User Comments

snorks October 23, 2020

Trump has a good point in that Biden already has decades in politics, why couldn't he do the stuff he wanted to get done?

As for Obamacare, he's saying it's bad but they're making thd best of it. 

The rest of it is a real hot mess. 

snorks October 21, 2020

@david s He hasn't started a war, and it looks like he has made some progress in the Middle East. 

Only a few percent have swung the other way, and with the large margins of error in the polls he's not out of it. 
His promises to bring the middle classes back mean a lot to them (whether he follows through or not). 

snorks October 21, 2020

@guest2 I don't think it's the groups of people that are the issue. 

snorks October 20, 2020

@michael nominees for the Nobel peace prize not generally known for starting wars. 

snorks October 19, 2020

@guest2 The economy was doing pretty well except for the last 6 months. 

I think the civil unrest is why Trump is losing in the polls, but only because people are afraid they would get shouted at if they said otherwise. What they actually think might be different. 

snorks October 19, 2020

I think Trump's going to win, there will be support from the middle classes coming out to push him over the top in the states he needs. 

Biden is certainly uninspiring as an opponent.

snorks October 19, 2020

@laura__palmer Careful, your privilege is showing.

Why don't you ask people from Mexico and Cuba?

snorks October 19, 2020

@laura__palmer the people who live in poverty in Australia do pretty well in world terms. 

While obviously people would prefer to be at the rich end, people in poverty in other countries would like to be at poverty levels in Australia. 

snorks October 18, 2020

@guest2 Even compared to other developed countries Australia is in a pretty good position. 

Agree with you that $180K does not make a person rich though. 

$180,000 a year from investments means they have around $3,000,000 invested (very approximate obviously). Problem is there's no agreed upon definition of what 'rich' or 'wealthy' means. 

snorks October 18, 2020

@laura__palmer that's true, though it's the same at the other end of the scale too. 

snorks October 17, 2020

@cat being wealthy / rich is not a matter of income. It's a matter of assets. 

While there is of course a pretty strong correlation, they are by no means the same thing. 

As for your last comment, it's factually wrong and easily checked. 

snorks October 17, 2020

@rush that's a good one. 

snorks October 15, 2020

So, according to the other story, none of this was gaslighting and he was more or less in the right?

The only thing that was maybe gaslighting was when he quit half way through being fired, but he had already planned to do that anyway. 

Reality TV, not real..... shocking. 

snorks October 14, 2020

I didn't love the book, but might have to give the series a go, see how they've updated it. 

snorks October 14, 2020

There's a very interesting article on the Law Society Journal from 1st September about this. 

Apparently Scotland has the gold standard when it comes to coercive control laws. It's a bit early to see if they are working properly but it's a step in the right direction for sure. 

As an aside, WA now has a law to punish people for choking someone, whether there is consent or not. 
The idea behind it being that people who have been assaulted shouldn't need to prove that they didn't consent to being choked. 
Theoretically people who participate in BDSM could be charged under this law. As could I for doing Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu.  
That's unlikely, of course, but it does show the wording of Bills needs to be exact or you get unintended consequences (as in the case of not allowing rape victims to be identified even if they want to be). 

snorks October 14, 2020

cat And there's a bunch academics who say that it's not the same. 

I don't think you can say there hasn't been any positive outcomes. You can say we haven't had the outcomes we wanted. 
Why do you think we haven't looked deeply into the facts and scientific basis? 

snorks October 13, 2020

cat, not that reasonable. One is for the most part changeable, the other isn't. 

'because our beauty standards are inherently racist, sexist and exclusionary' - They aren't inherently racist, sexist and exclusionary. They change over time. Our current version of the ideal is only about 30 years old. 

'Body positivity isn’t about policing anyone’s body' - And yet, many of them do it.

snorks October 12, 2020

@laura__palmer As a general rule, facts don't care about political persuasion. There's a reason I don't generally talk political parties, it doesn't particular interest me. 

I'm not going to say that no government has ever said bad things about unemployed people, of course they have.
But to say it only comes from one side, or that political parties aren't trying to stimulate the economy and get people jobs, is just wrong. 

snorks October 12, 2020

At the very least she's guilty of a gross conflict of interest. 

Considering she came down on the right side of that conflict (by getting him to quit) I don't see she would need to resign over it.
If she knew about all his wrong-doings, then yes of course she should resign. 

snorks October 12, 2020

Cat, so we can say that about any group who's fringe members don't represent the whole group? The police in America for example?

00:00 / ???