Marty_d

The original title was a joke, if you look at the first post you'll see. In reality the sort of idiots who support Clive Palmer might be closet Trump supporters.

I agree in general with what you're saying. If the stats show that the murder rate is going down, especially in the area in question (domestic & family violence), then that's a good thing and should be published as a caveat in news stories about D&FV. As far as "are you happy to have it claimed to the World that you are a homicidal, controlling sex maniac? ", I don't think anyone thinks that the mere fact of your gender means that, just as the existence of female prostitutes doesn't make one assume that every woman will have sex for money. Not sure why you emphasised heterosexual there either, as the recent double murder in Sydney proved, this is not a phenomenon unique to hetero males.

Ah, one of those sentences, usually followed by a "but" - where the statement following the comma completely reverses the first part of the sentence. Some other examples are: "I'm not a racist, but..." "No offence, but..." "With all due respect, ..." "I've got nothing against <insert ethnic/cultural/sexual group here>, but..."

Arse trumpet perhaps, but he was that long before Trump was a politician.

What, Donny's going to have his way with him then pay him to keep quiet about it?

Good, common sense prevails. I know it's not a big deal in and of itself, but more a symptom of attempts to de-liberalise our democracy. We REALLY don't want to go the way of the USA in this regard.

Not trying to be rude here Peter... but check out their butts.

Landlords don't pay utilities. Usually.

They've all got very good leg muscles.

4

Not very hard, but it has poTENtial...

It almost jumps out and bites you.

I like that in this case, the publisher has put a free PDF copy of the book online for whoever wants to download it. If the intention behind the ban is to limit readership of the book, they've kicked an own goal.

It's pretty simple, really. If you go to a library and see a book you don't want to read, don't read it. By the way, his use of the word "sexualised" is way out of context for this book. All it does is present some facts which may be uncomfortable for conservative religious parents, but which in this country are legal. Two men or two women can raise a child just as well as any other family. Pretty sure the councillor wouldn't have a problem with a book about being raised by a mummy and a daddy, isn't that equally "sexualised"?

Don't know if anyone's been following this in the news, but a local council in NSW passed a motion to ban the library from keeping a copy of a kid's book. https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.abc.net.au/article/103836256 Interested what people think about this. My opinion will come as no surprise, if religious conservatives want to ban a book because it describes how some families have 2 mummies or 2 daddies, then I think it's only fair to remove another book that promotes incest, killing children, slavery and lots of other horrors - the bible. Seriously - that entire council should be sacked for anti democratic behaviour, exceeding their remit and stupidity. Arguments in support of the council?

Haha, I got the right answer for the wrong reason. I thought it was the number of vertical lines multiplied by the number of horizontal ones.

Bloke goes to an Asian massage parlour for a massage. Very attractive young lady is massaging him. When he rolls over for her to do his front, she notices the large tent in his towel. Giggling, she says "You want happy ending?" Bloke thinks... why not! "Yes please", he says. She smiles and leaves the room. He's a bit confused, but waits for her to come back. 5 minutes later she reappears and says... "You finish yet?"

I have an inkling that economics is a hard area to make predictions in, because they can become self fulfilling. So in your example above - yes, on an individual basis it may make sense to pay off your debts, stock up with tinned goods & ammo and hunker down. However if there's broad movement in the population to stop spending on all the stuff we spend on, then that money doesn't go around the economy from my pocket to say the sparky, from his pocket to the coffee shop, from the coffee shop employee to JB Hifi etc... My preferred fix would be a slightly more socialist slant to our democracy/capitalist system. Using methods such as @nomadpete's idea of a transaction tax to shift more of the burden of taxation from the poor to the wealthy. Better and more targeted taxation of large companies and what I would class as "obscene" private wealth (what individual needs more than say 20 million dollars?) Smarter spending of defense budgets so we're not just equipping for the last war but for how future ones will be fought. A change of focus in housing stock from being an investment to being owner occupied. There are vast stocks of wealth locked up in things that don't cause economic activity - people sitting on empty houses to make a killing when the capital value increases, tucked away in trust funds, etc. There must be ways to disincentivise this. A clever country shouldn't have to have cost of living crises (or homeless people, or people who have to choose between eating or heating).

Well done Peter. I missed it!

I'm happy with Gmail. The spam is pretty much non existent. Plus easy to search up old emails, all the folder stuff etc.

Interesting, might be different school to school. My 15yo son (grade 10) is often saying an assignment must be hand written.

4

Name

3. One of each.

31 December.