Shortforbob

I still call Australia home

Recommended Posts

Yeah, pretty much a standard response...ever since Noah.

But with the NBN actually being rolled out ATM and a lot of people being confused about when their area is going on and what they have to do about it, I can see a lot of people being caught.

I rang my mum and warned her.

Mind you, the scum that called me this afternoon..three times now, well they're pretty amateurish. Robot voice, wait in silence for 30 seconds then a non australian "tech" sounding like he's in an a deserted section of the london underground with 30 others.

I usually just ask them if their Grandma is listening and that he should be ashamed of himself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Ease the sheet. said:

NBN is a wholesaler.  They don't call people.....

I know that, but does grandma?

It did nudge me to call Optus and get connection organised though. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

completely non political. Does anyone know how to get water based paint off a pair of almost brand new Blunnies? :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely with water and then give them a good polish using a "nourishing creme" (lifts some stains) first and then the usual polish. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, DtM said:

Surely with water and then give them a good polish using a "nourishing creme" (lifts some stains) first and then the usual polish. 

when it's been dry for 2 weeks?

Found them under a pile of dust sheets . The only thing I can think of is a razor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, charisma94 said:

Seriously, WD-40.

OK, I think I've got some somewhere..will it get it off the ceramic floor tiles too? and the coffee table and the washing machine and the loo lid and... :rolleyes:

Thanks :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A question of etiquette.

The Actor Jack Charles was giving a talk at work tonight about his new book.

The (white) organiser from Penguin,   introduced him to me as Uncle Jack..I feel somewhat uncomfortable addressing someone I don't know as "uncle" 

My culture taught me to address older men as Mr.

I know this is a standard address and mark of respect for aboriginal elders, but it sounds sort of patronising and fake for white people to use it.. Unless invited by the person to do so.. Thoughts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Shortforbob said:

A question of etiquette.

The Actor Jack Charles was giving a talk at work tonight about his new book.

The (white) organiser from Penguin,   introduced him to me as Uncle Jack..I feel somewhat uncomfortable addressing someone I don't know as "uncle" 

My culture taught me to address older men as Mr.

I know this is a standard address and mark of respect for aboriginal elders, but it sounds sort of patronising and fake for white people to use it.. Unless invited by the person to do so.. Thoughts?

Like everything, it’s all about intent. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone know anything about Australian Super funds/Rules?

If someone is in a defined benefit fund, it appears they can retire at 55, get a lifetime pension indexed to the CPI and still work in their old job up to 9 1/2 hours per week.

If they have two different super funds, one defined benefit and one just normal pay in and take out, you could theoretically take the defined benefit as a pension , keep working less than 10 hours for as long as you like and keep paying into the "normal" fund until 65, and take that as a lump sum and then access some of the age pension at (in my case) 67 or keep working.

Seems too good to be true,. Id be getting almost exactly the same income as I am now for as long as I want to work 9 hours per week, with access to a lump sum at 65.

I can't see a downside there has to be a catch somewhere or everyone with a defined benefit fund would be retiring at 55 or 60.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Shortforbob said:

Anyone know anything about Australian Super funds/Rules?

If someone is in a defined benefit fund, it appears they can retire at 55, get a lifetime pension indexed to the CPI and still work in their old job up to 9 1/2 hours per week.

If they have two different super funds, one defined benefit and one just normal pay in and take out, you could theoretically take the defined benefit as a pension , keep working less than 10 hours for as long as you like and keep paying into the "normal" fund until 65, and take that as a lump sum and then access some of the age pension at (in my case) 67 or keep working.

Seems too good to be true,. Id be getting almost exactly the same income as I am now for as long as I want to work 9 hours per week, with access to a lump sum at 65.

I can't see a downside there has to be a catch somewhere or everyone with a defined benefit fund would be retiring at 55 or 60.

 

Meli, that's only Comsuper, or maybe some State government defined benefit schemes.  I'm in a defined benefit scheme and there's no pension option, nor a work part-time option.  I plan on retiring sometime in the next year and in preparation I'm setting up a self-managed super fund.  That fund will not have enough to provide the same standard of living as I currently have, but will be enough to ensure I never get a cent of any government pension.

I'm nervous as hell about putting all my retirement funds at the mercy of the market - deferring retirement keeps the defined benefit part safe for the time being, but it's actually eroding anyway because there's an indexing factor that is reducing because of the shit state of the NT economy.

Oh, and all the people I know who were in Comsuper retired at 54 years, 11 months.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Shortforbob said:

Anyone know anything about Australian Super funds/Rules?

If someone is in a defined benefit fund, it appears they can retire at 55, get a lifetime pension indexed to the CPI and still work in their old job up to 9 1/2 hours per week.

If they have two different super funds, one defined benefit and one just normal pay in and take out, you could theoretically take the defined benefit as a pension , keep working less than 10 hours for as long as you like and keep paying into the "normal" fund until 65, and take that as a lump sum and then access some of the age pension at (in my case) 67 or keep working.

