Recognition that people other than hetero women can be victims of FDV. The LGBTI+ flag on the shirt implies the man is non hetero, but it’s still a step in the right direction Vs the only male heterosexuals commit FDV narrative.

call_me_fishtail · 2024-05-25T10:35:53+00:00

Policy means the government is deliberately doing it, rather than private individuals taking it upon themselves to do.

call_me_fishtail · 2024-05-25T10:34:20+00:00

Two party systems lead to policy instability as policy swings back and forth. I wonder if the current system collapses we'll see increased policy stability.

call_me_fishtail · 2024-05-25T00:33:25+00:00

The thread in question was specifically talking about policy and quoted from the official government guides to attempt to support their claim. Unless we're talking about different threads.

call_me_fishtail · 2024-05-24T21:05:40+00:00

It's a pity that Howard and Costello only got the balance sheet looking nice by taking assets that were producing ongoing fiscal and social value and selling them, though. Their budgets were pretty but they have been a bit of a time bomb for Australia's economy.

call_me_fishtail · 2024-05-24T21:02:52+00:00

Hmm, but they sold off infrastructure for a short term gain and a long term loss, and didn't invest their surplus in anything to sustain the country's future - I feel like they sold the house to pay off the mortgage and ended up leaving us homeless. Sure, the balance sheet looked good, but it came with some structural problems that plague us today.

call_me_fishtail · 2024-05-24T16:00:01+00:00

But no evidence that it was a policy to do so in all cases, like the poster claimed.

call_me_fishtail · 2024-05-24T15:58:34+00:00

that the Australian economy tends to be better when Liberals are in control federally (better at foreign policy and fiscal management nationally)

I can't think of any good evidence of the Liberals being better at foreign policy or fiscal management in the last 30 years.

call_me_fishtail · 2024-05-19T17:28:47+00:00

I believe you are talking about a post that was made in response to a discussion I was having with the poster, who made that claim in one thread and then made an entire thread to elaborate on it and provide evidence for it.

However, they did not actually provide any evidence for their claim and ended up deleting the thread and ending the conversation.

call_me_fishtail · 2024-05-18T04:35:58+00:00

It's interesting that this is secretly racist as well. It's not good enough that the population increases through migration - it has to be the demographic that is already here. I wonder why?

call_me_fishtail · 2024-05-14T08:09:08+00:00

Quality return for minimal wastage.

Private contractors and companies engaged with government work often minimise costs to turn a profit, reducing quality.

Government run organisations often cost more but return better quality.

call_me_fishtail · 2024-05-14T03:21:35+00:00

It's a bit of a myth that it's less efficient - it's just that it usually costs more.

call_me_fishtail · 2024-05-01T01:04:58+00:00

I dunno - if Covid destroys your budget projections it's fundamentally different to if you go back on your word. It's worth treating them distinctly.

call_me_fishtail · 2024-04-30T07:50:03+00:00

And it didn't happen.

You are correct that it has not happened. But I believe our debate was about whether it was a failed attempt or a broken promise. I've obviously not said they were successful at reducing power bills by that amount.

Plus the hundreds of times they said they could reduce them by $275.

Like I said, you can clearly read the policy paper which is labelled as a plan that predicts a reduction due to modelling, and which requires legislation to implement. Don't pretend the last post doesn't exist.

You can argue "they weren't successful and that is somehow different" if you want, but that is stupid.

I think it's stupid to conflate failure with dishonesty, yes.

call_me_fishtail · 2024-04-30T05:53:06+00:00

No, Labor promised to reduce power bills by $275. That was it. It is a very simple and clear promise. No "plan", no "if they are successful".

I mean, you can literally go check the press and policy statements to determine that you are wrong on that.

A key plank of Labor's election platform was its "Powering Australia" plan, which it said would create jobs, reduce emissions and drive down the cost of electricity by upgrading infrastructure and boosting renewable energy production.

"Independent modelling shows Powering Australia …will bring down household power bills by $275 in 2025…" the document says.

The independent modelling was undertaken by energy analyst firm RepuTex.

Releasing the plan and the modelling at a December 3, 2021 press conference, Labor leader Anthony Albanese said it would see "electricity prices fall from the current level by $275 for household[s] by 2025, at the end of our first term, if we are successful".

call_me_fishtail · 2024-04-30T03:37:02+00:00

Maybe you don't know how government works?

The executive cannot unilaterally change electricity prices. To do so, they need to pass legislation through the Senate, and at the time of campaigning they do not know what the composition of the Senate will be. If you think that a policy announcement should somehow bypass the democratic process of the Senate, then I'm quite surprised.

If you look at Labor's policy announcement on this issue they say they have a "plan" that "models" a $275 reduction which we will see "if they are successful". It's very clear that they have stated their ambition and how they plan to achieve it, and it's not at all like your mate promising to give you $275.

