Bruce Tuncks

"i like clive" was for a popular presenter who was NOT clive palmer.

I'm hoping forlornly that there will be less of this following a big "NO" vote.

I was driving home a few years ago and coming towards me, on the wrong side of the road, was a negro woman driving a car. I wondered how she got her license but i was told that it would be racist to fail her. So of course she passed.

Was it david McCallum who played the young blonde russian sidekick in some show once?

As regards India, though, they clearly got the worst of english bureaucracy and Indian mysticism. Who made them select the worst aspects of each? I wish I knew. There was an Australian glider pilot who was being transferred for a year to India. He looked up and started correspondence to fly at the nearest gliding club there. After a year, he gave up with a binder chock full of correspondence but no permission. He wrote the story up for our local gliding magazine.

Well I do like your arguments OME, but I'm voting "no", so as not to encourage the woke lot. I fear that they are going to start asking for "reparations" and other stuff, and I reckon that losing the vote should give them second thoughts. I do wish that the "no " vote would not upset some good abo people though, but I reckon it will.

In about the 1952 "power farming mag, there was a story about the italian who had bought a " ten ton " chainsaw. On the first day, he worked 8 hours but only cut 2 tons. On the second day, he worked 12 hours and only cut 3 tons. On day 3, he took the chainsaw back and the salesman had a look at it....on pulling the starter cord, it roared to life and the italian jumped back.... " what thata bloody noise?

The reason c of e is good is that nobody there goes to church anyway. I was told by a priest that c of e stands for "christmas n easter" when anglicans might go to church. He also told me that there was a genetic trait towards short arms. This, combined with deep pockets, limited the church's collections. Catholics, now, had to go every Sunday or else a pair of nuns would conspicuously visit, ostensibly to ask if you were sick, but the whole town knew you were being told off for non-attendance. Gosh this was so long age that the nuns wore habits.

Well I have a theory that facthunter is really a 14 y/o girl who is impersonating a grumpy old pilot.

There was a 90 y/o pommy woman who always bought a bottle of sherry at the local, once a week. When the local changed hands , the old girl was asked for "proof she was over 18". She had no photo id, not having a driver's license and she had never had a passport either. The new young girl refused to sell to her and she was backed up by the manager. I don't think this could happen in Aust, well I hope it couldn't. Woke rubbish gone insane, thinks I.( I personally have a driver's license and an expired passport, but I have never had to use them for proof of age, well I hope not.)

Some years ago, I complained that wet n dry fine sanding paper had stickers on that you could not peel off , and that I had to go elsewhere to buy it. All to no avail, the manager clearly knew a troublemaker when he saw one.

OME, in the book " the fatal shore" it gives the youngest convict as a young boy and the oldest an 80 y/o woman. I prefer nev's interpretation. SA funded the colony with the income from land sales, what happened to this money elsewhere? I bet they gave nothing to the abos, and I bet they didn't sell it too cheaply. McDowell Stuart found the way to Darwin in order to get rich enough to be a landowner ( he only got to be an alcoholic in reality.) He also got scurvy from knowing nothing about nutrition, despite being good with horses. He was quite a good surveyor in real life.

I don't know my credit rating and I don't care, but jerry's idea that you should be told ( without charge ) if you ask is obviously right.... do they do this in Australia?

Some of us are just wannabe lesbians.

There was an example of a bank losing in SA about 20 years ago. They had foreclosed on a farm and were selling it to the highest bidder. Unfortunately for the bank, all the bidders were mates of the foreclosed farmer, who got to buy it back real cheap. Ever try and buy a farm? They lend you very little of the valuation, quite unlike a city house.

Well Space, I have to agree that a "reverse mortgage sure would need a guarantee that taking one out would never result in your eviction. Anyway, there is a neighbor around here who is not ( in my opinion ) a good farmer, but he NEVER borrows money. He knows that borrowing is the only way you can lose the farm. In tough times, he just becomes more self-sufficient and grows more of his own food.