Seems too good to be true,. Id be getting almost exactly the same income as I am now for as long as I want to work 9 hours per week, with access to a lump sum at 65.

I can't see a downside there has to be a catch somewhere or everyone with a defined benefit fund would be retiring at 55 or 60.

 

Surely your industry fund manager offers free financial advice?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Recidivist said:

Meli, that's only Comsuper, or maybe some State government defined benefit schemes.  I'm in a defined benefit scheme and there's no pension option, nor a work part-time option.  I plan on retiring sometime in the next year and in preparation I'm setting up a self-managed super fund.  That fund will not have enough to provide the same standard of living as I currently have, but will be enough to ensure I never get a cent of any government pension.

I'm nervous as hell about putting all my retirement funds at the mercy of the market - deferring retirement keeps the defined benefit part safe for the time being, but it's actually eroding anyway because there's an indexing factor that is reducing because of the shit state of the NT economy.

Oh, and all the people I know who were in Comsuper retired at 54 years, 11 months.

yeah, I'm in CSC pps defined benefit. Looks like i've accidently hit the retirement jackpot. The pension is paid at the set rate regardless of shifts in investment earnings. I've been out of that fund for 25 years but it's grown enough to get me a bit over the age pension and I can keep working at the Library 9 HPW. If I'd retired 5 years ago at 55. Id still have the kids to support and the pension would have been smaller.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Ease the sheet. said:

Surely your industry fund manager offers free financial advice?

no they don't/wont. They have warned that many accountants dont understand the ins and outs of defined benefit. I'll go to a seminar in November but FKT was in the PS and he might know. 

I'm just excited and dont want to start planning a world trip today :D

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Shortforbob said:

Anyone know anything about Australian Super funds/Rules?

If someone is in a defined benefit fund, it appears they can retire at 55, get a lifetime pension indexed to the CPI and still work in their old job up to 9 1/2 hours per week.

If they have two different super funds, one defined benefit and one just normal pay in and take out, you could theoretically take the defined benefit as a pension , keep working less than 10 hours for as long as you like and keep paying into the "normal" fund until 65, and take that as a lump sum and then access some of the age pension at (in my case) 67 or keep working.

Seems too good to be true,. Id be getting almost exactly the same income as I am now for as long as I want to work 9 hours per week, with access to a lump sum at 65.

I can't see a downside there has to be a catch somewhere or everyone with a defined benefit fund would be retiring at 55 or 60.

 

Send me a PM and I'll tell you what I know about the old CSS and industry super funds. Not discussing it here.

FKT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

Send me a PM and I'll tell you what I know about the old CSS and industry super funds. Not discussing it here.

FKT

thanks :)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, I’m confused. If the USA is our most important ally and China is our most economic partner, why is our head of state  the Queen of England?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, dreadom said:

So, I’m confused. If the USA is our most important ally and China is our most economic partner, why is our head of state  the Queen of England?

God said so.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, dreadom said:

So, I’m confused. If the USA is our most important ally and China is our most economic partner, why is our head of state  the Queen of England?

Because nobody (other than some Republican cringers) gives a damn one way or another......

FKT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

Because nobody (other than some Republican cringers) gives a damn one way or another......

FKT

Ha ha ha, why am I not surprised by your comment. I think it is perfectly obvious from your posts that you are an old white guy who doesn’t give a shit about our Nation’s Sovereignty and it’s citizens. I have no idea what you look like but when I read your posts I always picture you as looking like Alan Jones. The World will be a better place when you both fuck off and die. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, dreadom said:

Ha ha ha, why am I not surprised by your comment. I think it is perfectly obvious from your posts that you are an old white guy who doesn’t give a shit about our Nation’s Sovereignty and it’s citizens. I have no idea what you look like but when I read your posts I always picture you as looking like Alan Jones. The World will be a better place when you both fuck off and die. 

Oh dear, did I find a soft spot? Self-identifying as a Republican cringer, are you?

Fact is we are a sovereign nation. People like you are irrelevant. So sad too bad.

I'll happily support a Republican model when you clowns manage to come up with one that doesn't devolve into the sort of shit-fight we see in the USA ATM. Until then I'm pretty OK with the current system. The GG doesn't do much and the Queen is a figurehead, but everyone knows that the GG *can* take action if the PM gets too far outside the lines.

By all means let's elect a President, rename all 'Queen' references to 'President' - then exile the bastard to the UK for the duration of their Presidency. Win-win.

Meanwhile I've a few more fires to light before it gets too hot & dry. Carry on....

FKT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Middle class welfare :angry:

now..lets see..what singles earn $125,000 PA or couples $200,000 and have or have parents who have enough for a 5% deposit on an $700,000 home? To get in first?

And if Labor supports this they've had my last vote.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-10-27/government-unveils-details-of-first-home-buyers-scheme/11644018?section=politics

"There is no specific number of guarantees per jurisdiction it will be on a … first-in, best-dressed basis.

