You mean Hilary's party?...

Apparently Socawho know fuck all about American Political History

I just don't think you can just look at these things with an Option A vs Option B mentality, especially when the dollar amounts are so small as a proportion of total government spending.

I don't think we should be playing off funding in one sector versus another.

Yep - fair call there!

See the trouble with "culture" is it's hard to pin down a monetary value

If all anyone thinks about is a ROI in $ terms then we may as well abolish all art from the world
So many people these days think only of "if we do this, do we get $?" where not everything in life can be boiled down as simply.

Interestingly, there have been many studies lately around the world and in melbourne for example to pin down an economic $ value for things like a live music scene as a whole and the figures are certainly worthy of attention

Also, nobody is advocating not spending on health and education to fund orchestras ;)

I'm not sure what you're talking about. Punishment is strongly empathetic, because it a) dissuades crime b) protects people by segregating them from society and c) enforces justice - if one maketh another suffer unjustly they too shall be liable to suffer to the same degree. It's all very biblical, eye for an eye and all that..

Under the greens policy they have a rather dim view of humanity, that all bad behaviour can be explained away and that people are like robots in that they can be reprogrammed and conditioned into being good law abiding citizens.

Exactly
It's so silly to say would you rather save a man from dying or buy a painting
It's very rarely an either or situation aha and if it is, your life is strange and amazing

Unfortunately though, Government spending does come down to option A versus B because resources are finite, and each interest group has its advocates out there making their case. Of course recreation and culture should always be funded, but in response to BethFC’s question, I place much more importance on science funding because its overall benefit is greater.

Agreed, hence my statement that unfortunately such a value is set by society.

The same society that would believe in things like "Stop the Boats".

-PB

Yeah I didn't meant to disagree with you as such because frankly I would personally fund science research above the arts if forced to choose at gun point aha partly because art will always happen whether the people doing it are in their home dying of consumption or not!!

Either way, that really isn't the choice as I'm sure if we scratch a little deeper into government spending we could find a few bucks to chuck at cultural pursuits.

For sure.
Again, I was more just rambling than actually trying to contradict you in any way aha
I find it hard to be dispassionate sometimes about some fields
Probably stems again from the fact that I sit in an office with dead eyes while my brain writes songs that I'm always too tired to do anything with aha

https://www.reachtel.com.au/blog/7-news-grey-poll-9june16

Huge.

Let's face it,

Gay Marriage would've happen by now if it wasn't for Western Sydney Marginals

Ken oath lol.

-PB

Yup, can see NXT stealing a fair few seats this election.

-PB

30 minutes into Q&A every question (bar one by a 15 year old girl) is heavily biased to the right would be nice to have some variety.

Edited by Roar_Brisbane: 13/6/2016 10:10:18 PM

Cocks whinging about the cost of housing in Sydney.

Fuckwits.

You want to live there you pay the price.

"What are you going to do about the costs Bill?"

"Dunno Dave, dismantle capitalism? Is that what you want me to say?"

Bill was exposed on the housing affordability question. He's not going to make housing more affordable, just less less affordable. :lol:

He can't and any pollie saying they can is a liar.

When you move to London or Hong Kong or New York you expect to pay top dollar.

That's the free market and that's how it works.

But that's what he's saying. He's pitching himself as the champion of first home buyers but admitting under his policy housing won't become any more affordable. In fact it un-affordability will continue to rise, just at a slower rate.

Or the small business lady, "Yea but my small business turns over more than 2 Million dollars why aren't you giving me more assistance?" ](*,)

Or some drongo "The banks are one of the pillars of our society, why are you so mean to them?" ](*,)

The only thing to make housing more affordable is getting rid of the home owners grant.

Not only that if he scraps negative gearing for every house other than new homes every existing investor that owns a house will see the prices of those houses plummet.

Good for some I suppose. Fucked for a whole bunch of others.

Yes and no. The fact of the matter is when 100 000 + immigrants are lobbing into Sydney year in, year out prices will rise and continue to rise ad infinitum. That's demand outstripping supply and economics 101.

Sorry Tony, I didn't mean to interrupt your question with an answer! :-"

What's that?

I bought my first house last year and got nothing. Does it only apply to new homes or something?

https://firsthomeowners.initiatives.qld.gov.au/

Muslims actually holding western society together, a beautiful sight

[youtube]55sjaEDJ65k[/youtube]

Thanks :)

That's why I got nothing.