Gina Rinehart

[numbercruncher]

This woman has become such a big player in Australia and indeed the world that she deserves her own thread.

To me she opitimises all that is pathetic about the capatalist system and individuals that get to personally control to much capital and asset.

3 out of 4 of her Children cant stand her according to the media - now that would say something about anyone.

Ill start the thread with article that articulates typical public perception of this woman.

UNDER THE CONTROL OF GINA RINEHART

THE inference you take from numerous reports over Fairfax Media's apparent reluctance to offer its biggest shareholder, Gina Rinehart, a board seat (or the requested two) is that she has been reluctant to pledge not to try to directly influence editorial policy.

A second inference, arising directly from the first, is that Rinehart actively wants to influence editorial policy at Fairfax.

You might suppose that if Gina was in a position to influence FM's editorial policies, then about now is the juncture at which she'd be tempted to do so. She has been under union fire for wanting to bring in up to 1700 foreign workers to help establish her 70 per cent owned Roy Hill iron ore project in Western Australia's remote but lucrative Pilbara region. And she'd be immensely aware of a speech to the Minerals Council of Australia, delivered last Thursday by Prime Minister Julia Gillard. Gillard said, in part: "You (miners) don't own the minerals. I don't own the minerals. Governments only sell you the right to mine the resource, a resource we hold in trust for a sovereign people. They own it and they deserve their share."


Perceptions of Australia's richest person seem to extend well beyond the mining sector. Last Monday's Q&A (ABC1, 9.30pm, Mondays) saw her variously described as greedy, perverse, cruel, controlling, fat and ugly.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/opinion/under-the-influence-of-gina-rinehart/story-e6frg9to-1226381993488

 

[pilots]

So you are not happy with our capatalist system, you should spend some time in a communist country and see hoe good they are going, I have worked in some of them country's, I know who has the best living conditions.

 

[basilio]

The reasoning behind democratic, law based societies is to protect the majority of the population from the excesses of those who want it all for themselves.

If we let the Rineharts and Murdochs of the world free rein we can't be surprised if we get collectively screwed over. That's the result of unfettered capitalism.

But that's obvious isn't it ?

 

[Joe Blow]

Folks, just a brief reminder to please keep the language civil and that personal attacks and insults are not acceptable.

Stick to discussing the topic and hand and do not attack or deliberately provoke others.

Edit: Four off-topic posts removed. I will not hesitate to remove more should it be necessary.

 

[Miss Hale]

I don't mind her and I thought the attack on her on Q&A was appalling. And where are all the feminists, why aren't they standing up for her when people are calling her fat and ugly?

Fairfax could certinly benefit from her expertise on the board - their loss.

 

[basilio]

Totally wrong to attack Gina Rinehart for being "fat and ugly". The question for discussion is how does our society control/regulate people who basically want to take over the country for their own personal benefit. For example changing laws that might affect their wealth and power, attacking others who want to make them more accountable, and or destroying social or business competition.

As a matter of comparison we can go back to the America of the 1870- 1900's when the business robber barons were in full flight and the remainder of the country took a beating.

 

[Calliope]

Folks, just a brief reminder to please keep the language civil and that personal attacks and insults are not acceptable.

Stick to discussing the topic and hand and do not attack or deliberately provoke others.

Edit: Four off-topic posts removed. I will not hesitate to remove more should it be necessary.

This raises the question as to why this thread was started or allowed. Every aspect of Rinehart's looks, character, political leanings, wealth, and even odour, has been well and truly done over on another thread. This thread was surely intended to be provocative.

 

[Joe Blow]

This raises the question as to why this thread was started or allowed. Every aspect of Rinehart's looks, character, political leanings, wealth, and even odour, has been well and truly done over on another thread. This thread was surely intended to be provocative.

I can't stop someone from starting a thread about a public figure. If people want to discuss Gina Rinehart it's probably better to have a dedicated thread for the purpose rather than derail other threads with off-topic discussion.