"Ultimately the scheme will be driven by demand, up to 10,000 guarantees a year."

The program will be open to singles with a taxable income up to $125,000 per year and couples earning less than $200,000 per year, and will apply to owner-occupied loans on a principal and interest basis.

"It's really focused on helping first home buyers buy a modest first home," Senator Cormann said.

According to analysis by CoreLogic, the median Sydney property value in September was $805,000 and $635,000 in Melbourne.

Labor quickly promised to match the scheme when it was first unveiled by Prime Minister Scott Morrison during the election campaign.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Shortforbob said:

View image on Twitter

Well I thought it was funny. :)

 

So did I.

But I took it as commentary on a broader scale. Not specifically about a mother. Fathers are just as guilty.

And it's not just about babies. Adults do it to other adults too.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Ease the sheet. said:

So did I.

But I took it as commentary on a broader scale. Not specifically about a mother. Fathers are just as guilty.

And it's not just about babies. Adults do it to other adults too.

You Aussies push each other around in prams and fall out? No wonder I don't want to visit, you are sick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Gissie said:

You Aussies push each other around in prams and fall out? No wonder I don't want to visit, you are sick.

Some of us even sail prams.

Don't knock what you don't know.

PS, don't get me started on Milo and breast milk.......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Ease the sheet. said:

Some of us even sail prams.

Don't knock what you don't know.

PS, don't get me started on Milo and breast milk.......

In Hong Kong you are more likely to see a dog in a pram than a baby or an adult. Not that the dogs sail them, just sit their looking like a dog in a pram.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What a piece of shit.

A women's rights activist has sparked anger after warning some firefighters will return home from the bushfire crisis in Queensland and News South Wales to beat their partners.

"After a cataclysmic event like this, domestic violence peaks," she said.

"Women become extremely unsafe, when generally the men return home from the fires and subject them to domestic violence."

Sherele Moody made the comments alongside Greens senator Larissa Waters at a press conference on Wednesday.

https://www.news.com.au/technology/environment/nsw-sydney-qld-bushfires-live-updates-fury-after-activist-links-firefighters-to-domestic-violence/news-story/77cbbd720fb0807e127455a380a7b072

Larissa fucking Waters again. Who the fuck would vote for these morons?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Collingwood fuckwit supporters aren't know for their understanding towards their wives when Collingwood loses either.

State of Origin brings out the fuckwits too.

Yeah, it's fucked. But it's a well known phenomenon.

Calling it out everytime should be important.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, LB 15 said:

What a piece of shit.

A women's rights activist has sparked anger after warning some firefighters will return home from the bushfire crisis in Queensland and News South Wales to beat their partners.

"After a cataclysmic event like this, domestic violence peaks," she said.

"Women become extremely unsafe, when generally the men return home from the fires and subject them to domestic violence."

Sherele Moody made the comments alongside Greens senator Larissa Waters at a press conference on Wednesday.

https://www.news.com.au/technology/environment/nsw-sydney-qld-bushfires-live-updates-fury-after-activist-links-firefighters-to-domestic-violence/news-story/77cbbd720fb0807e127455a380a7b072

Larissa fucking Waters again. Who the fuck would vote for these morons?

U OK Boomer? You sound a little triggered?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Ease the sheet. said:

Collingwood fuckwit supporters aren't know for their understanding towards their wives when Collingwood loses either.

State of Origin brings out the fuckwits too.

Yeah, it's fucked. But it's a well known phenomenon.

Calling it out everytime should be important.

And when it happens the other way too. Especially when it comes to false allegations during a custody battle. I've had a close friend really badly affected by such a false allegation and it affected his connection with his young children tremendously at the time. But karma has a tend to come back in time and bite the false accuser in the bum...and in this case it did...but it doesn't always.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A life and death crisis and these dumb tarts want to score political points and create outrage.

And if their House is threatened the same would be expecting those firefighters to move heaven an earth to protect their plot before they go back to beating their women of course.

Fuck em ungrateful lowlifes.

  • Like 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, dreadom said:

U OK Boomer? You sound a little triggered?

What's triggering me atm is the ridiculous head in the sand attitude of many elements within present Federal government who think the fires in NSW & QLD have got NOTHING to do with climate change. What caused the IOD (Indian Ocean Dipole) to be so large this Indian monsoon season that delayed the end of their monsoon and therefore cause drier and warmer conditions on the east coast that created the conditions for the fire events that are happening atm?  Likewise I'm triggered by the tree huggers and latte sipping inner city lefties who argue about restricted controlled burns. As much as we know the indigenous people of this wide brown land didn't have to deal with the extent of wildfires that we've experienced over the 30-40 years because they used burnoffs to control the fauna for hunting purposes.

And yes the following references are from ABC News so possibly have a leftist bent, however they are what they are - 

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-11-14/analysis-bushfire-politics-hazard-reduction-climate-change/11700594

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-10-23/late-monsoon-withdrawal-will-likely-delay-onset-of-wet-season/11624550

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, albanyguy said:

What's triggering me atm is the ridiculous head in the sand attitude of many elements within present Federal government who think the fires in NSW & QLD have got NOTHING to do with climate change.

