Sir Grappler Truth Teller OAM wrote on Aug 6
th, 2022 at 2:35pm:
Ah - so not agreeing with you is 'non-thinking' - how drearily 1984 of you.
Not at all, I was commending you for actually taking the time to think, as in trying to understand the situation. (though my doubts about the
quality of your thinking remain, which is a different thing).
Quote:'no more harm than good' - ergo - no good will come of it and the potential harm has not been considered, as usual - we should spend $500m to alter the constitution to set in concrete discrimination and a shadow government.
er...repeat and and rinse .....the voice is not a shadow governement.
Quote: It's good to see you 'thinking' - but you are way off beam.
Ok, let's see what you've got:
Quote:WTF does wanting a pregnancy test have to do with REAL discrimination? Does sexual dysfunction go on the Medicare - do countless other things? You can buy a preggers test at the chemist's...
Ok, I'll call a truce on the women thing: I suppose abo women face many of the same issues, by the
mere fact of being women. But I won't call a truce on 'personal responsibility' being the end of individual well-being.
So let's see if you learned anything from my lesson on macroeconmics (which you claimed has 'phark all' consequence), and how it affects individuals.
Quote:If that's all women have to worry about - they have no problems..... and do you know what? As for 'concentrated in the lower paid and often caring occupations' - just WTF do you imagine are the best jobs in most country areas? Workin' at the hospital, on the council, in retail, in real estate - where women are by far the vast majority and men can scarcely get a look in.
I will address this because you are now considering
macreconomic effects on the lives of individuals.
Yes, no doubt women are the better bread winners in many country areas where farming can be a marginal occupation (in droughts, poor markets etc). But overall, women are still paid less than men.
Quote:What on earth are you basing your argument on about 'poor, poor women' this time? the simple reality is that there is a national wage case and negotiated wage increases from time to time as well... and in each category of work NOBODY can be legally reduced in income below the specified amount per hour worked....
And it's widely recognized the caring occupations, mainly female, are underpaid - despite, or because of, national wage cases determined by neoliberal ideologues.
Quote:Find something better to work on.. some REAL issue for women these days..... with the preferential schooling, the never-ending scholarships at uni, the preference for placement in courses, the shoe-horning into areas they are little interested in, their majority presence in courses while still being treated as a 'minority' (???), the gifts of 'governor' jobs and high public servant positions based on affirmative action over the years and some weird concept of restoring some historical imbalance long dead...
Apart from the issue of caring jobs being poorly paid, at the other end of the wage scale women surely don't get a free ride; recall the fate of Oz Post's CEO, merely because she awarded a watch to someone; a truly disgraceful pile-on by politicians scoring a cheap point.
Quote:What IS your problem with men being restored to a genuine equal opportunity and genuine affirmative action going to clear cases of genuine need as opposed to giving certain demographics endless AA for life?
My problem is with the vicious neoliberal job market which pits individuals - and men and women fighting for better wages - against one-another while the CEOs of the big end of town laugh all the way to the bank.
Quote: they've had it since 1982 - that's forty years now, sonny - older than you, it seems... when do you think AA should be abolished in favour of genuine equal opportunity on genuine merit and performance?
...continuing with your
inadequate 'personal responsibility' ideology. A functional system engenders satisfactory participation by all, in the nation's economic life.
Quote:Now - WHAT are the REAL issues for women these days, pray tell?
Low superannuation accounts on retiring, due to absences from the workforce for child bearing and rearing. And lower rates of home ownership on retirement.
https://www.domain.com.au/news/women-have-lower-rates-of-home-ownership-in-austr...Women have lower rates of home ownership in Australia than men: research Quote:Best you stick to the Lord of The Flies in your 'thinking' - "Kill the Boomers - Drink Their Blood!"
Like I said, i'm happy to drop the woman thing (a complication and diversion from the topic) , in order to get you back on track, ie, facing, dealing with, and 'closing the gap'.