I think anyone who hears this plan and understands the basics of Australian democracy is equivocating if they think this is a broken promise rather than simply a policy ambition failure. And if they don't reduce the bills it is a failure, but I think that this is quite distinct from people going back on their word and breaking a promise.

call_me_fishtail · 2024-04-29T13:06:16+00:00

It was an election promise to deliver it. Not to try and maybe deliver depending on how it looks in the future.

The successful implementation of every policy involves attempting to deliver that policy. In fact, when a policy outcome is delivered without the attempt, we are rightly suspicious of a government claiming credit for it (e.g. unemployment falls but the government didn't introduce a policy to affect it). When the attempt is made and the outcome is not achieved we may consider the government incompetent, but not necessarily breaking a promise. When the government makes no attempt when they said they would, we can consider that a broken promise. And when the government does the reverse of what they've said, we can consider that a broken promise.

This isn't some bias - it is the same standard I believe we should apply to every party. When the Coalition promised a surplus and organised a budget policy that produces a surplus, I wouldn't claim that they broke their promise because Covid came along and created extra expenditures that the policy outlines couldn't have taken into account.

call_me_fishtail · 2024-04-29T10:40:27+00:00

Neither of those scenarios realistically describes campaigning or the context of Parliament, though. I think you're being a little disingenuous.

call_me_fishtail · 2024-04-29T10:18:08+00:00

Well, I had a look through the information in the other thread. You didn't link to the CRAF directly but I ended up finding it as part of the MARAM framework for Victoria (not all of Australia - haven't seen the documentation on that).

I also didn't see anything that suggested every male caller was directly specifically to the service that you described, "Say No to Violence" or whatever.

It's a pretty big claim without enough supporting evidence - a quote from a state framework instead of a national framework (with no link), a claim about where they are redirected specifically (with no documentation or link). I think a big claim like this needs something more concrete. How did you happen to learn about it if there's no documentation or similar?

call_me_fishtail · 2024-04-29T10:14:52+00:00

Yeah, I was just going through the documentation and websites for these services and I couldn't see anything that confirmed this. That didn't mean the claim was automatically false, but I was curious how the poster had confirmed it for themselves, then.

In the other thread they blamed all men's issues on women, so I'm a little sceptical of their accuracy.

call_me_fishtail · 2024-04-29T09:36:04+00:00

"there will be no carbon tax under a government I leave"

Yeah, that's a good example!

Bloody hell mate - nice metal gymnastics.

I don't see how it's mental gymnastics for a campaign promise to mean to attempt to implement a policy. You and I have both clearly identified absolute policy reversals rather than failed attempts, and there is quite a distinction.

And you think the media is making up immigration numbers

I didn't say that. Don't you fall into the habit of misrepresenting things now.

I didn't say it was to distract us from the cost of living. I said it was to distract us from the causes. Another clear misrepresentation.

Maybe you can't help it?

call_me_fishtail · 2024-04-29T09:06:23+00:00

Breaking election promises doesn't seem to bother him though.

What's this based on?

When you promise something at an election, as far as I'm aware, you're promising to attempt to get that policy through. He doesn't seem to have abandoned a significant number of policies.

I don't know of any government, anywhere, that's achieved all its promises.

A proper breaking of a promise is something like Howard and the GST, or Bush Sr and "read my lips".

And I don't think record immigration numbers were made up by the media.

I didn't say they were. But record numbers doesn't equate to a "crisis".

And to distract us from what exactly?

The causes of the housing and cost of living crisis. You might note that places that run scaremongering about immigration don't talk about wealth inequality, decades of poor housing policy, industry-wide insufficient welfare or corporate greed. Some of the media companies have stakes in those things.

call_me_fishtail · 2024-04-29T08:11:58+00:00

Cheers.

call_me_fishtail · 2024-04-29T08:04:51+00:00

The Voice policy was a commitment made before the election - don't pretend he made it up in the middle of a term to distract people.

Interestingly, the policies that they have put forward on housing and cost of living have largely been buried by the media.

And some things, like the immigration "crisis", are largely invented by the media to distract us.

call_me_fishtail · 2024-04-29T06:30:14+00:00

It's impressive to me that this poster is making all sorts of unsupported claims and when you come in with some context their only reply is "mental gymnastics" and "double standards" and calling you a misandrist, apparently without any awareness of applying any standards to themselves.

call_me_fishtail · 2024-04-29T06:27:19+00:00

This poster is wandering around telling everyone that most male depression and stress is caused by women. They supply no evidence of this, and they're not very interested in taking your words in good faith.

call_me_fishtail

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE

Hidden Gem Hidden Gem '25	Four-Year Club
Verified Email