However, I think that ad hominem attacks do not do anything to further the discussion. If people want to discuss Gina Rinehart's public statements or her actions as a businessperson then fair enough. But to attack her for being overweight, rich or female is poor form and anyone who keep that sort of rubbish up can expect to be pulled up by me.

Stick to the facts and keep the discussion civil and as respectful as possible.

 

[Starcraftmazter]

So you are not happy with our capatalist system.

We do not have a capitalist system, we have something more akin to national socialism.


Gina Rinehart is a terrible person who is the embodiment of what people see wrong with capitalism. I think capitalism is great and we should have more of it in Australia (and everywhere else), however people like her are an obstacle to capitalists, because they portray only the absolute worst in it.

Capitalism is meant to serve the people, and all capitalists in truly democratic countries have a responsibility to show people that it is the single greatest economic system ever devised.

Unfortunately much like JP Morgan, JD Rockerfeller and many other prominent highly wealthy individuals of the past, Gina Rinehart hates capitalism and competition - the very same things which have brought her all her wealth. Instead of benefiting the country and people who have brought her everything, she seeks to destroy and impoverish Australia - and to undermine her gentle representative republic through her ruthless control of mass media.

How tragic.

 

[Calliope]

Fair enough Joe. It is my guess that without the invective this thread and the other Rhinehart thread on immigrant workers will run out of steam.

 

[basilio]

In the big picture its not hard to see how particular individuals who become wealthy want to keep getting bigger and bigger. In fact the single minded drive to succeed is often going to take some( not all...) tycoons into megalomania.

Gina Rinehart is just a more extreme and now public version of this process. She has always been a totally ruthless and controlling business person. Trouble is she now believes that there should be no restraint on her capacity to do business and that any obstacle in her way needs to be dealt with accordingly. So for her, challenging governments, employees, business competitors is all strictly business - and in that model you will do whatever it takes.

Change the title to the Packers, Murdochs, Bill Gates, Steve Jobs and there will be similar characteristics.

To safeguard the wider good we need strong democratic institutions, fearless laws and governments that recognise their responsibility to the whole community and broader environment.

And to keep all political parties roughly on the same track we need a community educated enough to understand these principles were critical and expect their leaders to not work in the narrow interests of a few very rich people or particular sectional groups

 

[Calliope]

We do not have a capitalist system, we have something more akin to national socialism.


Gina Rinehart is a terrible person who is the embodiment of what people see wrong with capitalism. I think capitalism is great and we should have more of it in Australia (and everywhere else), however people like her are an obstacle to capitalists, because they portray only the absolute worst in it.

Capitalism is meant to serve the people, and all capitalists in truly democratic countries have a responsibility to show people that it is the single greatest economic system ever devised.

Unfortunately much like JP Morgan, JD Rockerfeller and many other prominent highly wealthy individuals of the past, Gina Rinehart hates capitalism and competition - the very same things which have brought her all her wealth. Instead of benefiting the country and people who have brought her everything, she seeks to destroy and impoverish Australia - and to undermine her gentle representative republic through her ruthless control of mass media.

How tragic.

Tragic indeed. No woman should command such wealth. She should be burned at the stake as a witch.

 

[basilio]

Fair enough Joe. It is my guess that without the invective this thread and the other Rhinehart thread on immigrant workers will run out of steam.

That's an interesting comment isn't it ? Obviously if the conversation immediately turns to invective and abuse there could be plenty of posts - but very little discussion about the topic. Do we just want a series of nasty to and fro comments with no discussion about the topic??

But - then again - perhaps reducing the discussion to this level makes sure the real questions arn't aired ?

The key point with regard to the discussion about Gina Rinehart and her determination to extract every cent she can from her business was made by Julia Gilliard

You (miners) don't own the minerals. I don't own the minerals. Governments only sell you the right to mine the resource, a resource we hold in trust for a sovereign people. They own it and they deserve their share."

