spiffmeister

joined 2 years ago
[–] [email protected] 4 points 8 months ago (5 children)

“And our government is not going to wait around while members of the Greens political party call for more housing in the media while opposing it in their electorates and voting against it in the parliament,”

I already said Labor would like credit for the $2B.

Nonetheless, the Greens say they will now “wave through” such terrible legislation.

So on one hand the Greens should get out of the way and pass Labor's policies on housing, but also they shouldn't pass this because it's not good enough. I recall the help to buy scheme at least was assessed by the Australia Institute to make literally no difference because of the scale.

vote for the greens is a vote for the liberals

Ok champ.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 8 months ago (7 children)

They can go fuck themselves to be honest, I cannot believe in a housing crisis the greens are the ones holding up housing of all people...

I worry that a lot of people will feel the same.

Do you think if the greens just waved through the haff as-is, we would have gotten $2B extra for public housing? This funding only came after the Greens blocked the haff with extra funding a demand (though I know Labor take all the credit for it).

This is how independents and minor parties work, they can't pass their own bills so they have to negotiate by holding government bills up.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Nah, certainly not. I think Albanese's biggest failure, so far, was not having the next part of this parliaments story ready to go as soon as the referendum was over.

The fact that Labor hasn't been constantly screeching about having to clean up 10 years of the LNPs mess is a good indication they have no idea how to run a campaign anyway.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 9 months ago

Honestly, reducing the teaching + publish-or-perish + the constant need to apply for grants would go a long way towards fixing the review process. Academics have to spend a lot of time doing a lot of non-academic work that peer reviewing properly sometimes gets pushed down the list of priorities.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 9 months ago

Never let a crisis go to waste eh.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

The Australia Institute also has a new youtube video on this bill.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago (2 children)

You're right the bill does not do that. The point I'm making is that the way in which you remove money from politics is important, not just the removal of it. If the bill essentially removed the ability for any other group to run other than the two major parties then it's not a good bill.

Do you think that donations are the only way of biasing a party or candidate? How many have gone to work for consultants afterwards?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago (5 children)

Would it be a good bill if donations were banned but only the two major parties get public funding?

[–] [email protected] 11 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I think the YouTuber Professor Dave just did some videos about her encouraging science denialism. The podcast Decoding the Gurus has also done an episode on her with similar commentary, "good science communicator but also encourages denialism" is the tldr.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 9 months ago

/j on swimming. Realistically you can get away with any skills, though I always liked pistols since you can scope/laser sight the standard pistol and run around headshotting everything.

GEP gunning everything is also hilarious.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago (2 children)

The secret is to level the swimming skill exclusively.

view more: ‹ prev next ›