan 20^th, 2016 at 10:33am:

mariacostel wrote on Jan 18^th, 2016 at 8:21am:

Dnarever wrote on Jan 17^th, 2016 at 8:02am:

Sir Grappler Truth Teller OAM wrote on Jan 17^th, 2016 at 12:56am:

It was held in the Canberra landmark, Kingston Hotel. Inside the hotel were

36 ALP delegates

deciding what Labor Party policies the looming election was to be fought on.
Outside the hotel, waiting in the Canberran cold, stood the ALP leader Arthur Calwell and his deputy Gough Whitlam.
Neither were delegates to the Conference and could take no decisive part.
Alan, ever the astute reporter, awoke his photographer mate, Vladimir Paral, and that morning the iconic pics were blazened across the pages of the Tele.
The ALP didn't win that election. If they had won, the Calwell/Whitlam Labor Government would have followed the doctrine of

36 unelected, unknown unionists.

How did 36 ALP delegates turn into 36 unknown Unionists? Grin

What were these journalists smoking at the time?

Longmania going down at four o'clock... in flames... no chutes... someone'll be writing letters to parents....

You have to wonder about them when the best they can do is to re run a 1963 election ploy.

DNA, are you one of those crazy-lefties that chooses to say that this event didn't happen? or is your integrity enough to accept that it did happen exactly as reported?

I would think that you have managed to leave out a rather large grey area from your options.

No. The facts are very well understood and historically documented. You just can't handle the truth. Nor can Bam.

You fully 100% believe everything you read in the Telegraph. Outstanding!

Back to top

IP Logged

Sir Grappler Truth Teller OAM

Gold Member

Online

Australian Politics

Posts: 89887
Proud Old White Australian Man
Gender: male

Re: Time to overhaul political donations
Reply #166 - Jan 20^th, 2016 at 10:47am

Anyway - the time has come to discuss political donations - not the contents of 'caucus' of either side..... it is obvious that the members of any party elect their delegates to their own equivalent of caucus, and that the representation has nothing to do with status as an elected representative of the people...... on any side...

No - as for donations............

Back to top

“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.”
― John Adams

IP Logged

Bam

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 21905
Gender: male

Re: Time to overhaul political donations
Reply #167 - Jan 20^th, 2016 at 10:48am

John Smith wrote on Jan 20^th, 2016 at 8:19am:

mariacostel wrote on Jan 20^th, 2016 at 8:06am:

John Smith wrote on Jan 18^th, 2016 at 3:50pm:

mariacostel wrote on Jan 18^th, 2016 at 3:39pm:

I keep telling you the problems with the idea and being the dim-witted souls that you are, you just march on regardless with nary a thought for the practical problems.

That is why no one in authority ever asks your opinions on anything.

Do you think this is the first time this topic has been discussed? The 'problems' you whinge about have been dealt with. Simple solutions have been offered. You want to find out what they were go searching for them. No one here needs to repeat themselves just because you're incapable of independent thought.

Solutions that you dont have because the last time it was discussed, I was here. And no one even bothered to try and answer the problems. That is because you are all so damnably partisan and foolish that no question can even be entertained, never mind answered

Perhaps the reason this stupid idea has never been seriously floated is because it has serious flaws that cannot be addressed.

actually, the last time this was discussed, you weren't here .... longy was. Grin

There is nothing partisan about banning political donations. Your problem is your head is so far up your arse, you don't understand what's written in front of you.

If his head was up his arse, that means everything he sees is crap ... Grin

Back to top

You are not entitled to your opinion. You are only entitled to hold opinions that you can defend through sound, reasoned argument.

IP Logged

John Smith

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 78311
Gender: male

Re: Time to overhaul political donations
Reply #168 - Jan 20^th, 2016 at 10:49am

Bam wrote on Jan 20^th, 2016 at 10:48am:

John Smith wrote on Jan 20^th, 2016 at 8:19am:

mariacostel wrote on Jan 20^th, 2016 at 8:06am:

John Smith wrote on Jan 18^th, 2016 at 3:50pm:

mariacostel wrote on Jan 18^th, 2016 at 3:39pm:

I keep telling you the problems with the idea and being the dim-witted souls that you are, you just march on regardless with nary a thought for the practical problems.

That is why no one in authority ever asks your opinions on anything.

Do you think this is the first time this topic has been discussed? The 'problems' you whinge about have been dealt with. Simple solutions have been offered. You want to find out what they were go searching for them. No one here needs to repeat themselves just because you're incapable of independent thought.

