Australian Politics Forum - An Australian republic

Its time Gold Member Offline Boot libs out Posts: 25639 Gender:	Re: An Australian republic Reply #30 - Jan 26^th, 2016 at 9:40am bogarde73 wrote on Jan 26^th, 2016 at 9:37am: What cultural values do we instil in our kids when we force every passing fad or cause of the permanently disillusioned Left down their throats? You cant answer it can you ?
Back to top	IP Logged

skippy.

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 20882
Gender: male

Re: An Australian republic
Reply #31 - Jan 26^th, 2016 at 9:40am

BigOl64 wrote on Jan 26^th, 2016 at 9:35am:

skippy. wrote on Jan 26^th, 2016 at 9:24am:

BigOl64 wrote on Jan 26^th, 2016 at 9:14am:

skippy. wrote on Jan 26^th, 2016 at 9:01am:

What is wrong with a county " feeling good" about itself as a reason for change?

If you just want to feel good, buy a friggen puppy, it will cost the rest of us nothing.

Where there is no benefit for the rest of us who have to pay for all of this wankery, then it is not up to us to justify the status quo.

Look no-one gives a a sh1t about this any-more, time to move on.

What costs? The head of state would live where the GG lives.No cost. Plus we wouldn't have to foot the bill every time a pommy Royal comes here to bludge off us.
The costs would be minimal at best. At least come up with valid opposition. Arguments like changing the coins are pointless given we do that every time a monarch carks It anyway.

Just buy a puppy and let the rest of us be naturally happy with out the cost of this wankery.

Change for the sake of change is always fraught with folly.

Define and explain the benefit of change, conduct a cost analysis, BEFORE, demanding we change the entire structure of our system of government.

Making you feel good about yourself, isn't a benefit worthy of change.

I see you only have rhetoric and no argument, I accept your surrender.

Back to top

freedivers other forum- POLITICAL ANIMAL
Click onWWW below

IP Logged

BigOl64

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 14438
Townsville QLD
Gender: male

Re: An Australian republic
Reply #32 - Jan 26^th, 2016 at 9:48am

skippy. wrote on Jan 26^th, 2016 at 9:40am:

I see you only have rhetoric and no argument, I accept your surrender.

You haven't presented anything to argue against and if your knowledge of this subject is as extensive as you knowledge of the union jack, then I won't be expecting much of one either.

I don't need to present an argument for the status quo, you however, need to present a valid argument for change. Start with what are the benefits and what are the costs for those benefits.

It's ok, I asked the ARM the same question back in the day, they had nothing either. Their major problem is not being able to tell the difference between what is a benefit to the country and what was a feature of a republic.

My argument is and always will be if there is no solid benefit for change then this is no need for change.

(Read and comprehend before replying and looking stupid)

Back to top

IP Logged

skippy.

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 20882
Gender: male

Re: An Australian republic
Reply #33 - Jan 26^th, 2016 at 9:51am

BigOl64 wrote on Jan 26^th, 2016 at 9:28am:

skippy. wrote on Jan 26^th, 2016 at 9:19am:

Why do we have the flag of another country in the corner of ours that didn't want us anyway? They kicked us out and sent us here to perish.
Besides, the white fellas that founded this country were not just English, the Scots and the Irish in particular were among them and they hated England and what that Union Jack stood for. Scotland and Ireland don't have a Union Jack on their flags they are obviously more grown up than us.

Jeez, skip, you should have wiki'd that flag before you posted this rant.

The union jack (United Kingdom) is made up of three flags.

Cross of St Andrew (Scotland)
Cross of St Patrick (Ireland)
Cross of St George (England)

10 minutes is all it takes.

When you read my post for the first time you will note I said the Scot flag nor the Irish flag carry the Union Jack. You should wiki it. Grin

while the Union Jack is supposed to be a mix of those other flags it is nothing like them, the Irish flag is green white and orange blocks and the Scots flag is more like the southern cross without the stars more than anything else. Which brings me to a more appropriate flag for this country. The southern cross was a flag used by Irish, Scots and even English rebels against the system that sent them or their forbears here as convicts, it also included other nationalities and would be a good starting point to consider for a new flag.

