Australian Current Affairs Thread (not a Politics Thread) lol

[mack]

46 minutes ago, Taurus said:

You mean the people who toil hard to put food on your table? 

Foreign seasonal workers?

[Legionista]

They stealing them j o b s. 

[Taurus]

8 hours ago, mack said:

Foreign seasonal workers?

The land owners, the sons & daughters of previous generations of Aussie farmers.

They barely have a glass of water to share amongst themselves & all I see if metropolitan based yuppies suggesting that we should ignore their plight.  

I hope you're proud of yourselves. 

[wendybr]

10 hours ago, Unlimited said:

Also one reason I don't really donate to those drought relief fundraisers

Why help people who shoot themselves in the foot?

When I've donated, admittedly before the last election, I thought of starving animals.

But it's ridiculous really...they're only there being kept alive to be slaughtered. 

[sonar]

When the people in the bush elect people to govt who end up selling sell their water to miners and vested interests in the cotton indusrty they can blame no-one but themselves.........

https://www.theland.com.au/story/5931279/water-war-mines-beat-farms-at-water-auction/

https://www.smh.com.au/environment/barbaric-adanis-giant-coal-mine-granted-unlimited-water-licence-for-60-years-20170404-gvd41y.html

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-07-07/adani-mine-water-is-too-important-to-farmers/8686890

https://www.sbs.com.au/news/the-feed/australian-mines-are-harming-farmers-and-there-s-nothing-they-can-do

https://www.greenleft.org.au/content/sustainable-australian-agriculture-under-corporate-attack-mining-banks-and-agribusinesses

.....and they keep electing politicians who sell them out and then cry poor when they run out.....!

 

[wendybr]

10 minutes ago, Taurus said:

The land owners, the sons & daughters of previous generations of Aussie farmers.

They barely have a glass of water to share amongst themselves & all I see if metropolitan based yuppies suggesting that we should ignore their plight.  

I hope you're proud of yourselves. 

Why do they vote in a government that laughs in the face of concern for the environmental devastation that we are now seeing in rural Australia, that has been predicted FOR DECADES by scientists?

How can they vote in people in a party led (formerly) by someone like Barnaby Joyce?

[wendybr]

I'm not unsympathetic...but they have put their political allegiances ahead of what they depend upon for success.. a healthy environment.

It beggars belief.

[sonar]

3 minutes ago, wendybr said:

Why do they vote in a government that laughs in the face of concern for the environmental devastation that we are now seeing in rural Australia, that has been predicted FOR DECADES by scientists?

How can they vote in people in a party led (formerly) by someone like Barnaby Joyce?

^^^^^^^^This^^^^^^^^^

It's the people who they elected that made the laws for water use. They keep electing them.......

[wendybr]

2 minutes ago, sonar said:

^^^^^^^^This^^^^^^^^^

It's the people who they elected that made the laws for water use. They keep electing them.......

Or they're the people who have turned a blind eye to water theft and corruption.

[sonar]

1 minute ago, wendybr said:

Or they're the people who have turned a blind eye to water theft and corruption.

Yep. I DO have sympathy for people on the land but you have to question why they make the political decisions they do. They are not voting for their best interests and that is where they lose me.

[wendybr]

Some of these people,  no doubt, support idiots like Alan Jones, who scorn "environmental flows" down the river systems.

FFS..."environmental flows" (read that in an Alan Jones voice dripping with derision and contempt for full effect) only means leaving some water flowing down a river!!

Rather than diverting it into channels to grow ******* cotton!! Often owned by foreign interests.

[wendybr]

Guess they (AJ and co) must be pleased these days.

Those ridiculous "environmental flows" (sneering voice required) hardly exist now.

[mack]

Farmers are already eligible for a variety of government programs. One of them is that anyone with a farm worth less than $5 million can apply to get a payment worth $14k a year, that they and their partners are eligible for. $600 a week from the Government just for being a farmer (on top of whatever profit the farm makes) is a pretty significant amount of relief already.

[Legionista]

They should get no assistance.

[wendybr]

7 minutes ago, mack said:

Farmers are already eligible for a variety of government programs. One of them is that anyone with a farm worth less than $5 million can apply to get a payment worth $14k a year, that they and their partners are eligible for. $600 a week from the Government just for being a farmer (on top of whatever profit the farm makes) is a pretty significant amount of relief already.

This is as a result of the drought is it Mack?

The drought relief package?