Solutions that you dont have because the last time it was discussed, I was here. And no one even bothered to try and answer the problems. That is because you are all so damnably partisan and foolish that no question can even be entertained, never mind answered

Perhaps the reason this stupid idea has never been seriously floated is because it has serious flaws that cannot be addressed.

actually, the last time this was discussed, you weren't here .... longy was. Grin

There is nothing partisan about banning political donations. Your problem is your head is so far up your arse, you don't understand what's written in front of you.

If his head was up his arse, that means everything he sees is crap ... Grin

I thought that was obvious from his comments

Back to top

Our esteemed leader:
I hope that bitch who was running their brothels for them gets raped with a cactus.

IP Logged

Bam

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 21905
Gender: male

Re: Time to overhaul political donations
Reply #169 - Jan 20^th, 2016 at 10:51am

mariacostel wrote on Jan 20^th, 2016 at 10:13am:

Bam wrote on Jan 20^th, 2016 at 9:43am:

mariacostel wrote on Jan 18^th, 2016 at 3:39pm:

I keep telling you the problems with the idea and being the dim-witted souls that you are, you just march on regardless with nary a thought for the practical problems.

Yes, you do. A lot.

What you never seem to do though is put forth your own ideas for discussion. If you claim there are practical problems, the onus is on you to make alternative suggestions.

Is this your tacit admission that there is no solution to the problems I identified? YOU put up the idea and I found the problems. How about at least admitting they exist and either proposing solutions or dumping the idea.

It is not a tacit admission of anything. I'm simply calling you out for offering nothing constructive yourself. I have proposed solutions. Where are your proposals? Or are you going to admit that you have none?

Back to top

You are not entitled to your opinion. You are only entitled to hold opinions that you can defend through sound, reasoned argument.

IP Logged

Dnarever

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 61265
Here
Gender: male

Re: Time to overhaul political donations
Reply #170 - Jan 20^th, 2016 at 10:52am

mariacostel wrote on Jan 18^th, 2016 at 3:39pm:

I keep telling you the problems with the idea and being the dim-witted souls that you are, you just march on regardless with nary a thought for the practical problems.

That is why no one in authority ever asks your opinions on anything.

On this topic you have made around 44 posts and I can not see one where you have pointed out a significant problem with this.

You have made 11 abusive posts, 2 nonsensical, 10 untrue, 2 rants and 2 on the topic but nothing showing a significant issue with banning all political donations.

Back to top

IP Logged

John Smith

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 78311
Gender: male

Re: Time to overhaul political donations
Reply #171 - Jan 20^th, 2016 at 10:53am

Dnarever wrote on Jan 20^th, 2016 at 10:44am:

"disclosure" isnt about telling you everything you need to know.

Full disclosure is meant to be - otherwise it is pointless, incomplete disclosure only means leaving loop holes that can be abused.

disclosure
dɪsˈkləʊʒə/
noun
noun: disclosure

the action of making new or secret information known.
"a judge ordered the disclosure of the government documents"
synonyms: revelation, surprising fact, divulgence, declaration, announcement, news, report; More
exposé, leak;
admission, confession
"she was acutely embarrassed by this unexpected disclosure"
publishing, broadcasting;
revelation, revealing, making known, communication, divulging, divulgence;
release, uncovering, unveiling, exposure;
leakage;
discovery;
raredivulgation
"the unauthorized disclosure of official information"
antonyms: concealment
a fact, especially a secret, that is made known.

by creating these 3rd party organisations to both give and receive donations, they are attempting to keep secret information secret. There is no need for them other than to hide the truth. According to Maria attempting to hide the truth is 'disclosure' Grin

Back to top

Our esteemed leader:
I hope that bitch who was running their brothels for them gets raped with a cactus.

IP Logged

John Smith

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 78311
Gender: male

Re: Time to overhaul political donations
Reply #172 - Jan 20^th, 2016 at 10:54am

Dnarever wrote on Jan 20^th, 2016 at 10:52am:

mariacostel wrote on Jan 18^th, 2016 at 3:39pm:

I keep telling you the problems with the idea and being the dim-witted souls that you are, you just march on regardless with nary a thought for the practical problems.

That is why no one in authority ever asks your opinions on anything.

On this topic you have made around 44 posts and I can not see one where you have pointed out a significant problem with this.

You have made 11 abusive posts, 2 nonsensical, 10 untrue, 2 rants and 2 on the topic but nothing showing a significant issue with banning all political donations.

he did query how would newcomers get funding .....

Back to top

Our esteemed leader:
I hope that bitch who was running their brothels for them gets raped with a cactus.