Lets reframe the debate.

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

She was a fine looking lass when she was younger, and she could hold her own still against some of the anorexic old pieces from the ABC, Fairfax and the Greens.

gg

 

[Joe Blow]

Enough! Lay off each other and stick to discussing the topic of the thread. I am tired of removing off-topic posts. Last warning.

 

[Julia]

I don't mind her and I thought the attack on her on Q&A was appalling. And where are all the feminists, why aren't they standing up for her when people are calling her fat and ugly?

Fairfax could certinly benefit from her expertise on the board - their loss.

+1. Attacks on people's physical characteristics are gratuitous and irrelevant.

However, I think that ad hominem attacks do not do anything to further the discussion. If people want to discuss Gina Rinehart's public statements or her actions as a businessperson then fair enough. But to attack her for being overweight, rich or female is poor form and anyone who keep that sort of rubbish up can expect to be pulled up by me.

Good to know.

She was a fine looking lass when she was younger, and she could hold her own still against some of the anorexic old pieces from the ABC, Fairfax and the Greens.

gg

Right. Yours are so repetitious. The same old theme, monstering Gina. If you've read one, you've read the lot.

Yes GG. If you are looking for a nasty piece of work, then I nominate Christine Milne.

What do either of the above posts contribute to useful discussion? For heaven's sake, let's desist from such personal commentary.

Cudos to Basilio for at least making an attempt to reframe the debate. Probably a waste of effort, though, sadly.

 

[MrBurns]

I find the personal attacks against Rinehart offensive, you don't know her, she's wealthy and runs a large company, is it envy ?

She is bringing in foreign workers, lawfully, and paying them award wages, do you think if she could get them here she'd bother doing that ?

She doesn't dole the money out to her children but thats a private matter, she must have her reasons, I don't see them starving do you ? and the attacks on her appearance are simply immature and very offensive, not something I would expect from people on ASF - some people were dragged up I guess.

 

[Calliope]

Cudos to Basilio for at least making an attempt to reframe the debate. Probably a waste of effort, though, sadly.

Yes cudos (sic) to basilio for trying to reframe the debate. He sees it as good versus evil. A worthy effort, and a good subject for debate. It hinges on portraying Rinehart and her ilk as the evil.

I won't join the debate. Joe can rest assured I won't be defending Rinehart or myself from any further attacks on either Rinehart thread.

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

Enough! Lay off each other and stick to discussing the topic of the thread. I am tired of removing off-topic posts. Last warning.

+1. Attacks on people's physical characteristics are gratuitous and irrelevant.


Good to know.




What do either of the above posts contribute to useful discussion? For heaven's sake, let's desist from such personal commentary.

Cudos to Basilio for at least making an attempt to reframe the debate. Probably a waste of effort, though, sadly.

My apologies,

To you Julia and to Joe.

I was merely making the observation that none of us scrub up as well as we did when we were 18 or 20.

I was particularly unimpressed by the comments from the prissy Marr on QANDA 2 weeks ago. He is a verm.

Gina is a capitalist but she is our capitalist. She has stayed in Australia unlike Murdoch and now Tinkler or whatever that fellow is from Newcastle down south who have decamped to the USA and Singapore respectively.

She is successful. That is no reason to demonise her .

gg

 

[Starcraftmazter]

is it envy ?

No.

She is bringing in foreign workers, lawfully

Just because something is lawful doesn't make it right or ethical. I think many posters would have a lot to say about the carbon tax. It is lawful - but do you automatically agree with it and think it's the right path for Australia?

Let us not be hypocrites here.

and paying them award wages, do you think if she could get them here she'd bother doing that ?

Yes, and that is precisely the reason. She does not want to pay the wages which the free market has set, so she buys up media and threatens the government with bad press if they don't grant her the ability to fly in foreign labour who are willing to work for minimum required wages, undercutting local workers.