  Likewise I'm triggered by the tree huggers and latte sipping inner city lefties who argue about restricted controlled burns. As much as we know the indigenous people of this wide brown land didn't have to deal with the extent of wildfires that we've experienced over the 30-40 years because they used burnoffs to control the fauna for hunting purposes.

 

 

This Monash University researcher says it's bullshit to link our bushfires to Climate change, of course SBS tried to remove this recently yet stuff just stays on the internet.

Must be a kick in the nuts to those from the climate change religion to have experts call bullshit on their nonsense- https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:i41h-TryDp0J:https://www.sbs.com.au/news/fires-not-due-to-climate-change-expert+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=au&client=safari

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, albanyguy said:

What's triggering me atm is the ridiculous head in the sand attitude of many elements within present Federal government who think the fires in NSW & QLD have got NOTHING to do with climate change. What caused the IOD (Indian Ocean Dipole) to be so large this Indian monsoon season that delayed the end of their monsoon and therefore cause drier and warmer conditions on the east coast that created the conditions for the fire events that are happening atm?  Likewise I'm triggered by the tree huggers and latte sipping inner city lefties who argue about restricted controlled burns. As much as we know the indigenous people of this wide brown land didn't have to deal with the extent of wildfires that we've experienced over the 30-40 years because they used burnoffs to control the fauna for hunting purposes.

And yes the following references are from ABC News so possibly have a leftist bent, however they are what they are - 

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-11-14/analysis-bushfire-politics-hazard-reduction-climate-change/11700594

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-10-23/late-monsoon-withdrawal-will-likely-delay-onset-of-wet-season/11624550

How exactly are inner city lefties stopping controlled burns? It’s a nice whinge by the unhinged but it has no merit. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder which lefties were in power when this idiocy came in.

Quote

Qld landholder hit with record $1m penalty for making fire breaks too wide

James Nason, March 23, 2017

How wide can a fire-break be in Queensland?

Getting the answer wrong, despite receiving conflicting advice from several different Queensland Government staff, has just resulted in a Queensland landowner being forced to pay $999,780 in fines and costs.

That figure – a record since Queensland’s Vegetation Management Act came into effect in 1999 – incorporates a $276,000 fine and an order to pay the Government $723, 780 in costs.

Court decision

Michael Vincent Baker of Chess Park, Eidsvold, was this week found guilty in the Brisbane Magistrate Court of the unauthorised clearing of 367.5 hectares of native vegetation.

Mr Baker was found guilty of 39 charges under the Vegetation Management Act and 7 charges under the Forestry Act relating to the width of clearing associated with firebreaks, fence lines and access tracks on his property, and also failing to comply with the self-assessable code for Native Forest Practice.

Magistrate Elizabeth Hall of the Brisbane Magistrates Court fined Mr Baker $276,000 for the 46 offences under the Vegetation and Forestry Act.

She also ordered restitution for loss of forestry products of $17,471.

In addition, she ordered Mr Baker to pay $165,000 and $541,309.15 of costs incurred by the Department in investigating and prosecuting him.

The total costs incurred by the Queensland Government in pursuing this prosecution, as disclosed to the court, were $2.2 million.

Mr Baker’s lawyer Tom Marland from Marland Law, Roma, said Mr Baker has previously filed an appeal to the District Court based on Magistrate Hall’s decision and will appeal the costs and sentence imposed as part of those appeal proceedings.

Lack of clarity over allowable fire-break widths:

Mr Marland has previously indicated that before Mr Baker commenced the clearing in question, he contacted 32 different Government employees seeking advice on the acceptable width of fire breaks.

He said he received conflicting advice ranging from 1.5 metres wide to “1.5 times the height of the tallest tree”.

The Vegetation Management Act (VMA) provided an exemption for clearing remnant vegetation if the clearing was to establish a fire break, and provided the break was “no more than 20 metres wide or 1.5 times the height of the nearest vegetation”.

The Act also allowed for “the clearing necessary” to remove or reduce the imminent risk that the vegetation poses of serious personal injury or damage to infrastructure.

Mr Baker was motivated to construct effective fire breaks because his 9242 hectare property Chess Park was almost totally burnt out by bushfire soon after he bought the property in May 2011.

The fires caused $300,000 worth of damage to property infrastructure. After that event, Mr Baker was determined to construct fire breaks to protect his family, property and livestock from future fires.

He said Mr Baker applied the advice of “1.5 times the tallest tree” in determining the width of his fire breaks – narrower firebreaks would provide no protection if a burning tree fell across the break and continued the fire on the other side.

With trees measuring between 18 and 32 metres, an average of 25 metres was applied, resulting in  fire break widths of 40 metres.

Mr Baker advised the Department of his plan and his intention to commence the work.