[StringerBellend]

56 minutes ago, wendybr said:

Why do they vote in a government that laughs in the face of concern for the environmental devastation that we are now seeing in rural Australia, that has been predicted FOR DECADES by scientists?

How can they vote in people in a party led (formerly) by someone like Barnaby Joyce?

I blame the left, by opposing climate change and creating an atmosphere of intolerance to those that don’t believe in science they have created a vacuum for brave edgy radicals to fill (for money)

 

is that how it works 

#bellendreport 

Edited October 1, 2019 by StringerBellend

[mack]

38 minutes ago, wendybr said:

This is as a result of the drought is it Mack?

The drought relief package?

It started in 2014 but isn't specifically linked to needed to be drought stricken.

[wendybr]

8 minutes ago, mack said:

It started in 2014 but isn't specifically linked to needed to be drought stricken.

So...just a general handout, eh?

Interesting.

Thanks Mack.

[Unlimited]

Others have already made the same point so I won’t reiterate too much but yes, if farmers out in rural areas are going to vote Nationals who don’t give a crap about climate change and are peddling idiotic water policies that don’t work and whose “special envoy to the drought” Barnaby Joyce wrote a report via text message, then I’m sorry but no

At least some of them had the sense to realise the Nationals are taking them for a ride and vote Shooters Fishers and Farmers, but that’s another issue...

[Legionista]

It rains more under Labor. 

#science

[ManfredSchaefer]

Gotta put my 2 cents in here because I'm seeing a lot of generalisations from a lot of people who have spent bugger all time in the bush or have zero understanding of the dynamics of rural & regional economics & politics.

First off, make no mistake...there are lots of ordinary, decent Australian farmers and their families out there who are hurting and hurting bad. Whether they run a property that has been in the family for several generations or are employees of a large national/multinational combine running a farm on their employer's behalf, this drought as well as other non-environmental factors have damaged their businesses & their lives. I would like to think that no matter one's political opinions we should all have some degree of empathy for those who might be struggling to put food on the table, keep their kids at school, wash the dishes etc. It doesn't matter whether you're a stud manager near Murrurundi or a wheat farmer near Cummins on the Eyre Peninsula or a feed lot worker near Young; if the bottom has fallen out of your lives because water is no longer there then we in the city have no right to afford them at least some kind of basic human sympathy.

Of course there is no doubt that many farmers are conservative and their political beliefs have meant that they have at least in part enabled the election of National Party & other right win groups. However as I know from my time living in New England (pre-Barnaby who, btw was at my uni just a year or so after I left) farmers are not the single definitive major influence in regional politics. It;s important to understand that these farmers that everyone talks generally about and hurl abuse at are not the majority in every electorate, in every region.For example, based on this info (http://www.agriculture.gov.au/abares/research-topics/aboutmyregion/nsw-new-england#employment) re employment stats in that region those employed in agriculture & forestry constitute 17% of that area's employees. Now those near 15K workers may not all be farmers. Some may be stock & station agents, agronomists, field hands, crop duster pilots etc. If you as many of those who have posted here seem to generalise, believe that farms and farmers are some monolithic single entity in the bush then you have zero clue.

Furthermore, when it comes to the demographics and political allegiances in the country, it might surprise many of you that it's often the business owners and those that live in town that are the big influencers and not necessarily the archetypal farmer most of you are talking about. Going back to those same ABARES figures, approximately 30K people or about a third of those employed in New England work in areas like construction, retail, transport, accommodation, food services etc. You'd be surprised how much economic, social & political power can be held by those who run and/or own the local abattoir, pub, supermarket, trucking company etc. I remember when I was living in Armidale the guy who ran the local business supplies shop was a big man politically. In Tamworth, around the time that Tony Windsor got the shitts with the Nats the big mover & shaker in town was the guy who ran and owned Treloars Department store. The cockie in the back paddock running his or her Santa Getrudis herd may have bugger all time to get into the politics that lead to the rise of dickheads like Joyce etc.

Oh, and before I forget about it, in my experience and from what I've seen there will always be a lot of conservative political clout exerted in the bush towns by those who see themselves as stalwarts of their township...the banker, the solicitor, the accountant, the council clerk etc. Do not be surprised that a huge reason why so many country seats have Nationals as their political reps because they have that kind of bush bourgeois background. Case in point...Joyce may have come from a farming family background but he started off as an accountant in Werris Creek (a town that used to be heavily engaged in railways, an industry that has died in the arse in recent years). 