Nope spacy, I reckon you should pay to have the job done. IF you have a beneficiary who wants the job, that's great. If you need to mortgage the place. so be it. Just take out enough for mortgage payments too.

I reckon onetrack had it right... Many years ago, the housing trust was there to provide cheap housing to workers. Then the government started to get too cheap to continue this, ( we had a Liberal premier called John Olsen who sold off housing trust houses by the street at 3,000 dollars each. he did this for strange right-wing political reasons, and I reckoned at the time that the Labor party should have promised to retake them back for the same price when they were next in power. In the event, the Labor party did nothing of the kind, and they gave John Olsen a plumb job or 2 as an honored elder statesman ). Anyway, I had 2 good mates, one a weapons researcher scientist, who lived in housing trust houses. I personally bought a house for 3,600 dollars before they hit $3000. Well of course there became a big shortage, and the Govt responded, not by resuming houses, but by making some applicants more "needy " than others. After years of this, you needed to be a single parent on parole with a drug problem to get housed. People lived in fear of their neighbors. I reckon we need to return to cheap houses for workers, only this time with rules in place to stop right-wing crazies in temporary power from selling them off cheaply. I would take back the house and give no recompense for pain and suffering, interest etc.

The worst ingredient in junk food is sugar. It is the one thing that those who know have been advocating for years to have it taxed more. Will the voice add to or subtract from this clamor to tax sugar a lot more?

Let's take white fella grog... yes it does a lot of harm, and I reckon it does more harm than with whites for 2 big reasons: firstly, whites have had the stuff much longer and so they are not as susceptible to it as blacks are and, secondly, the aboriginal culture thing about sharing means that it is more available than it should be. Personally, I would use a "basics card" to pay welfare and have it not available for grog. I didn't know about the Macarthur river, is that the new mine SE of Darwin? As for junk food, the worst of it should not be available on a basics card just as for grog. I bet these reforms would be fought against by the voice lot.

My maternal grandmother was very intolerant of Italians, I remember her saying that she would be good n dead before one got to be prime minister. But I personally like Albanese, and I think Grandma was silly. Now, returning to the Bible, if they are using the word "day " then they have used a bloody awfully confusing "translation" if they actually meant " a long but unknown period of time". If you can do this, you can do anything as your words can be made to suit anything you choose. But how do they weasel out of the "firmament stuff... do I need to be careful in my Jabiru or not? The thing is pretty solid if it is going to "separate the waters above from the waters below", and it is below freezing level for the same reason.

Back to the topic, about the voice referendum.... I reckon we should apply whitefellow rules to things which only exist because of whitefellow work. Their culture should restrict itself to blackfellow things if they wish to use blackfellow rules, like sharing everything. The sharing idea, applied to whitefellow things, makes nonsense of the whole thing. ( I have tried unsuccessfully to think of an example of a blackfellow thing ) The Nepotism thing sums it up quite well... nepotism is seen as a cultural imperative by blacks, and as a crime by whites. Now you can't have both at once. The job should go to the best candidate, regardless of his kinship or the color of his ( or her ) skin.. SO, despite the bad company here on the NO side of the fence, I am intending to vote that way.

I could never figure out why the bubbles were so much smaller in bottle fermented wine.But they sure are... actually I choose not to afford this stuff.

Quite right old K....what do you think will happen in the referendum? Personally, I think the "no" vote has been under-estimated. I don't think I would publicly admit to voting "no", not if it might cost me a job or something like that. When filling out forms, I used to tick the " C of E" box for religion, as I had a suspicion that this would keep me out of trouble the best.

Yep Nev, the crown seal would be fine and you could use it for sparkling wines too. One day we might see it.... apparently, 30 years ago, the "champagne closure" which consists of an elaborate cork, plus a wire cage, plus the metal covers, plus any other plastic, added up to over 50 cents a bottle, so we are paying 1 to 3 dollars for the fun of the closure, which technically could be replaced by a 2 cent crown seal. I personally would like to pay less and have the crown seal. Many years ago, such a closure was found on "barossa pearl" a downmarket sparkling wine which I liked. Maybe if I drank more it would still be on the market...