However, some two years after the work began, he was advised by the Department that his fire breaks were too wide, and legal action followed.

The result was Magistrate Hall’s decision in the Brisbane Magistrate’s Court this week.

More questions of interest:

How wide can a fire break in Queensland actually be – does the NRM have a clear answer on this?

Beef Central has put that question to the NRM earlier today and was waiting for a response at the time of publishing this story. We will publish the NRM’s answer when it is received.

Did Mr Baker require a clearing permit? The NRM’s statement said Mr Baker “illegally cleared without a permit”. However, Mr Marland said Mr Baker did not require a permit as he was clearing under an exemption or self-assessable code.

The 367ha involved represents about 4 percent of the total property area of 9242ha. Was that all for fire breaks? Mr Marland said about 200ha was for fire breaks, about 100ha was for fence line maintenance and 50ha for native forest practice.

How much of the 9242ha property is marked as area that should not be cleared (or blue on his property map)? About 40pc of the total property area is marked blue for remnant. The 9242ha property comprises 8000 hectares of freehold, and also has 1029ha state forest in the middle and a former forestry entitlement area of 213 hectares that is now freehold. There is also a 40 metre wide, 9.3 kilometre long gas pipeline through the middle of the property.

Record punishment

The fine and costs order is the largest handed down since the Vegetation Management Act was enacted in 1999.

The overall costs of the prosecution as disclosed to the court were $2.2 million.

“This matter is of significant importance, obviously for Mr Baker, but also all landholders throughout Queensland in relation to what they can and can’t do on their properties.

https://www.beefcentral.com/news/qld-landholder-hit-with-record-1m-penalty-for-making-fire-breaks-too-wide/?fbclid=IwAR2jqa5B2ZJBdWonBDgP8G1Bm1kvNjMvHE_3fophn-kk0YDiHhioSAM3Amo#.XcffcKnwARs.facebook

 

Local councils are infested with that Green filth who don't like people taking action to reduce the severity of bushfires.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps we should allow people to collect fire wood in national parks, nah much better to let the deadwood go up in the next bushfire increasing the severity of it and make those with fireplaces buy their wood from somewhere else according to the current idiocy.

 

Quote

Heavy fines for illegal firewood collection in National Parks

26 April 2019

As the weather cools, the NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service (NPWS) is rolling out its annual warning to residents across the Central West that it’s illegal to collect firewood in the region’s national parks, state conservation areas and nature reserves.

NPWS Central West Area Manager Fiona Buchanan said the warning to residents around Condobolin, Bathurst, Dubbo, Forbes and Grenfell is timely as it follows a man being fined $30,000 for illegally collecting firewood in the Murrumbidgee Valley National Park.

“We are getting the message out there that removing firewood, including deadwood and fallen trees, is not permitted in national parks,” said Ms Buchanan.

“Its important people are aware that on-the-spot-fines apply but also very large fines can be handed out by the courts.

“The recent $30,000 fine handed out by the NSW Land and Environment Court reinforces how important it is that people follow the rules.

https://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/news/heavy-fines-for-illegal-firewood-collection-in-national-parks

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Mohammed Bin Lyin said:

Perhaps we should allow people to collect fire wood in national parks, nah much better to let the deadwood go up in the next bushfire increasing the severity of it and make those with fireplaces buy their wood from somewhere else according to the current idiocy.

 

 

 

Yes, this is one of the more stupid laws to become vogue in recent times. Green imbeciles 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, dreadom said:

How exactly are inner city lefties stopping controlled burns? It’s a nice whinge by the unhinged but it has no merit. 

Because they're the first ones to arc up when controlled burns go wrong or when they're done in breeding season of the animals that are in the controlled burn area. Also because they don't want like to deal with the smoke when it drifts into their inner city bastion and they also think "old growth forests" shouldn't be burned. Yes I know this is a general swipe but I trust you get my drift :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, albanyguy said:

Because they're the first ones to arc up when controlled burns go wrong or when they're done in breeding season of the animals that are in the controlled burn area. Also because they don't want like to deal with the smoke when it drifts into their inner city bastion and they also think "old growth forests" shouldn't be burned. Yes I know this is a general swipe but I trust you get my drift :)

I get that your drift is a whinge at people having a whinge but the fact of the matter is that the Greens have very little power and ultimately have had no say in controlled burn legislation. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Shortforbob said:

Is what she said untrue or just not well timed?

 

Both. What could possibly be her motivation? 

Apart from being a man hating, attention whore, fuck wit of course. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Ease the sheet. said:

Collingwood fuckwit supporters aren't know for their understanding towards their wives when Collingwood loses either.

State of Origin brings out the fuckwits too.

Yeah, it's fucked. But it's a well known phenomenon.

Calling it out everytime should be important.

Ahh that explains it. It is a lower class labor voter phenomenon. Supported by the greens as always. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, dreadom said:

How exactly are inner city lefties stopping controlled burns? It’s a nice whinge by the unhinged but it has no merit. 