Another huge influence on politics in the scrub, and a rejection of the myth that  only the farmers define who gets elected in the bush is the (at times) almost tribal commitment many regional Australians will have to a particular influential family. The classic case was the Anthonys. The most notable example of that family of pollies was Doug; he became Deputy PM as leader of the Country Party (the Nats forerunner) during Fraser's prime ministership. His dad was a prominent CP MP and his son Larry also went into federal politics, becoming the third Anthony to represent the seat of Richmond in Canberra.

So before people sound off about how farmers elect climate denying ratbags from the Nats etc, reflect on the real demographic and political nexus in the bush. I'm not denying that a lot, in fact probably the majority of farmers (i.e. those those own or work a property for agricultural use) are Nats voters. However that is not the definitive construct of how bush politics work. And bush electorates can return left leaning pollies...the first two state MPs that I knew who represented Armidale in the NSW Legislative Assembly were Labor.

Okay, that's tackled the misnomer propagated here by some that farmers are the only ones in the bush enabling ratbag pollies from the right who support climate change denialists. I'm not denying they may have a role, but they aren't the only ones and they are probably not the definitive sector of regional Australian voters.

So let's move on to who these farmers actually are, and what role they play in the degradation of their own environments.

Now if you want to pick a fight with, for example, the independent citrus grower who has been producing oranges in say the Renmark or Mildura area and has been relying on highly efficient drip feed irrigation systems then to be blunt they are the wrong people to target. The same goes for a smallholder running heritage breed pigs in the upper Hunter, or the fourth generation wheat farmer on the family property out near Horsham. The ones that need the blame shafted home are those multi-million agribusiness operations in two of the most water demanding farming operations, rice and cotton. Going back to old mate Barnaby Joyce, he spent a lot of time kicking around in the Queensland town of St George as a young man and later as a pollie, getting very chummy with those who run and/or own properties like Cubby Station. It's these huge agribusiness operations that are almost entirely antithetical to what many of you seem to think what a farmer is that bear so much responsibility for the shitty stuff going on in country & environmental politics.

Putting aside the excessive environmental demands and damage wrought by these concerns (and they're not just held by city slicker greenie hipsters but also the poor bastards on the land downstream on the Darling), these are also the true masters of sucking hard on the government assistance tit whilst manipulating bush politics. I'm not sure how many of you saw either of the two Four Corners reports in recent years on how the Nats and upstream agribusinesses have conspired to degrade the Darling whilst rorting government support, but those of you who have will know what I'm talking about. They can be seen here:

https://www.abc.net.au/4corners/pumped/8727826

https://www.abc.net.au/4corners/cash-splash/11289412

I could go on and on about how off beam many of these posts are, how farmers and their political influence have been so badly misrepresented or understood. I'm not as nearly as well informed as I would like to be on this issue and it's been a while since I spent time talking with people engaged with the coalface of local affairs in places like Deniliquin, Bourke, Glen Innes or Parkes. I understand & to some extent agree with the general antipathy held against those in the bush who seem to be creating a rod for their own backs by electing the arseholes who help run the rivers dry, who help leech dollars away from those who need it to those who don't, who scream there is no such thing as climate change then wonder why we are living through the most momentous and turbulent environmental challenges seen in at least the last two centuries if not longer. However before you go off on some stupid bloody rant about 'farmers don't deserve a red cent' take the time to learn more about who you are bitching about and also have a little bit of basic human decency FFS.

[sonar]

28 minutes ago, ManfredSchaefer said:

............ I understand & to some extent agree with the general antipathy held against those in the bush who seem to be creating a rod for their own backs by electing the arseholes who help run the rivers dry, who help leech dollars away from those who need it to those who don't, who scream there is no such thing as climate change then wonder why we are living through the most momentous and turbulent environmental challenges seen in at least the last two centuries if not longer.

Manfred...I actually agree with your post to a large extent but the selective quote above is the gist of the matter for me. It's the idiots who are making the laws,not just on water, climate change,land clearing and the enviorment but also the stupid and idiotic trade agreements the Nationals/Liberals and Labor sign up to that in some ways are forcing farmers to exploit a) the enviorment and b) the people who work for them, as they are forced to compete against countries that pay $5 ph. No one in Australia can live on earning $5 ph. Simple as that. The lawmakers they elect are the root of the problem yet they refuse to change and then cry foul when it starts going to shyte.

