The bullshit thread

[The Reboot]

Who gives a fuck about these two leeches.....not me...that's for sure.....

I've never cared for the Royals or why people froth at the mouth with anticipation each time one of them farts. People!

[billy the kid]

[billy the kid]

I see some peasant is suing his superannuation fund for not managing his financial loss due to climate
change. Apparently the gig is set for a hearing in Sydney on the 20th July, 2020.
"UNSW Associate Professor Scott Donald said climate risk cant be avoided and is already determining investment
performance. Climate risk is here – it is affecting the valuation of assets and also the investment opportunity set now. Sticking one’s head in the proverbial sand is not a viable investment option."
Donald said the law is explicit in that superannuation fund trustees have to act in the best interests of its members.
"So, to the extent that climate change poses financial risks, the duty is already there. The problem is one of priority. Unfortunately, not all trustees see action on climate risk as a priority, at least not for their fund."
RISK....hhmmm...the one element of a gamble......
WELL, does that mean that placing your money into a super fund is a gamble...
What is the definition of a gamble..."a monetary transaction, the success of which is based on the result
of a future uncertain event...."
A future uncertain event.....does that include climate change.....
If it does, then the results of the gamble in paying into a superannuation fund if they are profitable....
SHOULD NOT BE TAXED.....
Don't know if the peasants lawyers are pursuing this tack....
I could be drawing a long bow...but the result of this case could have ramifications if applied to
capital gains tax and how it is collected...
Remembering that capital gains tax is NOT payable on the profit from gambling...…
I know more than a little about this topic as I was involved with the ATO several years ago
in the AAT regarding the issue of whether profit from gambling/day trading attracts capital gains tax...…
Long story...….

[billy the kid]

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-01-18/ ... g/11876360

Just a little more about the previous post...
All I see in this link is the word risk...risk...risk...risk...risk.....
If there is so much risk....paying into a super fund must be a gamble.....
If its a gamble...then how can the profits of a super fund be taxed....
Therefore it follows that if you are trading short term on the stock market...buying stock say at 11.15am
on a Tuesday morning...watching the stock price tick up or down, maybe holding until tomorrow,
or even over the weekend...…what happens whilst you hold...risk from everywhere...
Even a terrorist attack, or a corona virus can send the market (and your stock) into meltdown.....
How is this not a fkn gamble...…..
How can you be taxed on this activity...…
The article is correct....the world awaits...….

[Black Orchid]

Just had a conversation with my son about the tone of the ads on YouTube.

On tv theAustralia Day ads I think showed one white person out of dozens. (He said even one of his co-workers, an Indian/Australian, was whinging about how stupid that was)

You can't show a 'nuclear' white heterosexual family anymore. They are all mixed marriage families and kids or gays guys kissing and announcing their engagement in the hope you will switch to Optus.

So it's all brown skinned people, trans, gays and Chinese/Aussie marriages trying to sell us their products on tv yet all of these people are not representative of the majority of Australians. White people are a no no apparently.

I've got no problem with any of the above but it needs to be representative of the whole and ALL of these ads now are not representative of the whole. Why aren't they advertising to the majority instead of the minority? It just seems silly.

This is not diversity. Diversity shows all of the above, including white people, at the correct ratio. Diversity is not eliminating whites and heterosexuals from the media and only concentrating on minorities.

So yes it is BS!

[The Reboot]

Just had a conversation with my son about the tone of the ads on YouTube.

On tv theAustralia Day ads I think showed one white person out of dozens. (He said even one of his co-workers, an Indian/Australian, was whinging about how stupid that was)

You can't show a 'nuclear' white heterosexual family anymore. They are all mixed marriage families and kids or gays guys kissing and announcing their engagement in the hope you will switch to Optus.

So it's all brown skinned people, trans, gays and Chinese/Aussie marriages trying to sell us their products on tv yet all of these people are not representative of the majority of Australians. White people are a no no apparently.

I've got no problem with any of the above but it needs to be representative of the whole and ALL of these ads now are not representative of the whole. Why aren't they advertising to the majority instead of the minority? It just seems silly.

This is not diversity. Diversity shows all of the above, including white people, at the correct ratio. Diversity is not eliminating whites and heterosexuals from the media and only concentrating on minorities.

So yes it is BS!

I don't get it. When I look at people, I don't notice nor do I particularly care about people's skin colour or who they like to bang.

And we don't need to see people sucking on each other's faces, especially two men. Sue me. two women though... well, I guess I'm a hypocrite but even then there is a time and place for that and that's not some advert. I would still "condemn" it, because it's being "inclusive" for the sake of pandering to political correctness, and nothing genuine or real.

Reminds me though, of a few years ago when Black Panther named the "greatest superhero movie ever".. based on what exactly?

Oh, and apparently an all black cast = most diverse, inclusive movie ever! Only some leftards weren't happy and criticized it for not having trans characters

[Black Orchid]

Black Panther was ok but hardly what I would call the greatest super-hero movie of all time. Quite far from it actually and I have watched them all. LOL

As for the rest all I ask for is a bit of balance. The scales have been tipped to the point of PC absurdity and if my son notices it then it really has to be bad. He would normally scold me for saying such a thing but he is fed up with it as well and brought the topic up so it's obviously very noticeable to the extremely 'tolerant' and not serving the purpose of its intent.

It's alienating people.

Oh and I really don't want to see two guys trying to lick each others tonsils either, especially if they are trying to interest me in a product

[The Reboot]

it's obviously very noticeable to the extremely 'tolerant' and not serving the purpose of its intent.

It's alienating people.