What triggered you? Is it the ‘inner city’ part?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, dreadom said:

I get that your drift is a whinge at people having a whinge but the fact of the matter is that the Greens have very little power and ultimately have had no say in controlled burn legislation. 

Controlled burns during the present climate are a government legal departments worst fear.

Increased temperature and decreased humidity create the risk of controlled burns becoming uncontrolled.

Risk adverse lawyers are the ones setting the rules, not greens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, LB 15 said:

What triggered you? Is it the ‘inner city’ part?

You didn’t answer my question?

RU OK Boomer?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Ease the sheet. said:

Controlled burns during the present climate are a government legal departments worst fear.

Increased temperature and decreased humidity create the risk of controlled burns becoming uncontrolled.

Risk adverse lawyers are the ones setting the rules, not greens.

With urban sprawl and the encroachment of lavish houses bordering wilderness areas, like along the escarpment of the Great Dividing Range, it is not surprising that the insurance companies lawyers have had a say.  I don’t have to hear it from retired fire chiefs, who now safely whistle blow I know from my father (a timber property owner and retired Forestry worker) and my Brother (the local RFS captain) that the main reason there has not been the controlled burns of yesteryear is that the window of opportunity to do it safely is getting smaller each year. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, dreadom said:

With urban sprawl and the encroachment of lavish houses bordering wilderness areas, like along the escarpment of the Great Dividing Range, it is not surprising that the insurance companies lawyers have had a say.  I don’t have to hear it from retired fire chiefs, who now safely whistle blow I know from my father (a timber property owner and retired Forestry worker) and my Brother (the local RFS captain) that the main reason there has not been the controlled burns of yesteryear is that the window of opportunity to do it safely is getting smaller each year. 

"The window of opportunity to do it safely is getting smaller each year"

 

Exactly!

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, dreadom said:

With urban sprawl and the encroachment of lavish houses bordering wilderness areas, like along the escarpment of the Great Dividing Range, it is not surprising that the insurance companies lawyers have had a say.  I don’t have to hear it from retired fire chiefs, who now safely whistle blow I know from my father (a timber property owner and retired Forestry worker) and my Brother (the local RFS captain) that the main reason there has not been the controlled burns of yesteryear is that the window of opportunity to do it safely is getting smaller each year. 

Agree. I spent some time up on my family property in central west NSW this winter. There was no way I was going to try doing any burning off. Far too dry.

Even down here I had it all done & dusted a month ago.

But the trifecta - more houses in bushland fringes, owners who can't or won't control-burn when conditions are suitable and councils that forbid clearing vegetation - make the consequences of any fire much worse.

FKT

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wytaliba had been back burning before fatal fire: Sparks

https://www.gleninnesexaminer.com.au/story/6492701/opinion-we-did-burnoffs-badja-sparks-hits-back/?cs=13312&fbclid=IwAR24Dik2MQafsM9mc_nUkJvUMcn6QFyLwzLuMSNlU7Ct6_J7p1oBagIJ4ok

So, the politicians (and the media) turn the talk to hazard reduction burns, or the lack of them, as something else to blame on the inner-city raving lunatics. 

We had a bushfire two months ago that burned most of our property. It didn't matter. It burned again. 

This is climate changed. We're in the worst drought recorded. A million hectares of bush has burned. Barnaby says it's Green voters and the sun's magnetic field. 

Pray for rain, pray harder for leadership.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The main problem around the scenic rim fires is grass lands. The area was logged 100 years ago and much of it is now either new growth forest or grasslands. I have done controlled burns every year for the last 10 years with a good mate who has a place near Bonah. 100 acres or so every year. You just need to cut good firebreaks, and wait for a still evening and start on sunset just as it starts to dews off. Lots of help to stamp out spot fires and pumps from the dam ready to go. Burn, into the wind, down hills ect and if you stick to the rules set out in your permit, no problems. Of course many  Newbie urban warriors looking for a tree change have bought into the area and bringing there massive understanding of the bush learnt from running a lactose free coffee shop in Paddington for years, listen to the fuckwit greenies, don’t burn off and we have seen the results over the past few days.

Of course you can burn off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, dreadom said:

my Brother (the local RFS captain) 

Does he normally go home and smack the family around after a fire like your mate Larrisa Waters and her elk claim?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, LB 15 said:

The main problem around the scenic rim fires is grass lands. The area was logged 100 years ago and much of it is now either new growth forest or grasslands. I have done controlled burns every year for the last 10 years with a good mate who has a place near Bonah. 100 acres or so every year. You just need to cut good firebreaks, and wait for a still evening and start on sunset just as it starts to dews off. Lots of help to stamp out spot fires and pumps from the dam ready to go. Burn, into the wind, down hills ect and if you stick to the rules set out in your permit, no problems. Of course many  Newbie urban warriors looking for a tree change have bought into the area and bringing there massive understanding of the bush learnt from running a lactose free coffee shop in Paddington for years, listen to the fuckwit greenies, don’t burn off and we have seen the results over the past few days.

