Beoz

You still ignore the Afghan component. Is that because it will trip up your story?

GarryP

You continually witter on about 'afghan', in the mistaken idea that it somehow distracts from the racist nature of his statements - rather than supporting the vile nature of them.

You continually ignore that he HASN'T been sacked for his racist comments, and instead has been supported. That's the point. We can see obviously that Dutton is racist - but the important part is SO ARE THE REST OF THEM - because they tacitly agree with him.

Beoz

It wasn't racist. If he was racist he'd be sacked. He was stating a fact about Afghan refugees which is an unfortunate by product of decades of war.

Unless you want to look at the context of what was said instead of conveniently ignoring it, then its just more hot air.

GarryP

I've thought about this overnight - and I think I've come to a conclusion.

Now you, like the liberal party, are trying to brush this off as 'unfortunate wording' or even 'justified statement'. You are pointing to words and countries and saying "well he didn't say 'all towelheads are lazy, useless *****s', so it's not racist".

I think it's the same mindset that gets worked up over certain words, considering them as something you can ban and get rid of the problem of racism. It's about outward facing words and perceptions - a very SJW-type mindset.

I, on the other hand, think words are just conveyances for meaning - and what I listen to is the thought behind the words. Dutton was pretty obviously, racistly, dismissing those he had already labelled as 'illegal' as also being illiterate, worthless, a drain on society, and paradoxically, taking jobs. What I hear is the obviously racist mindset - denigrating a whole group of people with whatever negative ideas he could cast around for because of his inherent racism.

It obviously makes him unfit to be immigration minister, and an MP. He barely makes 'member of the human race'.

It's a fairly fundamental issue of how people perceive the world - and I guess I shouldn't be surprised that a bunch of people who mainly have a lawyer background, and are continually thinking about how voters will react to their words, think that words are more important than thoughts, and that indeed, that's all they have to watch.

the troubadour

A bit like the 51 locked up indefinitely, mostly Sri Lankan, on undetermined security grounds, whose detention was found illegal by UNHCR.


It seems to me it was the Shite dominated Iran,where the Islamic Revolutionary forces took control by force and until recently with regime change was regarded as the biggest threat to security.
At least until outside intervention destabilised the entire region.


Sunni Islam found in Malaysia and Indonesia as an example is rather open minded in comparison.


Instead of being told things by those in positions open to being brain washed themselves, or 'functioneers' within the system, in can help to have a personal bearing and understanding of the matter at hand.

the troubadour

It was an attempt at being idiotic vote catcher for the lower common denominators of the unwashed public, in absence of any real policy, in a nation of growing 'real' issues, which are simply not being tackled.


Both parties are in search of a Howard 'Tampa' moment to win momentum.
Of course it was racist to point towards a particular group.


Afghan refugees are certainly lacking in education stakes but not in the ability to work hard. As I have mentioned, they populate smaller towns, more than other groups, and generally are sober and peaceful and hard working.


Cheap ploy by a poor politician to single out a vulnerable group for political expediency.


Even worse for a poster that I suspect considers themselves half intelligent not to see through the ploy.

the troubadour

I'm afraid some on here will clutch at straws in using 'their' government vile statements, fed out in an attempt to win over the masses, as evidence enough to support their own ideological stance, which in itself doesn't stand up to much scrutiny.

Beoz

To be honest I think you've either lost the plot or have finally found a very weak opportunity to forget the context to jump all over a sentence, and are doing a good job of being prejudice at the same time.

Now where were we on hypocrisy.

Beoz

OK in bold, now we are getting somewhere. You said it. I don't know if that 90% was correct or if it has changed since it was said, but I agree, if its correct then I doubt its down to laziness either.

As we have said, lack of education opportunities would be the problem here. Nothing more nothing less ...... whats your problem again?

Beoz

Well looks like your house prices are going down either way.

Even though Turnbull says "Driving down the value of the most important asset for most Australians is not a strategy for economic growth and enhanced prosperity" it looks like he has a plan to do it.

It's not making sense.

http://www.news.com.au/national/fede...ce0e74dcff7530

GarryP

Remember about talk about "land value capture"? As a way of paying for infrastructure?

Basic idea is Turnbull forces state governments to flog off land cheap to his mates, who then bung in a bit in tax, and make off with the nice new value of land+infrastructure markup that the government helps fund.

Here's a write up on the right little sneaky way of screwing existing residents, etc.

https://theconversation.com/paying-f...more-tax-58731

Has bog all to do with driving down prices, quite the reverse. Key phrase is 'unlock' = give my mates control.

Beoz

Well if it really is a mates issue (I don't buy your propaganda for a second) I'd rathar the future PM's mates to be in places that create work and generate tax rather than with corrupt, coke sniffing, hooker lovin unions

the troubadour

I would dispute the numbers listed as unemployed. Many do casual work and like many of us, are subject to irrational market forces, exploitation and a host of other factors, not unrelated to people coming from war zones.


Actually the guy that put a new front door on for me about a year ago, was an Afghan. Arrived via Dorset UK where he settled for a few years prior to being sponsored by his brother to WA.
A first class tradesman with a brain to match.


Not forgetting a fair whack of UK tradesmen are hardly over exposed to education opportunities.


And yes it is most certainly racist to refer to a specific group in nationality terms. Afghans make as great as a contribution as anyone probably more than some, besides are part of out history as well.

Beoz

I don't think anyone was disputing the worthiness of people from Afghanistan. Me, you, Dutton, Skynews commentator.

But we are all highlighting, including yourself, that their chances of success as collective group, have not been given the benefits of others. There are going to be some success stories which is awesome.

Referring to a group in nationality terms is not racism. I'm sure if I could be arsed looking, I could easily find a thread where you have done so.

the troubadour

Of course being selective of a nationality is racism. Most other accounts will be of the nature of the difficulty to recruit labour to remote locations or do arduous jobs. Hence the stink about Back Packer tax being a disincentive to that group to perform the work, apparently locals are not prepared to do.


Afghans coming often from more of a rural setting are ideal for such locations and work, besides have been shown to be hard workers, polite and sober.
It would be rather hard to find a more suitable migrant for such tasks, I'd suspect.


Not forgetting it has been suggested more refugees be brought in to shore up the fortunes of rural communities as well as Tasmania.


Both parties are playing a particular card. Reffos being an easy group to bash and gain support doing so, while ignoring the latest list of vocations judged in need by Australia, which of course is the real job killer, creating greater competition in the work place and challenging prevailing conditions .