Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

The Voice

Jump to new
IFocus said:
The serious big money was always behind Trump.

Trump will reward well... that's the USA.
Click to expand...
As you would say, Yeh nah.
The big money has slagged off against Trump since he introduced tariffs in his first term.
As with most Western countries there is a huge swing to the right from the middle and lower class.
Even here Labor only scraped in last election, due to the affluent voters, the middle class are deserting them.
Hopefully Albo gets another term, but does he really want one? That's the question.
Bill's jumped ship he probably realises he wont be able to increase the final average salary.
Albo may well think the same, he is on top whack already, so the super is set.
What's the upside?
 
IFocus said:
The serious big money was always behind Trump.

Trump will reward well... that's the USA.
Click to expand...

The Democrats outspent the Republicans.

IMG_6695.jpeg



 
What someone is personally, and who they choose to align their political views with, are not tied to each other and there's plenty of examples of that.

People who are themselves upper or middle class but who align with the working class politically aren't uncommon in my experience. It's not hard to find someone who holds a lofty position who puts manufacturing, manual labour or a STEM education on a pedestal despite not being that themselves.

Elitism isn't simply about personal circumstances but it's a mindset that largely comes from exposure to the realities of life or, more to the point, lack of exposure.

Where you'll find it is in the media, education, politics, activism, celebrities, think tanks and the like. Things where risk is minimal to non-existent, the physical environment is pleasant and comfortable, incomes are high and where it's pretty hard to find yourself out of work involuntarily.

Versus trades, professional drivers, dangerous goods, military, manufacturing / shift work, emergency services, utilities, farmers, cleaners, sex workers, garbage collectors, low end service jobs and anyone else who's done something that's physically unpleasant, comes with unavoidable risks, involves working in the middle of the night, has to be done no matter what the circumstances or which comes with zero respect or authority. Those people don't usually adopt the elite mindset even if they do somehow end up wealthy, in their hearts they're rusted onto the working class mindset.

The Democrats have simply become far too influenced by the media, academics, activists, celebrities, think tanks and so on at the expense of those mentioned above. Versus Trump who, despite being personally wealthy, has at least acknowledged the concerns of the rest.

That's the key. It's no secret that Trump is personally wealthy but he's acknowledging the rest, he's not presenting himself as someone above the plebs even though he is in practice. He's not pushing an ideological paradigm that most can see isn't working as promised.

Because there's a brutal reality behind this. Regardless of who's been in government, it's a practical reality that progressive agendas have been implemented throughout the West over the past half century or so. Take a serious look – there's very little the progressives argued for that hasn't been implemented, they've called the shots in practice one way or another.

Now the trouble is, it's not exactly working all that well. Yes there's been technological progress but that mostly didn't come from government (with some exceptions). For the rest well there's an awful lot of people struggling, there's a very hollowed out middle class that's turned into a two class society of haves and have nots with few left in the middle. People aren't blind to that situation and they're now pushing back against the whole thing and saying no more, enough is enough.

It's not a rejection of black people, it's not a rejection of gays and lesbians and it's not a rejection of any other minority either. Not personally. What it is, is it's about the reality that even the average same sex couple won't wake up tomorrow morning wishing that if only they had another rainbow flag then all would be well. No, they'll be far more worried about being able to afford a house to put the flag on in the first place along with putting fuel in the tank and food on the table. In other words, their problems are the exact same problems the average white heterosexual man has.

Society isn't divided on race, gender or sexuality despite the attempts of many to bring that about. The real divide is whether you're a have or a have not, that what was once a large middle class is now seriously hollowed out after decades of policies doing just that and constant division seeking to distract from that situation.

Australians didn't vote no to Aboriginal people. What they voted no to is more of the same, more of the mentality that's gutted manufacturing, doubled the real price of utilities, quadrupled the real price of houses and is now gutting the core culture of society itself. That's what they said no to, they've had enough of the elites stuffing things up and making life harder than it ought to be.

Quite simply the establishment has lost credibility. Voters are looking for leaders who get things done, they're not looking for more of the same. They want results not process. The Voice was process with a complete lack of specifics - the exact opposite of what voters want to see hence its rejection. :2twocents
 
IFocus said:
No that's not what I was on about as far as the election goes Trump captures more media anyway, he has no peer in that area.
Click to expand...
Like I said earlier, constantly looking for excuses and finding someone else to blame, will never get anything done.

The left have to face the reality that their agenda can't go on forever, sometime they have to stop, take a breather and allow the middle class who are paying for it to take a breather.

The only way the worker can be heard is at the ballot box.
 
IFocus said:
No that's not what I was on about as far as the election goes Trump captures more media anyway, he has no peer in that area.
Click to expand...

Where do you think the Democratic Party got their funding from?

It wasn’t the working people that voted for the Republicans.
 
