TOPIC:

swan42 wrote:

BC wrote: I don't need to argue anything...the facts are very clear that you and your ilk resort to blatant labelling and name calling when someone has an opinion other than your own. your previous post is all the proof I need.

BC Dick Smith has aligned himself with One Nation. The One Nation party that in the 1990s said we were being overrun by Asians. The One Nation party that says in the 2010s we are being overrun by Muslims. Both are demonstrably untrue. I am not going to stand by and allow the dissemination of racist comments that are aimed at vilifying a minority in Australia. As for John Howard's later day epiphany and getting into bed with One Nation is an absolute disgrace and just adds the opprobrium his Prime Ministership will be held in years to come.

Absolute patent NON SENSE.

Dick gave an excellent interview last night that went for an hour and explained this and other issues confronting Australia like the current power crisis.

Dick has NO connection with One Nation as all, and he clearly explained there were policies he did not support that ON pushes, the only statement he made was that ON was the ONLY party willing to discuss sustainable immigration numbers. Note NUMBERS not race.

Btw Dick does not want a complete hault on immigration, he just wants it to go from the current LUDICROUS 200k a year to 80k a SUSTAINABLE a year...that was in place during most of the 90's.

Along with Dick, one issue I agree with Bob Carr on is this one, Carr's academic publication on this issue shows COMPREHESIVLEY that Australia's geography, climate, etc are totally unsuited to a big Australia and that the current intakes are unsustainable and destructive.

BC wrote: that is just so typical of the looney left of which you're a world class example $wan...as soon as someone promotes a view other than your own they're branded as xenophobes, misogynists, racists, environmental vandals and so on. there's a very strong argument to get you lot sterilised at birth.

SPOT ON - The evidence is overwhelming yet he comes out with this crap about a bloke that genuinely cares about Australia and its future, clearly Swans priorities are NOT in the same place.

DD wrote: I disagree with Dick Smith, it's not immigration that is the cause of rising house unaffordabilty, rather foreign investment. Yet we are not afforded the same rights in those countries that are snapping up our real estate and jacking up prices. Our politicians are a disgrace and nothing more than political whores that sell the countries soul.

No - its demand that drives up prices, and the demand comes from people that want to live in one place, you need to check out DIMA figures to get a better handle on this, and see just how many people have been funnelled into Sydney over the last 15 years, the vast bulk of our intake goes there, and they all need a roof over their heads and within a few years so do the kids, btw that is not to say foreign investment is playing a part, plenty of rorts going on there as well, but its the demand on housing and infrastructure that wrecks affordability and quality of life.

If your theory was correct then there would be no correlation between population growth and housing demand, ie, property values in Sydney would not growing anymore than those in Perth, but that is clearly not the case, its the same crap you hear about Negative Gearing, which is a national policy of course, applied to all cities, if its forces prices up how does that explain negative growth in Perth, Darwin and stagnation in Adelaide and Brisbane? is got nothing to do with NG its demand that drives prices.

Bazza wrote:

swan42 wrote:

BC wrote: I don't need to argue anything...the facts are very clear that you and your ilk resort to blatant labelling and name calling when someone has an opinion other than your own. your previous post is all the proof I need.

BC Dick Smith has aligned himself with One Nation. The One Nation party that in the 1990s said we were being overrun by Asians. The One Nation party that says in the 2010s we are being overrun by Muslims. Both are demonstrably untrue. I am not going to stand by and allow the dissemination of racist comments that are aimed at vilifying a minority in Australia. As for John Howard's later day epiphany and getting into bed with One Nation is an absolute disgrace and just adds the opprobrium his Prime Ministership will be held in years to come.

Absolute patent NON SENSE.

Dick gave an excellent interview last night that went for an hour and explained this and other issues confronting Australia like the current power crisis.

Dick has NO connection with One Nation as all, and he clearly explained there were policies he did not support that ON pushes, the only statement he made was that ON was the ONLY party willing to discuss sustainable immigration numbers. Note NUMBERS not race.

Btw Dick does not want a complete hault on immigration, he just wants it to go from the current LUDICROUS 200k a year to 80k a SUSTAINABLE a year...that was in place during most of the 90's.

Along with Dick, one issue I agree with Bob Carr on is this one, Carr's academic publication on this issue shows COMPREHESIVLEY that Australia's geography, climate, etc are totally unsuited to a big Australia and that the current intakes are unsustainable and destructive.

I am sorry you can't be half-pregnant. The whole raison d'etre of One Nation is to prevent a certain group of people from coming to Australia on the basis of their religion. That in my opinion is not acceptable nor was it acceptable when Australia had the White Australia policy that Labor supported.

Bazza wrote:

BC wrote: that is just so typical of the looney left of which you're a world class example $wan...as soon as someone promotes a view other than your own they're branded as xenophobes, misogynists, racists, environmental vandals and so on. there's a very strong argument to get you lot sterilised at birth.

SPOT ON - The evidence is overwhelming yet he comes out with this crap about a bloke that genuinely cares about Australia and its future, clearly Swans priorities are NOT in the same place.

