Printable View
If it was legislation, the libs would turn it over when next in power. This serves no purpose for them and their mates like Palmer and Hancock who want to use their land without proper compensation or consultation. I remember a few years ago Rio Tinto knowingly desecrated sensitive ceremonial locations.
So you don’’t vote but you will this time out of spite.Quote:
Originally Posted by dotcumdotinyou
The last referendum in 1999 was No to Australia becoming a republic and this has festered; if No succeeds, status quo remains and the Gap won't ever get closed.
There has to be a better way and this might be a shot at it
There's a common theme to the No voters if Abbott, Bolt, Credlin, Dutton, Hanson, Howard, Palmer, Rinehart and their ilk are in their camp
Conspiracy theories and disinformation spread like wildfire, see this
https://twitter.com/i/status/1709855035184627754
Today, Albo ruled out legislating the Voice if No succeeds as it is the will of the people, he said
As Paul Kelly sang, if not now when, if not us, who..
Well, the people are voting on two things - the voice, and it's constitutional permanence. I hope someone asks Albo how he can possibly know which of the two things they have rejected.
Thats $55 towards a punt after he votes.. why waste it by not voting?!Quote:
Originally Posted by ReginaldBubbles
I feel like Australia has been influenced by the US a bit with their fanatical obsession with the idea that the constitution is this sacred document written by our founding fathers that shouldn't be changed (which in the US is basically to defend the second amendment but not so much the others) but it's actually a flexible document that needs to be able to be changed with the times.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ziggurat
In 1901 the Australian people accepted a whole constitution that simply listed what the government could make laws about. There was no detail what those laws would be and we're all fine because the detail can change in the parliament, but the fact that that ability is permanent whichever government is in is important.
It's important that there's always an Aboriginal voice to parliament even if the National Party somehow becomes the government and decides the voice should be one person who makes representations once every ten years. And it's not going to be a body that distributes funds or makes any financial decisions. So many furphys and straw man arguments in this debate for political gain, including the argument that we don't know the detail when it's actually really simple and harmless. There's nothing to lose. And it's not even about race.
Another 5 days and this thread can finally die.. well, it should finally die.
Just as any hope of a decent future will die with it...
I hope all you "No" voters have taken the time to read the actual proposed changes as well as the Uluru Statement from the Heart....
Dutton and his rich cronies have pulled a fast one here.. I hope he gets what he deserves politically.
Voting "Yes" is the only sane, logical thing to do... ONCE YOU HAVE ALL THE INFORMATION.
Bur then, this is a punting forum....
Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk
Maybe yes in the future after a thorough debate and mutual agreement on all sides. Right now it is not the time, now it will actually divide the society even more and create more conflict than benefits. This is not a well thought out decision. I will not support it.
Asking for a relo who’s stuck OS at the moment, that’s all. Postal voting is such a pain in the arse!Quote:
Originally Posted by dotcumdotinyou
GoldfishMan,Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldfishMan
Fyi, there is a postal voting deadline that AEC needs to receive the postal votes by, 13 days after voting day.
https://www.aec.gov.au/referendums/v...as-voting.html
Note this:
Unable to vote
Voting in a referendum is not compulsory for Australians overseas. If you are unable to vote you should complete and submit an overseas notification form.
If you do not inform the AEC, we will write to you asking you to explain why you did not vote.
The Nos are winning because a lot of people do not understand what it truly means and they think voting No is the safest answer.
No, the fact that they make me go all the way out to vote, that's a big "no" from me, I could've used the time for a punt instead...
I bet Langton would choke on here avocado on toast reading this forum
Was hoping not to discuss this lady, but since you brought her upQuote:
Originally Posted by BigPedro666
These are her words
"Every time the No cases raise their arguments, if you start pulling it apart you get down to base racism, I'm sorry to say that's where it lands, or sheer stupidity"
She and Ray Martin did nothing to persuade undecided people to their viewpoint. Fact
Name calling really has no place in a civilized discussion
Australians hate being told what to think or what to vote, and particularly if you call people names
This lady is clearly surrounds herself with like minded people. She doesn't yet understand that her opinion is just one opinion among 23 million people. Well she will learn shortly that the population as a whole were not happy to sign up to a contract with the fine print hidden
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-09-...ents/102848644
Sorry A&L but there will still be a decent future for all if the no vote gets up, its not as if they're going to reduce spending in the aboriginal affairs portfolio after Saturday.
And I hope Albo and his cronies get what they deserve for not giving us all the information and having a full and frank debate before going to a vote.
Its great living in a democracy isn't it? a yes vote may seem logical to you just as a no vote seems logical to me, what a great country we live in.
He has a point, bro. Any country will prosper if all of her people prosper. If there is an entire race living in it, that calls themselves her citizens, that are non-productive to society, then it simply creates a negative drag on the country as a whole.Quote:
Originally Posted by dotcumdotinyou
Throw out everything and look at it purely from an economic POV, that's the unavoidable truth that you will be left with.
Imagine an Australia where no extra spending is needed on Aboriginals. How much do we spend now? That's how much we stand to gain if we can beat this bogeyman, get that race up to speed and be productive like everyone else. Then we will all prosper.
I'm sorry GFM but that seems racist to me. Your saying that aboriginals are an anchor on the economy and we'd all be better off if they smartened up?
I'm voting no because it hasn't been debated properly and the information from the yes side hasn't changed my suspicions of what it will mean for the constitution in the future, not because I want "that race up to speed and be productive like everyone else".
That's why I said you have to throw out everything and look at it purely from an economic point of view. If you want to debate about $$$ that's what you have to do.Quote:
Originally Posted by dotcumdotinyou
Go ahead and sprinkle some salt and pepper on my argument, call me a racist. It doesn't take away from the fact that to vote No is to vote for the status quo, to continue paying all this $$$, on every budget every year, just to kick the can further along. Until what... A better idea comes up? Good luck with that.
It's not going to get up. It is behind in all mainland states and well behind in Qld and WA. Tassie has got a slim lead for yes. I think I saw oz wide only 8% are undecided.
If it is such a great idea, though none of that optimism is evidence based, I'm not sure why Albanese - if he so truly believes it is such a miracle idea - is petulantly thowing his baby out with the bathwater if (when) we don't vote yes for it in this form.
Very good discussion on Q&A re the Voice Referendum tonight
https://iview.abc.net.au/video/NC2304H032S00
I think it's been debated pretty thoroughly but it's hard to argue against a scare campaign full of lies and misinformation. And for those who say it's the yes campaign that's negative, "no" is literally negative. What are those suspicions about the constitution in the future? I'm perplexed. Some think all the constitutional experts who say it's fine are just worried about being cancelled or something but that makes no sense.Quote:
Originally Posted by dotcumdotinyou
Went along and voted today and both sides of the fence were standing outside with their placards, representing - sensed a bit of edginess in the air. Got asked ‘ Do you need any help?’ and a leaflet thrust towards me.
I responded ‘No thanks, I got all my info from a sex forum.’
Got let through and nobody uttered another word!
If you get your info from this forum, then you have read recent posts about being confident when speaking to womenQuote:
Originally Posted by rubit moore
Were there any appealing ladies to discuss the referendum with?
The polls already clearly predict what the result will be, but a little conversation is a healthy thing
Some of the constitution changes have been realise and if they win they are going to abolish South Australia into regions then it looks other states will follow and if you own home the yes people can take the land the land underneath it off you Under treaty law so if you vote yes don't complain later when your house is worth near zero because it's the land that's the real wealth
wtf is this gibberish supposed to mean?Quote:
Originally Posted by Radoush