IP Logged

Dnarever

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 61265
Here
Gender: male

Re: Time to overhaul political donations
Reply #173 - Jan 20^th, 2016 at 10:59am

John Smith wrote on Jan 20^th, 2016 at 10:54am:

Dnarever wrote on Jan 20^th, 2016 at 10:52am:

mariacostel wrote on Jan 18^th, 2016 at 3:39pm:

I keep telling you the problems with the idea and being the dim-witted souls that you are, you just march on regardless with nary a thought for the practical problems.

That is why no one in authority ever asks your opinions on anything.

On this topic you have made around 44 posts and I can not see one where you have pointed out a significant problem with this.

You have made 11 abusive posts, 2 nonsensical, 10 untrue, 2 rants and 2 on the topic but nothing showing a significant issue with banning all political donations.

he did query how would newcomers get funding .....

Yes but the answer of the same as all current players is too obvious to consider it a problem.

Back to top

IP Logged

mariacostel

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 7344
Sydney
Gender: female

Re: Time to overhaul political donations
Reply #174 - Jan 20^th, 2016 at 11:00am

Dnarever wrote on Jan 20^th, 2016 at 10:44am:

mariacostel wrote on Jan 20^th, 2016 at 10:25am:

John Smith wrote on Jan 20^th, 2016 at 10:22am:

mariacostel wrote on Jan 20^th, 2016 at 10:20am:

. The laws covering disclosure are also fine as they stand.

bullsh1t .... work around are way to easy ... if it wasn't on all the front pages, who would even know what the 'North Sydney Forum' is apart from those that have been a party to it?

"disclosure" isnt about telling you everything you need to know. It lists WHO. If you are even remotely interested, you can find out the rest of the details yourself. Surely that is obvious.

"disclosure" isnt about telling you everything you need to know.

Full disclosure is meant to be - otherwise it is pointless, incomplete disclosure only means leaving loop holes that can be abused.

Full disclosure gives you the name and address of the donor. If you need more than that then you don't deserve the information. What else do you need? You complain endlessly about metadata (fairly too) and then on the same principle, you demand the exact opposite.

Back to top

IP Logged

Dnarever

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 61265
Here
Gender: male

Re: Time to overhaul political donations
Reply #175 - Jan 20^th, 2016 at 11:04am

mariacostel wrote on Jan 20^th, 2016 at 11:00am:

Dnarever wrote on Jan 20^th, 2016 at 10:44am:

mariacostel wrote on Jan 20^th, 2016 at 10:25am:

John Smith wrote on Jan 20^th, 2016 at 10:22am:

mariacostel wrote on Jan 20^th, 2016 at 10:20am:

. The laws covering disclosure are also fine as they stand.

bullsh1t .... work around are way to easy ... if it wasn't on all the front pages, who would even know what the 'North Sydney Forum' is apart from those that have been a party to it?

"disclosure" isnt about telling you everything you need to know. It lists WHO. If you are even remotely interested, you can find out the rest of the details yourself. Surely that is obvious.

"disclosure" isnt about telling you everything you need to know.

Full disclosure is meant to be - otherwise it is pointless, incomplete disclosure only means leaving loop holes that can be abused.

Full disclosure gives you the name and address of the donor. If you need more than that then you don't deserve the information. What else do you need? You complain endlessly about metadata (fairly too) and then on the same principle, you demand the exact opposite.

You made the claim that it wasn't giving you all you need to know, now you infer that the name and address is all you need to know.

If you are saying that the disclosure is giving you all you need to know than I am happy with it. If you stand by your first statement I would suggest a call to Huston.

Back to top

IP Logged

mariacostel

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 7344
Sydney
Gender: female

Re: Time to overhaul political donations
Reply #176 - Jan 20^th, 2016 at 2:13pm

Dnarever wrote on Jan 20^th, 2016 at 10:44am:

mariacostel wrote on Jan 20^th, 2016 at 10:25am:

John Smith wrote on Jan 20^th, 2016 at 10:22am:

mariacostel wrote on Jan 20^th, 2016 at 10:20am:

. The laws covering disclosure are also fine as they stand.

bullsh1t .... work around are way to easy ... if it wasn't on all the front pages, who would even know what the 'North Sydney Forum' is apart from those that have been a party to it?

"disclosure" isnt about telling you everything you need to know. It lists WHO. If you are even remotely interested, you can find out the rest of the details yourself. Surely that is obvious.

"disclosure" isnt about telling you everything you need to know.