Back to top

freedivers other forum- POLITICAL ANIMAL
Click onWWW below

IP Logged

greggerypeccary Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 150850 Gender:	Re: An Australian republic Reply #34 - Jan 26^th, 2016 at 9:52am BigOl64 wrote on Jan 26^th, 2016 at 9:48am: My argument is and always will be if there is no solid benefit for change ... Who determined that it should be measured by "solid benefit"? I mean, that's merely your subjective opinion; it hardly constitutes an argument.
Back to top	GOP = Guardians Of Paedophiles IP Logged

bogarde73

Gold Member

Offline

Anti-Global & Contra Mundum

Posts: 18443
Gender: male

Re: An Australian republic
Reply #35 - Jan 26^th, 2016 at 9:52am

Its time wrote on Jan 26^th, 2016 at 9:40am:

bogarde73 wrote on Jan 26^th, 2016 at 9:37am:

What cultural values do we instil in our kids when we force every passing fad or cause of the permanently disillusioned Left down their throats?

You cant answer it can you ?

My question or yours.
I'll answer mine. False cultural values that erode their humanity and give them no basis for success or happiness in life.

PS why can't you use your real identity instead of one nobody knows?

Back to top

Know the enemies of a civil society by their public behaviour, by their fraudulent claim to be liberal-progressive, by their propensity to lie and, above all, by their attachment to authoritarianism.

IP Logged

skippy.

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 20882
Gender: male

Re: An Australian republic
Reply #36 - Jan 26^th, 2016 at 9:56am

BigOl64 wrote on Jan 26^th, 2016 at 9:48am:

skippy. wrote on Jan 26^th, 2016 at 9:40am:

I see you only have rhetoric and no argument, I accept your surrender.

You haven't presented anything to argue against and if your knowledge of this subject is as extensive as you knowledge of the union jack, then I won't be expecting much of one either.

I don't need to present an argument for the status quo, you however, need to present a valid argument for change. Start with what are the benefits and what are the costs for those benefits.

It's ok, I asked the ARM the same question back in the day, they had nothing either. Their major problem is not being able to tell the difference between what is a benefit to the country and what was a feature of a republic.

My argument is and always will be if there is no solid benefit for change then this is no need for change.

(Read and comprehend before replying and looking stupid)

No need for me to look stupid you've done enough of that for both of us.
The fact you can't provide valid reasons not to let go of the apron strings of a country that never wanted the people it sent here in the first place is reason enough to understand you have no argument. Again, I accept your surrender . Cool

The funny thing is I'm not even a staunch republican and would not even vote for the last option put to us, imagine if you had to argue against someone with a passion for the subject? Grin

Back to top

freedivers other forum- POLITICAL ANIMAL
Click onWWW below

IP Logged

BigOl64

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 14438
Townsville QLD
Gender: male

Re: An Australian republic
Reply #37 - Jan 26^th, 2016 at 9:58am

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 26^th, 2016 at 9:52am:

BigOl64 wrote on Jan 26^th, 2016 at 9:48am:

My argument is and always will be if there is no solid benefit for change ...

Who determined that it should be measured by "solid benefit"?

I mean, that's merely your subjective opinion; it hardly constitutes an argument.

A solid benefit is one that not only I agree is worthwhile, but even yourself can recognise its worthiness; it can be measured, costed and found to be worthwhile to the country.

What hardly constitutes an argument is one that requires changing an entire system of government so a few socialists can feel good about themselves.

Back to top

IP Logged

greggerypeccary

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 150850
Gender: male

Re: An Australian republic
Reply #38 - Jan 26^th, 2016 at 10:01am

BigOl64 wrote on Jan 26^th, 2016 at 9:58am:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 26^th, 2016 at 9:52am:

BigOl64 wrote on Jan 26^th, 2016 at 9:48am:

My argument is and always will be if there is no solid benefit for change ...

Who determined that it should be measured by "solid benefit"?