Just because people don't go into a 5,000 word rant about the bush doesn't mean they lack understanding or empathy or have no understanding of what is occuring and your quote above is the reason why.They are shafting themselves and for what ever reason refuse to vote out the people who are the root cause of the problem. That is where they lose me.. .

[Legionista]

Oooo Trade deals. 

[ManfredSchaefer]

15 minutes ago, sonar said:

Manfred...I actually agree with your post to a large extent but the selective quote above is the gist of the matter for me. It's the idiots who are making the laws,not just on water, climate change,land clearing and the enviorment but also the stupid and idiotic trade agreements the Nationals/Liberals and Labor sign up to that in some ways are forcing farmers to exploit a) the enviorment and b) the people who work for them, as they are forced to compete against countries that pay $5 ph. No one in Australia can live on earning $5 ph. Simple as that. The lawmakers they elect are the root of the problem yet they refuse to change and then cry foul when it starts going to shyte.

Just because people don't go into a 5,000 word rant about the bush doesn't mean they lack understanding or empathy or have no understanding of what is occuring and your quote above is the reason why.They are shafting themselves and for what ever reason refuse to vote out the people who are the root cause of the problem. That is where they lose me.. .

Sorry but your simplistic assessment of the relationship between farmers (who as I discussed in my previous post are not a single type or entity but are a highly diverse group) is off beam by miles. You make claims about farmers refusing to change...seriously? Have you actually seen credible evidence that backs that comment up, and can share that here? If you spent any time in the last thirty years seeing the changes in farming practice or seeing how regions have shifted their farming practices you'd know that what you said is a gross simplification. Take as a case in point what's happening to citrus growers down around Pooncarrie etc, cited in this ABC story:

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-09-29/citrus-industry-mourns-end-fruit-cropping-lower-darling-river/11556106

As for trade agreements forcing 'farmers' to exploit the environment and their workers, you again make a highly exaggerated sweeping statement. You'd be surprised how many primary producers have found that global trade agreements have actually helped them grow their businesses, or encouraged them to innovate. Go check out what is happening with the Hazelnut industry or the growing importance of single variety or heritage breeds and crops. Wage differentials between one market and the next doesn't equate to the results you tendentiously posit. Farming and agribusiness and the associated politics are far more complicated than that.

Tell you what, how about from now on we remove support from those here in Western Sydney who find it hard to make ends meet, who lack adequate health and education opportunities, because they voted for a NSW coalition government that built us  Bankwest Stadium. Or a Federal government that mollified their racist insecurities because they 'stopped the boats' , or because ScoMo is a good Christian.

Instead of developing a position based on what you postulate are the dominant operating constructs of farming and regional Australia, apply the same level of critical thinking and rational scrutiny you would expect those in the bush to apply when looking at us here in city.

[Legionista]

If anything farmers are better educated and far more in tune with how important the environment is generally, be it climate change, water policy etc.

Most farmers have invested heavily in their operations to make it more environmentally sustainable. 

Because they are highly informed, they know, that who they voted for in the last 20-30 years would make little if no difference to the problems they are facing now. 

[sonar]

7 minutes ago, ManfredSchaefer said:

Sorry but your simplistic assessment of the relationship between farmers (who as I discussed in my previous post are not a single type or entity but are a highly diverse group) is off beam by miles. You make claims about farmers refusing to change...seriously? Have you actually seen credible evidence that backs that comment up, and can share that here? If you spent any time in the last thirty years seeing the changes in farming practice or seeing how regions have shifted their farming practices you'd know that what you said is a gross simplification. Take as a case in point what's happening to citrus growers down around Pooncarrie etc, cited in this ABC story:

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-09-29/citrus-industry-mourns-end-fruit-cropping-lower-darling-river/11556106

As for trade agreements forcing 'farmers' to exploit the environment and their workers, you again make a highly exaggerated sweeping statement. You'd be surprised how many primary producers have found that global trade agreements have actually helped them grow their businesses, or encouraged them to innovate. Go check out what is happening with the Hazelnut industry or the growing importance of single variety or heritage breeds and crops. Wage differentials between one market and the next doesn't equate to the results you tendentiously posit. Farming and agribusiness and the associated politics are far more complicated than that.

Tell you what, how about from now on we remove support from those here in Western Sydney who find it hard to make ends meet, who lack adequate health and education opportunities, because they voted for a NSW coalition government that built us  Bankwest Stadium. Or a Federal government that mollified their racist insecurities because they 'stopped the boats' , or because ScoMo is a good Christian.