Full disclosure is meant to be - otherwise it is pointless, incomplete disclosure only means leaving loop holes that can be abused.

Okay, I'll bite. What does 'full disclosure' mean to you in the context of a political donation? We already know their name and address and who the money went to. What the hell else do you need?

Back to top

IP Logged

mariacostel

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 7344
Sydney
Gender: female

Re: Time to overhaul political donations
Reply #177 - Jan 20^th, 2016 at 2:15pm

Dnarever wrote on Jan 20^th, 2016 at 11:04am:

mariacostel wrote on Jan 20^th, 2016 at 11:00am:

Dnarever wrote on Jan 20^th, 2016 at 10:44am:

mariacostel wrote on Jan 20^th, 2016 at 10:25am:

John Smith wrote on Jan 20^th, 2016 at 10:22am:

mariacostel wrote on Jan 20^th, 2016 at 10:20am:

. The laws covering disclosure are also fine as they stand.

bullsh1t .... work around are way to easy ... if it wasn't on all the front pages, who would even know what the 'North Sydney Forum' is apart from those that have been a party to it?

"disclosure" isnt about telling you everything you need to know. It lists WHO. If you are even remotely interested, you can find out the rest of the details yourself. Surely that is obvious.

"disclosure" isnt about telling you everything you need to know.

Full disclosure is meant to be - otherwise it is pointless, incomplete disclosure only means leaving loop holes that can be abused.

Full disclosure gives you the name and address of the donor. If you need more than that then you don't deserve the information. What else do you need? You complain endlessly about metadata (fairly too) and then on the same principle, you demand the exact opposite.

You made the claim that it wasn't giving you all you need to know, now you infer that the name and address is all you need to know.

If you are saying that the disclosure is giving you all you need to know than I am happy with it. If you stand by your first statement I would suggest a call to Huston.

You must have picked up a case of pedantry from peccahead. What was mean was rather obviously that 'disclosure' isnt about giving you all the details you think you might want or have a right to know. It is about given name and address and who it went to. If you want more information than that then you will have to search for it - like everyone else.

Back to top

IP Logged

Sir Grappler Truth Teller OAM Gold Member Online Australian Politics Posts: 89887 Proud Old White Australian Man Gender:	Re: Time to overhaul political donations Reply #178 - Jan 20^th, 2016 at 2:33pm chews popcorn - considers cold beer and member's draw tonight.... I wanna see some claret flow here
Back to top	“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.” ― John Adams IP Logged

Dnarever

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 61265
Here
Gender: male

Re: Time to overhaul political donations
Reply #179 - Jan 20^th, 2016 at 2:36pm

mariacostel wrote on Jan 20^th, 2016 at 2:15pm:

Dnarever wrote on Jan 20^th, 2016 at 11:04am:

mariacostel wrote on Jan 20^th, 2016 at 11:00am:

Dnarever wrote on Jan 20^th, 2016 at 10:44am:

mariacostel wrote on Jan 20^th, 2016 at 10:25am:

John Smith wrote on Jan 20^th, 2016 at 10:22am:

mariacostel wrote on Jan 20^th, 2016 at 10:20am:

. The laws covering disclosure are also fine as they stand.

bullsh1t .... work around are way to easy ... if it wasn't on all the front pages, who would even know what the 'North Sydney Forum' is apart from those that have been a party to it?

"disclosure" isnt about telling you everything you need to know. It lists WHO. If you are even remotely interested, you can find out the rest of the details yourself. Surely that is obvious.

"disclosure" isnt about telling you everything you need to know.

Full disclosure is meant to be - otherwise it is pointless, incomplete disclosure only means leaving loop holes that can be abused.

Full disclosure gives you the name and address of the donor. If you need more than that then you don't deserve the information. What else do you need? You complain endlessly about metadata (fairly too) and then on the same principle, you demand the exact opposite.

You made the claim that it wasn't giving you all you need to know, now you infer that the name and address is all you need to know.

If you are saying that the disclosure is giving you all you need to know than I am happy with it. If you stand by your first statement I would suggest a call to Huston.

You must have picked up a case of pedantry from peccahead. What was mean was rather obviously that 'disclosure' isnt about giving you all the details you think you might want or have a right to know. It is about given name and address and who it went to. If you want more information than that then you will have to search for it - like everyone else.

You made the original statement that disclosure does not tell you what you need to know. Considering the dominant conservative position of covering up the required knowledge it is hardly pedantry to take your statement at face value.

I believed that you would try to support the position that you originally stated. I would not have been surprised had you meant what you had said.

Back to top

IP Logged