I mean, that's merely your subjective opinion; it hardly constitutes an argument.

A solid benefit is one that not only I agree is worthwhile, but even yourself can recognise its worthiness; it can be measured, costed and found to be worthwhile to the country.

Yes, but who said that that was what a Republic has to be measured by? Nobody - just you.

You're basing your argument on a false (subjective) premise.

Back to top

GOP = Guardians Of Paedophiles

IP Logged

BigOl64

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 14438
Townsville QLD
Gender: male

Re: An Australian republic
Reply #39 - Jan 26^th, 2016 at 10:03am

skippy. wrote on Jan 26^th, 2016 at 9:51am:

BigOl64 wrote on Jan 26^th, 2016 at 9:28am:

skippy. wrote on Jan 26^th, 2016 at 9:19am:

Why do we have the flag of another country in the corner of ours that didn't want us anyway? They kicked us out and sent us here to perish.
Besides, the white fellas that founded this country were not just English, the Scots and the Irish in particular were among them and they hated England and what that Union Jack stood for. Scotland and Ireland don't have a Union Jack on their flags they are obviously more grown up than us.

Jeez, skip, you should have wiki'd that flag before you posted this rant.

The union jack (United Kingdom) is made up of three flags.

Cross of St Andrew (Scotland)
Cross of St Patrick (Ireland)
Cross of St George (England)

10 minutes is all it takes.

When you read my post for the first time you will note I said the Scot flag nor the Irish flag carry the Union Jack. You should wiki it. Grin

while the Union Jack is supposed to be a mix of those other flags it is nothing like them, the Irish flag is green white and orange blocks and the Scots flag is more like the southern cross without the stars more than anything else. Which brings me to a more appropriate flag for this country. The southern cross was a flag used by Irish, Scots and even English rebels against the system that sent them or their forbears here as convicts, it also included other nationalities and would be a good starting point to consider for a new flag.

They don't carry the union jack because they are the union jack you dolt. Good to see that you have recognised that the republic of ireland is not the same country as ireland and has a different flag.

Grin

Back to top

IP Logged

BigOl64

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 14438
Townsville QLD
Gender: male

Re: An Australian republic
Reply #40 - Jan 26^th, 2016 at 10:07am

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 26^th, 2016 at 10:01am:

BigOl64 wrote on Jan 26^th, 2016 at 9:58am:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 26^th, 2016 at 9:52am:

BigOl64 wrote on Jan 26^th, 2016 at 9:48am:

My argument is and always will be if there is no solid benefit for change ...

Who determined that it should be measured by "solid benefit"?

I mean, that's merely your subjective opinion; it hardly constitutes an argument.

A solid benefit is one that not only I agree is worthwhile, but even yourself can recognise its worthiness; it can be measured, costed and found to be worthwhile to the country.

Yes, but who said that that was what a Republic has to be measured by? Nobody - just you.

You're basing your argument on a false (subjective) premise.

I thought it would be a good idea that before changing ones entire system of government, it should have some sort of benefit for that country, yep I would be the only person who ever thought that was a smart move.

Carrying out an expensive pointless exercise for no valid reason, would be a bad idea, how silly of me.

Back to top

IP Logged

skippy.

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 20882
Gender: male

Re: An Australian republic
Reply #41 - Jan 26^th, 2016 at 10:07am

BigOl64 wrote on Jan 26^th, 2016 at 10:03am:

skippy. wrote on Jan 26^th, 2016 at 9:51am:

BigOl64 wrote on Jan 26^th, 2016 at 9:28am:

skippy. wrote on Jan 26^th, 2016 at 9:19am:

Why do we have the flag of another country in the corner of ours that didn't want us anyway? They kicked us out and sent us here to perish.
Besides, the white fellas that founded this country were not just English, the Scots and the Irish in particular were among them and they hated England and what that Union Jack stood for. Scotland and Ireland don't have a Union Jack on their flags they are obviously more grown up than us.

Jeez, skip, you should have wiki'd that flag before you posted this rant.

