Albo to the rescue

[nomadpete]

There will always be ways around any proposed legislation, no matter how well intentioned.

 

Maybe we could hand the control of social media over to Artificial Intelligence. It could detect the intention behind everything that any individual writes. Then censure, block or prosecute the perpretator.

 

I don't trust the government to protect me.

 

Problem solved!

 

 

 

Edited Monday at 10:56 PM by nomadpete

[red750]

Every government, no matter what flavour, blames the previous government for what is wrong, for the life of their tenure. And when in opposition, they try to block everything the government tries to do. That's why they are called "The Opposition".

[nomadpete]

20 minutes ago, red750 said:

Every government, no matter what flavour, blames the previous government for what is wrong, for the life of their tenure. And when in opposition, they try to block everything the government tries to do. That's why they are called "The Opposition".

Is that called progress?

 

Or an endless subroutine loop.

 

 

Edited Monday at 11:30 PM by nomadpete
Not happy,Jan

[facthunter]

Abbott actually  "sabotaged " the Governments actions. and Dutton is not much different. In  these contests FACTS don't count. . That's far from ideal. Without the IPA  and the MSM they wouldn't know what to do.. Money tells them what to do. Nev

[red750]

Nev, you seem to know it all. Why don't you run for parliament and save us all?

 

[red750]

30 minutes ago, nomadpete said:

Is that called progress?

An endless subroutine loop.

[onetrack]

The problems associated with scammers, crooks, con-artists, online bullying, and all internet crimes, could easily be solved by ensuring that anonymity cannot be part of your online presence.

The crims, bullies and scammers enjoy the anonymity of the internet, as it provides them with cover they can use, to avoid recriminations and penalties.

[Marty_d]

1 hour ago, onetrack said:

The problems associated with scammers, crooks, con-artists, online bullying, and all internet crimes, could easily be solved by ensuring that anonymity cannot be part of your online presence.

The crims, bullies and scammers enjoy the anonymity of the internet, as it provides them with cover they can use, to avoid recriminations and penalties.

The downside of that is that many people living under oppressive/authoritarian regimes depend on anonymity just to get news of the outside world or organise to bring about change.

[spacesailor]

But !.

We're in Australia,  we cannot prosecute the 3rd world crooks, & ' their ' governments welcome the revenue. 

Like our government,  likes the motorist's revenue .

spacesailor

[willedoo]

On the social media age restriction bill, Nationals MP Keith Pitt has made a good point. The bill doesn't kick in until 2026 so his point is why can't they allow a few more weeks for MP's to scrutinise the bill properly instead of rushing it through. My best guess is Albo and Co. know they're in trouble electorally and are trying to push as many bills as they can in this last week so they've got bragging points for the election campaign. It wouldn't surprise me if they are going for an early election, if so this is the last sitting of parliament before the election.

 

Here's a cut and paste of Pitt's comments to the press:

 

   " If you can’t actually fine anyone for not taking action [until 2026], then what difference will it make to take a few weeks to look at this in detail – this is one of the rare occasions I agree with my colleagues in the Senate where this is something that should be looked at more …

    My job as a backbencher is to make sure that people are doing this right. It’s not simply to trundle along and agree with everything that’s put before me."

 

His main argument was that teenagers will be able to work around the ban – along with wanting more time to scrutinise the legislation.

[willedoo]

I think a lot of the government's problems go back to the Voice. I think they should have left it to later rather than jumping in so early in the term and expending a lot of early term energy on it for no gain. It was a high stakes, all or nothing political gamble and the defeat left them with egg on their face. After that they went into shock and have just bumbled along since until this latest 11th. hour traffic jam to rush through a lot of ill-prepared legislation in the hope of having some election ammunition. If they hadn't had the Voice and it's failure they could have concentrated on a lot of other legislation earlier in the term and had more time to present a better case for the Voice. It's not that they're an inherently bad government but they just haven't been able to win the politics since day one. Unfortunately that's how our system is these days. Voters don't take much notice of all the small stuff governments do all the time. It's the big politics and the 24 hour news cycle that makes or breaks a government in the eyes of the punters.

[Jerry_Atrick]

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

[onetrack]

Now the right wing media are making a huge noise about Chalmers budget blowout - $5B more than estimated.

The RW media know this is a big stick to beat Labor with - "Labor can't manage the countrys finances! - only the Libs can!"

[old man emu]

2 hours ago, willedoo said:

Voters don't take much notice of all the small stuff governments do all the time.

With a pro-Conservative media, little of the good, or even OK, stuff that the Government does gets reported. I think one of the good things Labor has done is to fix our relations with China that the Conservatives ruined by their lap dog pandering to the USA. At least now our Government cans say to China that we don't like something they are doing, while at the same time having good trade, cultural and educational relationships. If only the Government would have the guts to tell the USA that their policies aren't the best for promoting peaceful coexistence.  

[Jerry_Atrick]

Hah! Look at the blowouts of the previous 13 years before Labor got in.

 

$5bn  of a 734bn total spend is peanuts

 

Short memories 

[Marty_d]

Yeah I found myself in the very uncomfortable position of agreeing with both Keith Pitt and Matt Canavan on something, usually you can rely on the truth being the opposite of whatever they're saying.

[facthunter]

Not two people I'd rely on for good judgement.  By the was, the Voice referendum was an election Promise.   Never gong anywhere once the Nats Immediately opposed it, followed by Dutton. (aided by the Media). 40% DID vote for it despite all that.  Nev

[spacesailor]

I opposed the partition of our parliamentary system .

spacesailor

[willedoo]

Pitt and Co. have a point about rushed legislation and inadequate time for scrutiny of the bill. A senate inquiry into the bill was set up last Thursday with public submissions closing Monday. Hardly good government if we rush legislation through where the public and MPs don't have time to be properly informed. Some bills have good intent but the devil is always in the detail which needs to be scrutinised and sometimes amended to make it a fair and effective piece of legislation. In that short time the senate inquiry got 15,000 submissions but I think the bulk of them were generic Musk enabled submissions.

[red750]

The bill to ban social media access to those under 16 has passed the Lower House 102 to 13.

 

PS: Watch the news tonight. an explosive outburst by Sen Payman accusing Pauline Hanson of racism.

 

 

 

[onetrack]

The big problem with a lot of legislation is that they use a sledgehammer to crack a walnut. I don't believe a blanket ban is practical, is needed, nor will the legislation have the intended effect.

What IS needed is intensive parenting and education of slovenly parents to ensure that children only watch and see things on social media that are positive or at least neutral for them.

Easy access to hard core and deeply perverted porn is one thing that needs to be addressed for under-16's - too many youngsters are getting their sex education from this crap, and thinking that treating women simply as walking holes on two legs is normal.

[nomadpete]

12 minutes ago, onetrack said:

What IS needed is intensive parenting and education of slovenly parents to ensure that children only watch and see things on social media that are positive or at least neutral for them

I would ony add that setting personal boundaries and resistance to peer pressure is absent from most families. This aggravates all flavors of bullying not just the current acceptance of giving all kids open slather to everything a smartphone offers.

 

Culture cannot be legislated.

 

 

 

Edited 5 hours ago by nomadpete

[red750]

Unfortunately, kids get access to devices at an early age.Mum and Dad update  to a newer model, and pass the old one down so they can keep in touch with the kids while they are at school or on the way to and from. This allows the kids to explore the net while unsupervised, even when they are in their room. It's something we as older parents never had to deal with.  Kids often know more about using these devices than their parents do. This makes policing their use extremely difficult.