Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

Gina Rinehart: "spend less time drinking or smoking and socialising"

elephants walking south in June whilst the stock market rallies does not meant elephants are the cause of stock market rallies..

show me how making the minimum wage $100/hr causes more employment...
you dont have sufficient intellectual ability to be commenting on these topics i suggest you stop

I didn't say that.
Saying we all should work harder for less money is hardly a great philosopher at work more an example of self interest
Economics 101 is simply the first semester of a degree and if you think the world is that simple you had better check that it not yourself that is the intellectual pygmy.
 
She's not being hypocritical at all. Although I agree she could lsoe weight, she isn't running around whinging and saying "I want to lose weight", and not doing anything about it. Then it would be hypocritical. I imagine she is referring largely to those complaining they want/need/expect more money without doing anything about it.
Yes, as I see her remarks also. Recently there was an article in one of the Sunday papers with the headline
"Fat and Proud of It" or words to that effect. It was about two grossly obese women posing in various attempts at fashion and telling readers they had no interest in altering their shape at all.

I don't see Gina's weight as even slightly related to her business capacity.

Totally agree
All losers see all successful people
This way.
:D:D:D
 
a lot of very sour grapes in this thread.

Personally i have worked hard all my life
I find it hard to accept the fact that i like a beer after a hard days work
is a problem
The cigarettes she has a pointed out she has a good point (struggling to give them up but i will get there one day
day)
I am sure most fly in out workers are not happy with Gina,s comments

There are are a lot of posters on this site that run very successful business,es ( and good on them i back them100%)

I myself have never begrudged a millionaire for making money and i never will! this creates employment and taxes

But to put down the average beer swilling, smoking cigarettes Australian is costing money
I have to question this

Maybe Gina should look at the fact,s that a beer drinking and smoking Dogger(yes Dogger not digger) presented her father with the Iron ore samples and told Lang where it was, that made her rich to day
( the Dogger was an amateur geologist)
In those days maybe $3000 a year was a doggers rate (guessing)

May be Gina is right the Beer swilling,smoking West Australian Dogger working for the state government
Was not good enough
So if the State government was smart maybe the iron ore discoveries in are West Australian owned
But a least he was honest and gave Lang a tip where the iron was
The Dogger did not have the money to lay the miners rights

But Lang did, he had a privileged family that owned the cattle station on which the iron ore was discovered

Full commendations for Lang Hancock pushing the Iron ore industry in West Australia,As the Court and previous Government at the time would not allow exports because of National interest and Lang had a big fight on his hands.He won good on him


No mention of that in history the plane flight was a furfy

Show me the flights records of bad weather that day(the records show no bad weather on the day of Lang,s discovery)As history suggest,s he flew low in his private airplane because of bad weather and his instruments went crazy because of iron ore (crap)

And i will surely prove this one day
Cheers
Des
 
I didn't say that.
Saying we all should work harder for less money is hardly a great philosopher at work more an example of self interest
Economics 101 is simply the first semester of a degree and if you think the world is that simple you had better check that it not yourself that is the intellectual pygmy.

im nearly finished my masters in economics, if you wanna measure credentials and economic knowledge im well and truly up for the challenge... you can go away now with the tail between your elgs
 
im nearly finished my masters in economics, if you wanna measure credentials and economic knowledge im well and truly up for the challenge... you can go away now with the tail between your elgs

Well I have an MBA, experience as well as some other degrees.

I hate to be the employer who hired you. he would find he had a right wing redneck with a fetish for guns and US TV and worst of all a closed mind and a huge ego.
 
Lets lay off the personal attacks please guys.

Any further off topic posts will be removed and infractions issued
 
Contributed to the economy? If she wasn't digging the stuff up someone else would be.

It's like Gerry Harvey, we're supposed to thank him for 'creating jobs'. Every time the guy opened a store it would put nearby electronic stores out of business, resulting in no net gain in employment. And he imports everything from China just like everyone else does anyway. I don't think he's added any value.

So what happens when there is no entrepreneurs ready to take any risks?(yeah yeah I know majority on this thread seem to think she hasn't done anything, and has had everything handed on a silver platter :rolleyes:) Everyone just keeps assuming 'someone else will do it', but what if no one does. Then there is no jobs? Entrepreneurs and innovation drive economies. Without them it would be a very sorry looking place.

Harvey obviously had the balls to think big, and it paid off. Although hes taking a bit of a beating at the moment.

I don't know that resources and retail is the best comparison either.
 
Well I have an MBA, experience as well as some other degrees.