The union jack (United Kingdom) is made up of three flags.

Cross of St Andrew (Scotland)
Cross of St Patrick (Ireland)
Cross of St George (England)

10 minutes is all it takes.

When you read my post for the first time you will note I said the Scot flag nor the Irish flag carry the Union Jack. You should wiki it. Grin

while the Union Jack is supposed to be a mix of those other flags it is nothing like them, the Irish flag is green white and orange blocks and the Scots flag is more like the southern cross without the stars more than anything else. Which brings me to a more appropriate flag for this country. The southern cross was a flag used by Irish, Scots and even English rebels against the system that sent them or their forbears here as convicts, it also included other nationalities and would be a good starting point to consider for a new flag.

They don't carry the union jack because they are the union jack you dolt. Good to see that you have recognised that the republic of ireland is not the same country as ireland and has a different flag.

Grin

Thanks for the mindless abuse, I expect that from the mindless that can not forge an argument.
Get back to me when you come up with a valid reason to keep the status quo, though I won't hold my breath you have never proven yourself to much of a thinker.

Back to top

freedivers other forum- POLITICAL ANIMAL
Click onWWW below

IP Logged

greggerypeccary

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 150850
Gender: male

Re: An Australian republic
Reply #42 - Jan 26^th, 2016 at 10:10am

BigOl64 wrote on Jan 26^th, 2016 at 10:07am:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 26^th, 2016 at 10:01am:

BigOl64 wrote on Jan 26^th, 2016 at 9:58am:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 26^th, 2016 at 9:52am:

BigOl64 wrote on Jan 26^th, 2016 at 9:48am:

My argument is and always will be if there is no solid benefit for change ...

Who determined that it should be measured by "solid benefit"?

I mean, that's merely your subjective opinion; it hardly constitutes an argument.

A solid benefit is one that not only I agree is worthwhile, but even yourself can recognise its worthiness; it can be measured, costed and found to be worthwhile to the country.

Yes, but who said that that was what a Republic has to be measured by? Nobody - just you.

You're basing your argument on a false (subjective) premise.

I thought it would be a good idea that before changing ones entire system of government, it should have some sort of benefit for that country, yep I would be the only person who ever thought that was a smart move.

Carrying out an expensive pointless exercise for no valid reason, would be a bad idea, how silly of me.

The point is, your premise is merely a subjective opinion.

Yes, it may be shared by others but it isn't a universally accepted "truth".

By manufacturing your own premise, you've ensured that your argument is valid.

It doesn't work that way.

Back to top

GOP = Guardians Of Paedophiles

IP Logged

Dnarever

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 61322
Here
Gender: male

Re: An Australian republic
Reply #43 - Jan 26^th, 2016 at 10:11am

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 26^th, 2016 at 9:52am:

BigOl64 wrote on Jan 26^th, 2016 at 9:48am:

My argument is and always will be if there is no solid benefit for change ...

Who determined that it should be measured by "solid benefit"?

I mean, that's merely your subjective opinion; it hardly constitutes an argument.

People don't tend to just do things for no reason ?

Back to top

IP Logged

greggerypeccary

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 150850
Gender: male

Re: An Australian republic
Reply #44 - Jan 26^th, 2016 at 10:14am

Dnarever wrote on Jan 26^th, 2016 at 10:11am:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 26^th, 2016 at 9:52am:

BigOl64 wrote on Jan 26^th, 2016 at 9:48am:

My argument is and always will be if there is no solid benefit for change ...

Who determined that it should be measured by "solid benefit"?

I mean, that's merely your subjective opinion; it hardly constitutes an argument.

People don't tend to just do things for no reason ?

Agreed.

But who determines what constitutes a "valid reason"?

Back to top

GOP = Guardians Of Paedophiles

IP Logged

Poll
Question: Do you support a republic
Yes 13 (36.1%) No 14 (38.9%) Yes, but with conditions 9 (25.0%) No because the coins cost too much to change 0 (0.0%) Total votes: 36 « Created by: skippy. on: Jan 26^th, 2016 at 9:06am »