Jerry_Atrick

Yes, this is true; most notably the public housing fund being one of them. However, when you delived into the detail of the proposal, it should have been sunk as it is never going to realise its aims. Of course, something is better than nothing. However, this is all part and parcel of the political process in Australia and has been for a long time. It has been rare in modern political times that a political party has held the majority in both chambers to ease through the regulatoy agenda. Whilst I am sure there have been previous governments that have rammed through legislation at the last minute, I can't recall the same magnitude - but accept that may come down to reporting. The reality is Albo has made himself an easy target for the press to get eyeballs and they are taking advantage of it. A lot of the laws are perfunctory and procedural such as tidying up wording or replacing the "Queen" with the Mornarch or some such term. However, there are a couple that warrant a full and fair debate as well as adequate consultation before passing; the laws of unintended consequences may prevail in these situations. For example (although I admit, I have yet to read ther changes yet): The ban on social media for under 16s can cause as much metnal health issues as it solves. For example, it could isolate kids that are in more rural areas; it could push them to the dark web, which should be banned for everyone, but will be where they see a lot worse than on Facebook or Youtube, or even X; it could drive them to porn, etc. Not well thought out laws can cause more probloems than they solve. The changes to immigration laws dealing with refugees, at least by this report, would probably even make SFM cringe: https://www.theage.com.au/politics/federal/trump-would-love-these-terrifying-laws-why-are-we-passing-them-without-proper-debate-20241128-p5ku9e.html. Surely the minimum guarantee of deportation to a safe country should be thought of. Would we want to send people to likely mistreatment of their death? Also telling is what he didn't want to put through - such as the establishment of a federal environmental protection agency with teeth, and an independent environmental data collection agency to allow better decision making on more data. I think he has unwittingly set himself up a showdown with Plibersek and this seemed to have at least cross-bench if not cross party support, as well as was well consulted according to reports.

Let's play the ball and not the man.. With all due respect, Nev proffers up an opinion based on reported facts. Because he doesn't blindly accept what he reads and points out why, based on other reported facts which are omitted from the general news on this provides a fuller picture.. this is a positive IMHO.

Seriously, it isn't me who is getting worked up over this.. we can all express feelings.. but let's have a convo about things because life isn't black and white.. You can still disapprove..

Again.. this is just a beat up.. place of birth? I don't recall ever putting hospital down. Usually it's Melbourne. Occasionally Footscray, never Footscray hospital. Seriously, why whip oneself into a frenzy? Life is too short to be angry over nothing

To quote you: That is false. The government does not have the legal authority to deny the right. If they denied the right, they would be overulling the law and is that ones definition of good government? In a country like Australia, it would waste taxpayers' money as such an overulling would go to the High Court and be promptly thown out. The claim is the Victorian government are bad because they are not yielding to public pressure - not that the mother is bad and should not have a baby and quie frankly it is biased and not based on fact.

There is clearly some nefarious context to that one

This is a legal process and the government is right not to interfere without requisite legal process. Otherwise you're down the slippery slope of populist dictators . [Edit]The only non sensational media coverage I found was here: https://www.abc.net.au/listen/programs/melbourne-mornings/prisoner-released-for-ivf-has-health-rights/104657608 Admittedly not any real depth It is not correct to say the outcries were overruled by the government; they don't have the legal authority to do so.

Well you could argue his bellicose ways are already having a positive impact for Americans. Of course it isn't anything concrete yet but Europe is looking to take the view if you can't beat em, join em Buy American to avoid Trump trade war, says Christine Lagarde - https://on.ft.com/4fKSvb3 via @FT Lagarde asks how does it make America great again if world GDP falls. Who in the US cares.. as long as US GDP increases

Wheel of fortune

Hmm a ppl can be earned in 40 with 20 solo.. Nit sure there is merit in 100 hrs learning to drive.. it doesn't knock the testosterone out of young male drivers for example

I don't inherently disagree with this. Trump is not one for diplomacy nor one for worrying about wider impacts. In his last term, depending on where one stands he did do some good things. For example most European/NATO nations are now either spending ir have a plan implemented to spend 2% of GDP on defence and that was before Putin's invasion of Ukraine. He managed to start the ball rolling on normalising relations between Arab states and Israel - and that is no mean feat. I am not sure of his wisdom of pulling out of the Iran deal.. have to do more research, but it's fair to say Iran appears to have been a nefarious actor while the US was in the deal. Looking at the Trumpometre, some of his policies would accord well with most here, albeit not successful, or a cynic may say, never intended. The lobbying bans, controlling immigration, health saving account, free access to the drug market, 550bn infra fund (spund a little like the inflation reduction act), no cuts to social security, no cuts to medicaid, expand mental health programs, guaranteed 6 weeks holiday, expand economy by 4% a year, etc; I could go on I also think the idea of DOGE is a good one.. in terms of improving efficiency.. not sure I agree with the proposed execution of the idea. Of course in his previous term some was blocked by a Congress and then senate that was held by the opposition, some was probably never intended, and some was probably incompetence.. sounds like any other government to me He is transactional and a bully. He will get some good things done, but will it outweigh the bad and the things he breaks on the way?

Jee, you guys would hate it over here.. dogs rule, but most are well behaved.. Pubs, some restaurants, camping: many allow dogs and they are more often better behaved than humans I intend to bring my cocker to Aus.. but he may be more yappy about being prohibited from the pub

Jee, Chad Gilchrist has aged :-)

David Letterman

Hah! Look at the blowouts of the previous 13 years before Labor got in. $5bn of a 734bn total spend is peanuts Short memories

So do I.. but how many do? My point is most people only use handbrakes when parking or in a manual, for a hill start. For the latter, an electronic hand brake is better anyway.. for the former, there's no real difference.

I think for everyday users, they are fine. How many people drive a manual these days and how many times does one apply the handbrake while the car is in motion?

That's my point about Albo - he can read the back room of politics, but can't read the front room of the electorate. Yes, the MSM are largely biased against the ALP, but his timing and handling of the Voice exemplified his poor decision making on appealing to the public

Bush telegraph

I'm here, but not there (as in on the TV show).. I guess I am not that photogenic.

That was my initial thought, too... but this: made me thing there was more to it than my initial thought.

I may have misinterpreted the post but are you saying the way a girl acts or dresses in some way gives a reason (not justification) for them to be assaulted or murdered?

Whilst there are remnants of the class system, notably the royals and the Duke of Westminster, and a few that still retain a sear in the house of Lords, it is largely defunct. Though I do understand, the royals and the Duke of Westminster are exempt from inheritance tax

Potato chips