Of course you can burn off.

Did read the article above? They burnt off but this latest fire was so hot in burnt across the tops of trees. My father would have burnt off earlier this year but didn’t have a safe weather window to do so, it just isn’t always possible. He is fully prepared to back burn if a fire starts burning down the ridge towards the house and cattle paddocks. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, LB 15 said:

Does he normally go home and smack the family around after a fire like your mate Larrisa Waters and her elk claim?

OK Boomer? Larissa actually delivered a statement straight after that press conferences rejected everything that was said by that woman. What that nut job said was based on the facts that the incidence of domestic violence does rise around times of stress such as bush fires, returning from active service,   FIFO etc. Mot really rocket science but there is a Time and place for that discussion. 

My brother just became a father on Wednesday hasn’t had a chance to smack his son around. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, dreadom said:

OK Boomer? Larissa actually delivered a statement straight after that press conferences rejected everything that was said by that woman. What that nut job said was based on the facts that the incidence of domestic violence does rise around times of stress such as bush fires, returning from active service,   FIFO etc. Mot really rocket science but there is a Time and place for that discussion.

Yeah - people under stress with poor self control are more likely to act out & hit someone. As you say not rocket science.

The solution of course is no male partners because then domestic violence will never ever happen.....

FKT

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, dreadom said:

OK Boomer? Larissa actually delivered a statement straight after that press conferences rejected everything that was said by that woman. What that nut job said was based on the facts that the incidence of domestic violence does rise around times of stress such as bush fires, returning from active service,   FIFO etc. Mot really rocket science but there is a Time and place for that discussion. 

My brother just became a father on Wednesday hasn’t had a chance to smack his son around. 

Sorry mate but the 'Boomer' reference goes right over my head. Yes I am sure her minders had a fucking heart attack when they heard what the stupid fuckwit had done but nevertheless she stood there at the press conference nodding her head in agreement at everything that nutjob claimed. Like Greta these dropkicks can only work from a script.

Congrats to your brother, remind him to savor every second because as the say it is over in the blink of an eye. Both my boys are overseas and I am missing the fuck out of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

Yeah - people under stress with poor self control are more likely to act out & hit someone. As you say not rocket science.

The solution of course is no male partners because then domestic violence will never ever happen.....

FKT

The issue isn't domestic violence, it's just plain old violence.

There's no smoke screen big enough to obscure the facts.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

 

The solution of course is no male partners because then domestic violence will never ever happen.....

 

OK by me as long as both chicks are hot and they let me watch....

Sadly, it's no solution at all. I've witnessed and heard of some horrible violence in lesbian couples.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ease the sheet. said:

The issue isn't domestic violence, it's just plain old violence.

There's no smoke screen big enough to obscure the facts.....

No the issue that piece of shit was talking about is domestic violence - specifically firefighters being violent towards their partners.

i hope she dies in a fire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Happy said:

OK by me as long as both chicks are hot and they let me watch....

Sadly, it's no solution at all. I've witnessed and heard of some horrible violence in lesbian couples.

I have seen it for myself- I watched a short film on the internet where they were pissing on each other. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So when female gay volunteer firefighters get home after a week in hell, they give their partner the fist?

I think I saw something like that in a short film too......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LB 15 said:

No the issue that piece of shit was talking about is domestic violence - specifically firefighters being violent towards their partners.

i hope she dies in a fire.

Judging by the number of arsonists that are also firey's, that's entirely possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/14/2019 at 5:32 PM, Mohammed Bin Lyin said:

 

This Monash University researcher says it's bullshit to link our bushfires to Climate change, of course SBS tried to remove this recently yet stuff just stays on the internet.

Must be a kick in the nuts to those from the climate change religion to have experts call bullshit on their nonsense- https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:i41h-TryDp0J:https://www.sbs.com.au/news/fires-not-due-to-climate-change-expert+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=au&client=safari

 

 

 

 

Umm MBL...Have you checked the date on that report? October 2013. Which NSW Bushfire Emergency was that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, LB 15 said:

No the issue that piece of shit was talking about is domestic violence - specifically firefighters being violent towards their partners.

i hope she dies in a fire.

Really? 

You hope some total stranger dies in a fire because she said something you thought was ???? what exactly?

Hell,  If we all went around wishin an hopin people we don't like or disagree with died in horribly painful ways..we'd all be in

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sAn7baRbhx4

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Shortforbob said:

Really? 

You hope some total stranger dies in a fire because she said something you thought was ???? what exactly?

Hell,  If we all went around wishin an hopin people we don't like or disagree with died in horribly painful ways..we'd all be in

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sAn7baRbhx4

 

 

What do you think of the opinion that "she's a piece of shit"?

If someone is described like that, surely hoping she would "die in a fire" is a logical progression?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Ease the sheet. said:

What do you think of the opinion that "she's a piece of shit"?