JohnDe said:
Where do you think the Democratic Party got their funding from?

It wasn’t the working people that voted for the Republicans.
Click to expand...

Let's see where the money flows to under Trump, doubt lower or middle classes will see much.

That will be the answer.
 
IFocus said:
Let's see where the money flows to under Trump, doubt lower or middle classes will see much.

That will be the answer.
Click to expand...

What ever will happen in the future is in the future, but I can now see from your comments and frustration the current problems with the left side of the political spectrum.

A lot of soul searching is going to be needed, if answers and solutions are wanted.

Blaming money and misinformation for the continued failures of the left is a cop out. The Voice referendum lost significantly, the Republicans won significantly.

Stop blaming others and start having a look at the causes.
 
Smurf1976 said:
What someone is personally, and who they choose to align their political views with, are not tied to each other and there's plenty of examples of that.

People who are themselves upper or middle class but who align with the working class politically aren't uncommon in my experience. It's not hard to find someone who holds a lofty position who puts manufacturing, manual labour or a STEM education on a pedestal despite not being that themselves.

Elitism isn't simply about personal circumstances but it's a mindset that largely comes from exposure to the realities of life or, more to the point, lack of exposure.

Where you'll find it is in the media, education, politics, activism, celebrities, think tanks and the like. Things where risk is minimal to non-existent, the physical environment is pleasant and comfortable, incomes are high and where it's pretty hard to find yourself out of work involuntarily.

Versus trades, professional drivers, dangerous goods, military, manufacturing / shift work, emergency services, utilities, farmers, cleaners, sex workers, garbage collectors, low end service jobs and anyone else who's done something that's physically unpleasant, comes with unavoidable risks, involves working in the middle of the night, has to be done no matter what the circumstances or which comes with zero respect or authority. Those people don't usually adopt the elite mindset even if they do somehow end up wealthy, in their hearts they're rusted onto the working class mindset.

The Democrats have simply become far too influenced by the media, academics, activists, celebrities, think tanks and so on at the expense of those mentioned above. Versus Trump who, despite being personally wealthy, has at least acknowledged the concerns of the rest.

That's the key. It's no secret that Trump is personally wealthy but he's acknowledging the rest, he's not presenting himself as someone above the plebs even though he is in practice. He's not pushing an ideological paradigm that most can see isn't working as promised.

Because there's a brutal reality behind this. Regardless of who's been in government, it's a practical reality that progressive agendas have been implemented throughout the West over the past half century or so. Take a serious look – there's very little the progressives argued for that hasn't been implemented, they've called the shots in practice one way or another.

Now the trouble is, it's not exactly working all that well. Yes there's been technological progress but that mostly didn't come from government (with some exceptions). For the rest well there's an awful lot of people struggling, there's a very hollowed out middle class that's turned into a two class society of haves and have nots with few left in the middle. People aren't blind to that situation and they're now pushing back against the whole thing and saying no more, enough is enough.

It's not a rejection of black people, it's not a rejection of gays and lesbians and it's not a rejection of any other minority either. Not personally. What it is, is it's about the reality that even the average same sex couple won't wake up tomorrow morning wishing that if only they had another rainbow flag then all would be well. No, they'll be far more worried about being able to afford a house to put the flag on in the first place along with putting fuel in the tank and food on the table. In other words, their problems are the exact same problems the average white heterosexual man has.

Society isn't divided on race, gender or sexuality despite the attempts of many to bring that about. The real divide is whether you're a have or a have not, that what was once a large middle class is now seriously hollowed out after decades of policies doing just that and constant division seeking to distract from that situation.

Australians didn't vote no to Aboriginal people. What they voted no to is more of the same, more of the mentality that's gutted manufacturing, doubled the real price of utilities, quadrupled the real price of houses and is now gutting the core culture of society itself. That's what they said no to, they've had enough of the elites stuffing things up and making life harder than it ought to be.

Quite simply the establishment has lost credibility. Voters are looking for leaders who get things done, they're not looking for more of the same. They want results not process. The Voice was process with a complete lack of specifics - the exact opposite of what voters want to see hence its rejection. :2twocents
Click to expand...
All of that could be true,but the thing is that DJT had a chance to fix it in his first term but got thrown out presumably because he failed to live up to expectations

Yes the Dems have moved too far Left, but I'm also thinking that they don't think women are up to the job.

Whatever, they will get what they deserve.
 
SirRumpole said:
All of that could be true,but the thing is that DJT had a chance to fix it in his first term but got thrown out presumably because he failed to live up to expectations

Yes the Dems have moved too far Left, but I'm also thinking that they don't think women are up to the job.

Whatever, they will get what they deserve.
Click to expand...

Even you mentioned that a government needs two terms.
 
JohnDe said:
What ever will happen in the future is in the future, but I can now see from your comments and frustration the current problems with the left side of the political spectrum.