Instead of developing a position based on what you postulate are the dominant operating constructs of farming and regional Australia, apply the same level of critical thinking and rational scrutiny you would expect those in the bush to apply when looking at us here in city.

I've never called for farmers to have any assisstance taken away. NEVER.

I do do have a problem with outcomes that impact the lives of rural people and the enviorment because at times they lack the will to force change. I thought Tony Windsor was a very good candidate from the bush. I liked him and how he went about things.

I will call out bad practices from the bush just as I do with bad practice from city folk. .If a comapny/farm wants to exploit workers then you call them out.....city or bush.  If a company wants to **** the enviorment you call them out....city or bush.

If you think that is generalisation than the problem is yours not mine.

[ManfredSchaefer]

1 minute ago, sonar said:

I've never called for farmers to have any assisstance taken away. NEVER.

I do do have a problem with outcomes that impact the lives of rural people and the enviorment because at times they lack the will to force change. I thought Tony Windsor was a very good candidate from the bush. I liked him and how he went about things.

I will call out bad practices from the bush just as I do with bad practice from city folk. .If a comapny/farm wants to exploit workers then you call them out.....city or bush.  If a company wants to **** the enviorment you call them out....city or bush.

If you think that is generalisation than the problem is yours not mine.

Did I claim you said that assistance should be taken away from farmers? No. 

Did I state you made generalisations based on how you perceive the relationship between farmers, trade agreements and the politics that lead to environmental damage...hell yes. If you want to back it up with some specific examples, fine. But all I see in your last post are an ad hoc statement with no supporting evidence about agricultural stagnation and a generic liking of Tony Windsor.

Go and watch 'Landline', listen to regional radio, talk to people who lives in the bush, spend some time around farmers...then come back and tell us how relevant your generalised statement re the nexus on trade, supposedly conservative farming practices and regional politics is.

[Taurus]

5 hours ago, wendybr said:

Why do they vote in a government that laughs in the face of concern for the environmental devastation that we are now seeing in rural Australia, that has been predicted FOR DECADES by scientists?

How can they vote in people in a party led (formerly) by someone like Barnaby Joyce?

What has their plight got to do with their democratic right, to vote how they choose?

Sounds like some who post in here don't actually want to live in a democracy

[ManfredSchaefer]

18 minutes ago, Legionista said:

If anything farmers are better educated and far more in tune with how important the environment is generally, be it climate change, water policy etc.

Most farmers have invested heavily in their operations to make it more environmentally sustainable. 

Because they are highly informed, they know, that who they voted for in the last 20-30 years would make little if no difference to the problems they are facing now. 

Farmers abilities or willingness to implement change are highly influenced by their existing business model. A family run property (and these are in the minority in Australia) may have a greater desire to change and be perhaps more conscious of their environmental situation, but may not be able to do so because of capital shortcomings or certain environmental or other legal restrictions.

Larger agribusiness combines that have a huge amount of money and political influence may be less willing to change their practices because they are following corporate policies set off site or even overseas.

It's a complicated, highly variable construct and one that is hardly understood by most people who live in cities like Sydney, Melbourne etc.

[sonar]

1 minute ago, ManfredSchaefer said:

Did I claim you said that assistance should be taken away from farmers? No. 

Did I state you made generalisations based on how you perceive the relationship between farmers, trade agreements and the politics that lead to environmental damage...hell yes. If you want to back it up with some specific examples, fine. But all I see in your last post are an ad hoc statement with no supporting evidence about agricultural stagnation and a generic liking of Tony Windsor.

Go and watch 'Landline', listen to regional radio, talk to people who lives in the bush, spend some time around farmers...then come back and tell us how relevant your generalised statement re the nexus on trade, supposedly conservative farming practices and regional politics is.

,,,,,,so to my original post about farmers ........they don't shaft workers...employees..........? 

Facts.

https://www.governmentnews.com.au/migrants-trapped-in-slave-like-conditions-at-aussie-farms/

The National Union of Workers (NUW)  has launched an investigation into exploitation in Australia’s fruit picking industry where some foreign farm workers are enduring “slave-like conditions” and receiving wages as low as $8 a day.

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/nov/21/australian-employers-ripping-off-backpackers-and-foreign-students-study

https://au.finance.yahoo.com/news/fruit-farmer-fined-for-ripping-off-workers-043856129.html

https://www.abc.net.au/triplej/programs/hack/welcome-to-australia/9174492