Are you trying to say that Dick Smith is above criticism? One is able to rationally criticise a person's position on a certain subject without it of necessity impugning the actual person.

swan42 wrote:

Bazza wrote:

swan42 wrote:

BC wrote: I don't need to argue anything...the facts are very clear that you and your ilk resort to blatant labelling and name calling when someone has an opinion other than your own. your previous post is all the proof I need.

BC Dick Smith has aligned himself with One Nation. The One Nation party that in the 1990s said we were being overrun by Asians. The One Nation party that says in the 2010s we are being overrun by Muslims. Both are demonstrably untrue. I am not going to stand by and allow the dissemination of racist comments that are aimed at vilifying a minority in Australia. As for John Howard's later day epiphany and getting into bed with One Nation is an absolute disgrace and just adds the opprobrium his Prime Ministership will be held in years to come.

Absolute patent NON SENSE.

Dick gave an excellent interview last night that went for an hour and explained this and other issues confronting Australia like the current power crisis.

Dick has NO connection with One Nation as all, and he clearly explained there were policies he did not support that ON pushes, the only statement he made was that ON was the ONLY party willing to discuss sustainable immigration numbers. Note NUMBERS not race.

Btw Dick does not want a complete hault on immigration, he just wants it to go from the current LUDICROUS 200k a year to 80k a SUSTAINABLE a year...that was in place during most of the 90's.

Along with Dick, one issue I agree with Bob Carr on is this one, Carr's academic publication on this issue shows COMPREHESIVLEY that Australia's geography, climate, etc are totally unsuited to a big Australia and that the current intakes are unsustainable and destructive.

I am sorry you can't be half-pregnant. The whole raison d'etre of One Nation is to prevent a certain group of people from coming to Australia on the basis of their religion. That in my opinion is not acceptable nor was it acceptable when Australia had the White Australia policy that Labor supported.

More Crap, they are two different things SMITH makes no reference to TYPES ( whatever that is)..and the One Nation Policy makes NO mention of race either purely numbers.

swan42 wrote:

Bazza wrote:

BC wrote: that is just so typical of the looney left of which you're a world class example $wan...as soon as someone promotes a view other than your own they're branded as xenophobes, misogynists, racists, environmental vandals and so on. there's a very strong argument to get you lot sterilised at birth.

SPOT ON - The evidence is overwhelming yet he comes out with this crap about a bloke that genuinely cares about Australia and its future, clearly Swans priorities are NOT in the same place.

Are you trying to say that Dick Smith is above criticism? One is able to rationally criticise a person's position on a certain subject without it of necessity impugning the actual person.

criticise all you like but you called him a xenophobe...

swan42 wrote:

Bazza wrote:

BC wrote: that is just so typical of the looney left of which you're a world class example $wan...as soon as someone promotes a view other than your own they're branded as xenophobes, misogynists, racists, environmental vandals and so on. there's a very strong argument to get you lot sterilised at birth.

SPOT ON - The evidence is overwhelming yet he comes out with this crap about a bloke that genuinely cares about Australia and its future, clearly Swans priorities are NOT in the same place.

Are you trying to say that Dick Smith is above criticism? One is able to rationally criticise a person's position on a certain subject without it of necessity impugning the actual person.

You can throw you lot in with Ross CAMERON because he was very critical of SMITH face to face last night , SMITH was right all this is a giant unsustainable PONZI scheme, and when politicians say Growth, they mean PERPETUAL growth, Cameron then went onto say we could have a Million Million people living in Sydney because we can create a giant inland sea,,,this is the mindset of nutters like you! Mark Latham sat next to him and even he said CAMERON was nuts.

swan42 wrote:

Bazza wrote:

BC wrote: that is just so typical of the looney left of which you're a world class example $wan...as soon as someone promotes a view other than your own they're branded as xenophobes, misogynists, racists, environmental vandals and so on. there's a very strong argument to get you lot sterilised at birth.

SPOT ON - The evidence is overwhelming yet he comes out with this crap about a bloke that genuinely cares about Australia and its future, clearly Swans priorities are NOT in the same place.

Are you trying to say that Dick Smith is above criticism? One is able to rationally criticise a person's position on a certain subject without it of necessity impugning the actual person.

So tell me Swan, when is enough enough as far as Perth goes? 3 Million, 5 Million? 30 Million and where is water coming from? have you ever thought about the sustainability of this into the future or just fark it???

BC wrote:

swan42 wrote:

Bazza wrote:

BC wrote: that is just so typical of the looney left of which you're a world class example $wan...as soon as someone promotes a view other than your own they're branded as xenophobes, misogynists, racists, environmental vandals and so on. there's a very strong argument to get you lot sterilised at birth.

SPOT ON - The evidence is overwhelming yet he comes out with this crap about a bloke that genuinely cares about Australia and its future, clearly Swans priorities are NOT in the same place.

Are you trying to say that Dick Smith is above criticism? One is able to rationally criticise a person's position on a certain subject without it of necessity impugning the actual person.

criticise all you like but you called him a xenophobe...

I did not.