A lot of soul searching is going to be needed, if answers and solutions are wanted.

Blaming money and misinformation for the continued failures of the left is a cop out. The Voice referendum lost significantly, the Republicans won significantly.

Stop blaming others and start having a look at the causes.
Click to expand...

I clearly understand the causes the US that voted for Trump thinking that Trump will put more money in their pockets than the Democrats simple.

Money is the US god before anything.

I am not aware of any policy that will allow Trump to do that.

I am also no fan of the Democrats they are just a lesser bunch of nutcases than the Republicans but I still don't get the morals of a population that allow a candidate like Trump in.

Like I said let's see where the money flows to.
 
IFocus said:
I clearly understand the causes the US that voted for Trump thinking that Trump will put more money in their pockets than the Democrats simple.

Money is the US god before anything.

I am not aware of any policy that will allow Trump to do that.

I am also no fan of the Democrats they are just a lesser bunch of nutcases than the Republicans but I still don't get the morals of a population that allow a candidate like Trump in.

Like I said let's see where the money flows to.
Click to expand...



For many people, especially those leaning left, Donald Trump’s disqualifications to be president seem obvious. Why did so many people vote for Trump again, they wonder, and how did he win not just the Electoral College vote this time but the popular vote as well?​
www.minnpost.com

Anthropologist who studies 'Trumpiverse' on Trump voters

To reduce polarization, it's important to understand why Trump voters embraced MAGA. Here are 5 things to know.
www.minnpost.com www.minnpost.com
 
Reading some research papers today on rock art and came upon this

"Grey would later enact the Aboriginal Witnesses Act 1844,which excluded Aboriginal witnesses in genocide/mass murder trials."

Gray being lieutenant governor George Grey



The Aboriginal Witnesses Act was a series ordinances and amendments enacted by lieutenant Governor George Grey, Governor of South Australia during the early colonial period of South Australia. The act was established "To facilitate the admission of the unsworn testimony of Aboriginal inhabitants of South Australia and parts adjacent".
Despite the act's stated aims being to facilitate Aboriginal testimony, it had the opposite effect, creating a situation where the massacre of Aboriginal peoples by European colonisers could not be tried solely on the evidence of Aboriginal witnesses.

History​

[edit]
The lieutenant governor George Grey was responsible for the act, and later lieutenant governor Frederick Robe was responsible for the act's amendments.[1] While its stated aim was to make provisions for unsworn testimony by "uncivilised people" to be admissible in court, the act made it possible for a judge to dismiss the testimony of an "uncivilised person or persons" as insufficient unless corroborated by other evidence - that the court could not base the conviction of a white man on the testimony of an aboriginal witness alone.[2] Although it was a progressive law for the time, the act decreed that the credibility of the evidence be left to the discretion of "the justice of the court, or jury under direction of the judge". The act also made Aboriginal testimony inadmissible in trials that carried the penalty of death.[1]
Effectively, the act created a situation where settler solidarity and the law of evidence ensured that the murder and massacre of aboriginal Australians by European colonisers could not be tried solely on the evidence of aboriginal witnesses.[2] Possibly in response to the Avenue Range Station massacre, where three Tanganekald women, two teenage girls, three infants, and an "old man blind and infirm" were murdered by Australian mass murderer and pastoralist James Brown, the Aboriginal Witnesses Act of 1848 was amended in July 1849 to allow a person to be convicted on the sole testimony of an aboriginal person, though this rarely occurred.[2][1]

The act remained in force until 1929.[3]
 
IFocus said:
Reading some research papers today on rock art and came upon this

"Grey would later enact the Aboriginal Witnesses Act 1844,which excluded Aboriginal witnesses in genocide/mass murder trials."

Gray being lieutenant governor George Grey



The Aboriginal Witnesses Act was a series ordinances and amendments enacted by lieutenant Governor George Grey, Governor of South Australia during the early colonial period of South Australia. The act was established "To facilitate the admission of the unsworn testimony of Aboriginal inhabitants of South Australia and parts adjacent".
Despite the act's stated aims being to facilitate Aboriginal testimony, it had the opposite effect, creating a situation where the massacre of Aboriginal peoples by European colonisers could not be tried solely on the evidence of Aboriginal witnesses.