It stopped serving the purpose of its intent the moment that all "oppressed" peoples were given the same rights as the supposed "heteronormative whites". The reality is, most people don't give a shit about race or sexual orientation and all of that BS we have shoved in our faces now. It's only a small minority of people who actually have prejudices. Even then, a smaller fraction of people with prejudices that can be harmful (i.e, actual physical poofter bashing as opposed to somebody having an opinion on the lines of, "ew gay people".) It's a classic case of, "give an inch; take a mile".

Yet the politically correct seem to have it in their heads that all straight white people are evil (insert word here)phobes. And they are treated as such. Reverse-Nazism and hypocrisy at it's finest. Not only that, but apparently it's okay to make offensive posts about heterosexuals (for the crime of being into what they're biologically designed to be into) and bash the "straighties" all day, nobody says a thing. Yet people get sacked by their workplaces if they say anything that goes against the grain of political correctness. Go figure.

None of this crap unites people, it just makes people more pissed off and prejudiced.

[billy the kid]

I have seen this for several years on television.
Various advertisers seem to be focussing on issues which in the advertising
world could be construed as "attracting attention"
It seems that the advertisement of yesteryear where someone for example was advertising
a brand of lawn mower would just show someone mowing the lawn.
Then we had the era where the person pushing the mower was a shapely, busty young
woman in a bikini...the adage was "sex sells"....probably true...
Then the do gooders dumped on that image as being sexist, even though the ad was probably
quite successful for obvious reasons.
Nowadays, to advertise the lawn mower we could be shown two gay men attempting to
start the mower, and when it starts, they kiss each other....
Or maybe after the lawn has been mown, a bunch of people gather round a barbque
which includes people of different race and colour as if to advertise how wonderful
diversification and multiculturalism is....
What a load of fkn bullshit...
People will automatically turn off this product for obvious reasons.
Unfortunately advertising doesn't work.....
90% of advertising is a total waste of money.
I have spoken to sales experts who have been in sales all their lives....they
tell me its just not worth it.
AND in the meantime, we, the viewing public have to put up with this crap
day after day.
Ive thought for years that television is no longer an entertainment vessel.
When my current television packs it in, I think I'll put a fkn axe through it...….

[The Reboot]

When my current television packs it in, I think I'll put a fkn axe through it...….

Streaming services. You watch whatever you want, whenever you want without the stupid ads. Depends if you can find a service that fits your tastes though.

How's this for bullshit?

'Political correctness on steroids': Perth principal's birthday cupcake ban backfires

An attempt by a Perth primary school principal to ban cupcakes on birthdays has backfired after the state government stepped in to put the policy on hold in the wake of widespread outrage.

The move by Arbor Grove Primary School principal Glen Purdy was chided by both sides of politics, with WA Education Minister Sue Ellery voicing her support of birthday treats and Opposition Leader Liza Harvey labelling the move "political correctness on steroids".

The Ellenbrook school's note to parents raised eyebrows after telling them the school executive had been mindful of the increasing number of students with food allergies and intolerances, the cultural diversity of the school, and the beliefs and traditions of those cultures.

The note asked parents to no longer send students to school with cupcakes, lolly bags or other unhealthy options to share with their classmates when celebrating their birthdays.

If a student arrived with such items, teachers would no longer hand them out, instead returning them with the student at the end of the day.

"I acknowledge that this may not be a universally popular decision, however it does avoid the risk of a child suffering a potentially life-threatening health issue that may arise should they ingest an item they are allergic to, is respectful to the cultural diversity within the school maximising inclusivity, and supports the School and Education Department focus on healthy food choices for students," the note said.

But Ms Ellery said the move went too far, telling ABC Radio she was not aware of which "cultural sensitivities" there would be around cupcakes.

She told the Department of Education to ask the school to reconsider the policy, and in an updated notice to parents Mr Purdy said the school had put the new policy on hold, pending the outcome of a survey canvassing the school community.

"I will meet with members of the P&C and also provide the opportunity for all parents to have their say through an online survey," he wote.

Ms Ellery said ensuring parents were sensitive to students with allergeies was "perfectly reasonable and indeed appropriate".

"But banning cupcakes for cultural reasons is a bit beyond me," she said.

Ms Ellery said birthdays were important for students and was confident it was possible to find a way to celebrate birthdays with food "in a way that is safe and inclusive for all".

Opposition Leader Liza Harvey asked where common sense had gone.

"For goodness' sake. We shouldn't change our culture for other people's cultural reasons," she said.

A parent at the school told 6PR Radio her son had brought cookies for his kindergarten friends to enjoy on his birthday, but the following day the principal's decision was made public. She said parents were happy to work around allergies.

Mr Purdy told 6PR the school's focus was to put children's safety foremost and sharing food was not allowed. The issue of allergies and intolerances was a serious consideration.

"We do have a diverse culture clientele and some of our families do not have animal byproducts in their food offerings," he said.

"We have always as a school supported the celebration of birthdays and will continue to do so."

Western Australian Primary Principals’ Association president Ian Anderson said the majority of primary schools would have policies in place around students bringing cakes, treats and certain foods to schools due to allergy concerns and health issues.

“My understanding is that teachers will still celebrate birthdays in their classrooms and that the new policy is simply around bringing treats that could potentially develop an allergic reaction in a student," he said.

Source

Ridiculous. Absolutely fucking ridiculous. Banning kids from eating cupcakes is NOT inclusive. It's basically shunning the "culture" we grew up in, in favour of these "shithole" ones.

I shouldn't be surprised. People in the education sector are morons, as are most of the parents. No doubt the "progressive" mum club is cheering this idea on, as they gather in yoga pants that details the cellulite on their arse and thighs.