If someone is described like that, surely hoping she would "die in a fire" is a logical progression?

 

Not really.

I haven't bothered following this particular game of......"Oooooh did you hear what he/she said?"

People say dumb/thoughtless  things when they have fixations.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/25/2019 at 10:25 AM, Recidivist said:

Meli, that's only Comsuper, or maybe some State government defined benefit schemes.  I'm in a defined benefit scheme and there's no pension option, nor a work part-time option.  I plan on retiring sometime in the next year and in preparation I'm setting up a self-managed super fund.  That fund will not have enough to provide the same standard of living as I currently have, but will be enough to ensure I never get a cent of any government pension.

I'm nervous as hell about putting all my retirement funds at the mercy of the market - deferring retirement keeps the defined benefit part safe for the time being, but it's actually eroding anyway because there's an indexing factor that is reducing because of the shit state of the NT economy.

Oh, and all the people I know who were in Comsuper retired at 54 years, 11 months.

update.

Done all my homework. Boss says Fine.. I'm semi, semi retiring mid Jan once everyone's back from Christmas leave.

Check the work part time option. You may find it more flexible than you think. 

Retirement doesn't actually mean retirement. It means "genuine intention to work less than 10 hours per week" on a form.

Went to a "please shoot me now" boring full day seminar on wednesday. the Retirement thing was described..and I kid you not..as a "gentlemans agreement" and unenforceable the day after you "retire"   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/14/2019 at 9:22 PM, Mohammed Bin Lyin said:

Perhaps we should allow people to collect fire wood in national parks, nah much better to let the deadwood go up in the next bushfire increasing the severity of it and make those with fireplaces buy their wood from somewhere else according to the current idiocy.

 

 

 

 

On 11/14/2019 at 10:08 PM, Dark Cloud said:

Yes, this is one of the more stupid laws to become vogue in recent times. Green imbeciles 

Hmmm I don't pay much attention to the why's of forestry protection Laws (I just assume if they manage to survive our gutless parliaments and woodies blocks they must be fairly innocuous) 

But I've always assumed this one was quite sensible. Dead wood provides habitats for all sorts of things. Orchids, small creatures etc.and do you really want some city folk in their shiny number 14 Blunnies and pristine Ute dragging logs all through your fences and leaving gates open? Sheesh..there's no pleasing you country folk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Shortforbob said:

Went to a "please shoot me now" boring full day seminar on wednesday. the Retirement thing was described..and I kid you not..as a "gentlemans agreement" and unenforceable the day after you "retire"   

Told you that.

FKT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Shortforbob said:

 

Hmmm I don't pay much attention to the why's of forestry protection Laws (I just assume if they manage to survive our gutless parliaments and woodies blocks they must be fairly innocuous) 

But I've always assumed this one was quite sensible. Dead wood provides habitats for all sorts of things. Orchids, small creatures etc.and do you really want some city folk in their shiny number 14 Blunnies and pristine Ute dragging logs all through your fences and leaving gates open? Sheesh..there's no pleasing you country folk.

I have to say that I'm against the firewood harvesting thing. OK there's a minor bit of fuel reduction. The flip side is people going in with trucks, trailers and chainsaws and taking everything they can find. Ooops not enough dead trees, let's start cutting down the live ones. Then sell the wood. And let's bash a new track in to get to more dead wood. Etc etc.

Perhaps a permit system for State forests would be OK but figuring out how to police it is difficult.

FKT

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

Told you that.

FKT

yes you did.

It's good to confirm. It was an Accountant told me I "had to retire" and wasn't allowed to work if I took my Super. I could have done this 5 years ago. 

Lesson learned..no matter if the subject want's to make you stick your head in the oven.. grit your teeth and go to one of those deadly seminars they are always pushing at you. 

A head's up to Recidivist and anyone else that thinks that retirement means not allowed to work. I can even keep my current job..two mornings a week..or one morning, one night shift.. or whatever suits :dance:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I bet the rest of the gang at the library are thrilled about that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Ease the sheet. said:

What do you think of the opinion that "she's a piece of shit"?

If someone is described like that, surely hoping she would "die in a fire" is a logical progression?

 

I agree

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LB 15 said:

I bet the rest of the gang at the library are thrilled about that.

Now why is LB being even more waspish than usual? Tell Aunty Meli all about it.

:console:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Shortforbob said:

Now why is LB being even more waspish than usual? Tell Aunty Meli all about it.

:console:

Did the slightly sarcastic tone of my past 20k posts somehow escape you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, LB 15 said:

Did the slightly sarcastic tone of my past 20k posts somehow escape you?

No, but there's usually some humour amidst the sarc. It's been absent lately.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Shortforbob said:

No, but there's usually some humour amidst the sarc. It's been absent lately.

WTF? My barb about your coworkers was a real thigh slapper!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, LB 15 said:

WTF? My barb about your coworkers was a real thigh slapper!

You've not been the same without Bent and Randum...I'm pretty low hanging fruit.