History​

[edit]
The lieutenant governor George Grey was responsible for the act, and later lieutenant governor Frederick Robe was responsible for the act's amendments.[1] While its stated aim was to make provisions for unsworn testimony by "uncivilised people" to be admissible in court, the act made it possible for a judge to dismiss the testimony of an "uncivilised person or persons" as insufficient unless corroborated by other evidence - that the court could not base the conviction of a white man on the testimony of an aboriginal witness alone.[2] Although it was a progressive law for the time, the act decreed that the credibility of the evidence be left to the discretion of "the justice of the court, or jury under direction of the judge". The act also made Aboriginal testimony inadmissible in trials that carried the penalty of death.[1]
Effectively, the act created a situation where settler solidarity and the law of evidence ensured that the murder and massacre of aboriginal Australians by European colonisers could not be tried solely on the evidence of aboriginal witnesses.[2] Possibly in response to the Avenue Range Station massacre, where three Tanganekald women, two teenage girls, three infants, and an "old man blind and infirm" were murdered by Australian mass murderer and pastoralist James Brown, the Aboriginal Witnesses Act of 1848 was amended in July 1849 to allow a person to be convicted on the sole testimony of an aboriginal person, though this rarely occurred.[2][1]

The act remained in force until 1929.[3]
Click to expand...

Yeah, some nasty stuff went on in the old days. My mum was as only recently telling me a story of intimidation and fear that her great Aunt went through living in a remote part of SA. I even found out that one of my great great uncle’s married an aboriginal woman, but had to move because her family and community tried to kill her.

Thank goodness for our English democratic system with its checks and balances.
 
One thing I'm finding interesting is, we seem more concerned about U.S politics, than the average american.
I'm on a cruise ship which is mainly carrying U.S passengers, the cruise is a middle of the road affair, nothing fancy so generally middle class 50-80 year old passengers.
I expected a lot more excitement around the election, there was absolutely zip, nothing.
If I try to introduce the election result in conversations, the usual reply is, well he has to be better than the last lot
I think the average punter is waking up to the fact the West in general, is in a bit of strife and are just voting for change.
 
sptrawler said:
One thing I'm finding interesting is, we seem more concerned about U.S politics, than the average american.
I'm on a cruise ship which is mainly carrying U.S passengers, the cruise is a middle of the road affair, nothing fancy so generally middle class 50-80 year old passengers.
I expected a lot more excitement around the election, there was absolutely zip, nothing.
If I try to introduce the election result in conversations, the usual reply is, well he has to be better than the last lot
I think the average punter is waking up to the fact the West in general, is in a bit of strife and are just voting for change.
Click to expand...

What interests the Australian media and what interests the Australian public are often two different things.

A few reporters get an overseas trip which they get excited about, but personally I didn't on the news for three days at least because its all stuff that is irrelevant to me, and even now if I turn it on and Trump is mentioned then it's straight off again.

Why the media can just report he facts (like who won) instead of indulging in continual and pointless analysis and opinion mongering is something that they will have to look into themselves, but I'm one little black duck who thinks it all a big bore.
 
SirRumpole said:
What interests the Australian media and what interests the Australian public are often two different things.

A few reporters get an overseas trip which they get excited about, but personally I didn't on the news for three days at least because its all stuff that is irrelevant to me, and even now if I turn it on and Trump is mentioned then it's straight off again.

Why the media can just report he facts (like who won) instead of indulging in continual and pointless analysis and opinion mongering is something that they will have to look into themselves, but I'm one little black duck who thinks it all a big bore.
Click to expand...
It's why the mainstream media is dying. We haven't watched a mainstream news or current affairs program for a very long time. It's all BS and propaganda.

New media, Rumble, yoootoooob, X, etc you can curate a bit of balance. As much Trump as you want, or none at all. You can still form an echo chamber and many do, but you CAN find truth about everything

They are saying this was the first US election won and lost on new media rather than old media.
 
Last edited:
JohnDe said:
Yeah, some nasty stuff went on in the old days.....

Thank goodness for our English democratic system with its checks and balances.
Click to expand...

An example of the law working for everyone equally -

Mark Dreyfus silent on NAAJA funding shift following Priscilla Atkins judgment
28/6/2024
Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus has refused to say whether taxpayer funds should be reallocated from the embattled North Australian Aboriginal Justice Agency in the wake of Federal Court findings that the board unlawfully sacked its former CEO after she raised serious corruption allegations against senior staff members.​

NAAJA in shock apology to ousted CEO Priscilla Atkins
20/11/2024
Australia’s largest Aboriginal legal service has apologised “without reservation” to ousted chief executive, Priscilla Atkins, after the Federal Court found its board unlawfully sacked her after she raised serious allegations of corruption against senior members of staff.​
​
The Voice referendum failed because the majority of voters want one Australia where we are all equal.
 
An interesting article, that highlights the issues remote towns have, it's a complex problem and there are no easy answers.
Now there is an alcohol ban, it becomes expensive as booze runners bring it in, now meths becomes the drug of choice.


www.abc.net.au

Cheaper than grog and marijuana, meth is wreaking havoc on this small town

Methylamphetamine is taking a toll on the central Kimberley town of Fitzroy Crossing. It is a story playing out across Australia's top end.
www.abc.net.au www.abc.net.au
 

Similar threads

R
The American use of War Pretext Incidents
Replies
6
Views
9K
sptrawler
sptrawler
Top