I hate to be the employer who hired you. he would find he had a right wing redneck with a fetish for guns and US TV and worst of all a closed mind and a huge ego.

they teach better economics in the run of the mill MBA program then I guess..

you win Knobby haha
 
And onto some absolutely fantastic news - seems Gina should be paying attention to her own finances rather than the smoking and drinking habits of others ....
I love the smell of evaporating fortunes :xyxthumbs
Of course you do. Anything that penalises someone more affluent than you makes you happy, it seems.

So what happens when there is no entrepreneurs ready to take any risks?(yeah yeah I know majority on this thread seem to think she hasn't done anything, and has had everything handed on a silver platter :rolleyes:) Everyone just keeps assuming 'someone else will do it', but what if no one does. Then there is no jobs? Entrepreneurs and innovation drive economies. Without them it would be a very sorry looking place.
+1.
 
So what happens when there is no entrepreneurs ready to take any risks?(yeah yeah I know majority on this thread seem to think she hasn't done anything, and has had everything handed on a silver platter :rolleyes:) Everyone just keeps assuming 'someone else will do it', but what if no one does. Then there is no jobs? Entrepreneurs and innovation drive economies. Without them it would be a very sorry looking place.

Harvey obviously had the balls to think big, and it paid off. Although hes taking a bit of a beating at the moment.

I don't know that resources and retail is the best comparison either.

I don't have a problem with Gina or Gerry, other than the dumb comments they've made publicly in recent times. Clearly they are astute business-people, evidenced by the empires they've built.

All I'm saying, with regards to Gina, is that I don't think we should bow down and praise her awesomeness for 'contributing to the economy'. I think it's hard not to contribute to the economy if you're handed a gigantic inheritance, the money has to go somewhere, and it's not like she created a new and innovative product or started something from scratch. I'd be far more impressed if she directed some energy towards philanthropic endeavours, i.e. like Buffet and Gates
 
I don't have a problem with Gina or Gerry, other than the dumb comments they've made publicly in recent times. Clearly they are astute business-people, evidenced by the empires they've built.

All I'm saying, with regards to Gina, is that I don't think we should bow down and praise her awesomeness for 'contributing to the economy'. I think it's hard not to contribute to the economy if you're handed a gigantic inheritance, the money has to go somewhere, and it's not like she created a new and innovative product or started something from scratch. I'd be far more impressed if she directed some energy towards philanthropic endeavours, i.e. like Buffet and Gates


Fair enough. I would hope she has been putting money into increasing mining productivity. The mining-technology side of things is probably majority over-seas companies anyway. In saying that I saw a few with some good ideas on that young inventors show or whatever it's called.
 
Of course you do. Anything that penalises someone more affluent than you makes you happy, it seems.

+1.


No just Gina Whinehart and Her ilk who are getting their just desserts ! Plenty of the worlds elite whose Morals I support , and I suspect they would be the ones you dislike. Just imagine if people like you and I agreed , it would be a boring warless world wouldnt it ?
 
Maybe Gina is refering to this group of people mentioned in the Gonski Report.



In the 1960s, only 2 per cent of Australian men aged 25 to 54 were outside the workforce: neither in a job, nor looking for one. But in the year to June 2012, on average, almost 10 per cent of Australian men of prime working age were not in work or looking for it. They're not counted in the unemployment figures, but they cost us (and themselves) a fortune

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/big-fat-zero-for-gillard-20120903-25agh.html#ixzz25YAu8K00

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/big-fat-zero-for-gillard-20120903-25agh.html

Yet we are importing workers. :2twocents
 
Maybe Gina is refering to this group of people mentioned in the Gonski Report.



In the 1960s, only 2 per cent of Australian men aged 25 to 54 were outside the workforce: neither in a job, nor looking for one. But in the year to June 2012, on average, almost 10 per cent of Australian men of prime working age were not in work or looking for it. They're not counted in the unemployment figures, but they cost us (and themselves) a fortune

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/big-fat-zero-for-gillard-20120903-25agh.html#ixzz25YAu8K00

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/big-fat-zero-for-gillard-20120903-25agh.html

Yet we are importing workers. :2twocents

Wow, that is a huge number! My question is - why the hell are they not looking for work??
 
Wow, that is a huge number! My question is - why the hell are they not looking for work??

Maybe that's what Gina is asking.
Why aren't the reporters asking the government?
Then they could ask "if there is all these employable males out there, why the hell are we importing workers"
 
im nearly finished my masters in economics, if you wanna measure credentials and economic knowledge im well and truly up for the challenge... you can go away now with the tail between your elgs

so funny!!! knobby & goodman boys theres only one measurement that counts & it aint " i got my MBA faster than yours...

guys get the tape out & whoevers got the biggest is the winner or get the sumo suits on

& give us all a laugh........tb
 
Top