Comments by "" (@pwillis1589) on "‘Are we going to be one people?’ Former deputy PM says Australia is moving into ‘separatism’" video.

Of course there is no hyperbole at all in the totally ridiculous comment. In fact it is so hyperbolic it is completely insane. Irony intended.
2
@buildmotosykletist1987 Firstly rent payments already exist in limited form in some communities. Any larger type and you suggest or Mayo may I state a federal scheme would need to be legislated and passed through the parliament. The chances of that a zero to buckleys. You are just fear mongering.
2
@bradyryan5105 Various colony names such as New South Wales and Victoria. Prior to Colonisation it was referred to in Western circles as New Holland. The indigenous people didn’t have a single word to describe the entire land mass of Australia.
2
@TruthWarrior1 OMG you dimwit. I even emphasised the hyperbole in the original comment by using irony and you have gone off on the most idiotic, ludicrously, stupid, moronic, childish, immature rant of total ridiculousness ever. Irony intended. You dimwit.
1
@buildmotosykletist1987 Electorally, and why not?
1
@buildmotosykletist1987 It can’t become any sort of problem unless you are of the opinion that indigenous opinion is inherently problematic. The structural intricacies of the voice will be decided by parliament and legislation. It can be as complicated or simple as we want it to be. Once again you fear monger, whatever is in the constitution can be removed or amended by referendum. Nothing is forever, again you use emotive language that is simply factually incorrect. We have discussed this on numerous occasions and I’m sorry but I do find your knowledge of our constitution and political system extremely basic. You just are factually and demonstrably wrong on basic issues so many times.
1
@buildmotosykletist1987 Again an advisory body can’t redistribute power. It has no veto power, no legislative capacity, and no financial delegation. It can advise the government to redistribute power, and the government can just say no thanks. You don’t really seem to understand how a parliamentary democracy works. Even if a government accepted that advice and managed to legislate whatever a redistribution of power is/was it would need to pass through both houses of the parliament and then be easily dissolved by any future government. Again I’m just not sure you fully understand how our parliamentary democracy works. I understand that’s sounds a little condescending, but you seem to lack the basic understanding of our political system.
1
@buildmotosykletist1987 I’m sorry I don’t understand how it follows that I called anyone a liar. If I accuse someone of lieing I will call them a liar. I didn’t do that. Just because an individual says something it doesn’t mean it is the absolute authority, again that’s not how our democracy works. Mayo, Reid, Langton, Pearson have said all manner of things and sometimes what they have said has been misinterpreted, misunderstood, or just deliberately misconstrued. Recently 75 legal academics including the former High Court Chief Justice Robert French have publicly declared the wording of the constitutional amendment legally sound.
1
@buildmotosykletist1987 I have fully explained in reasonably detailed replies to each of your points/comments. Nobody is lieing and nobody is wrong. You have interpreted something the way you want to and are unable to deal with nuance. To quote a Jedi Knight “Only the Sith deal in absolutes”
1
@buildmotosykletist1987 You aren’t very good at this are you? Someone can call for, or suggest, or claim something and honestly believe that to be the case and be factually wrong either entirely or partly in that statement. It doesn’t mean they are lieing. I have merely pointed out that a call for reparations for instances doesn’t even mean that a voice would advise this as the voice and it’s exact structure and individuals is yet to be fully determined. Just because an individual calls for something doesn’t make it inevitable. I’m just amazed that you are able to function in our society and I say that with my tongue in my cheek in a humorous fashion.
1
@buildmotosykletist1987 I have been precise and clear in all my replies to your questions. You confuse light hearted banter with abuse as you are unable to, as originally pointed out understand nuance.
1
@Westyrulz Yes clearly simple is your middle name. I’m somewhat saddened that in this day and age this country was unable to have a mature complicated adult conversation/discussion/debate about an issue. Our constitution was designed to be changed and the current proposal is modest in concept and design. And yes you aren’t simple I was just taking the piss.
1
@Westyrulz Our constitution is deeply flawed. So flawed that section 25 needs an entire act of parliament and significant amounts of legislation just to nullify it. The Racial discrimination act. As it is legislated it can be dissolved by the parliament. Would it not be better to have a constitution that wasn’t inherently racist. Your claim that our constitution is not broken is factually incorrect. Of course if you consider racism OK then of course in your opinion it isn’t broken. Fair enough and I now understand where you stand.
1
@buildmotosykletist1987 And once again I addressed all of your concerns in detail. 1. Governments are regularly punished electorally for not abiding by the people’s wishes. 2. Rent tax already exists and is a voluntary scheme 3. Reparations are already being paid in Queensland, and class actions are well progressed in other states. No need for constitutional change. 4. Any advice to redistribute power would need an act of parliament to pass though both houses and could be dissolved by any future legislation. Nothing illogical, no inconsistency or untruths by indigenous voice campaigners, and nothing factually wrong with any of my claims. No abuse just some lighthearted banter, are you a snowflake or something?
1
@buildmotosykletist1987 Good to see you sticking up for your mates, but Westyrulz can take care of himself. It’s interesting what you took from my reply to him (assuming he is a him). I called the discussion immature not him personally. The simple comment was clearly in his reference to a simple vote and I didn’t say he was racist only that he truely felt a racist document was faultless than yes her probably is. I don’t believe he has a proper understanding of our constitution that’s all. Do you attend anger management classes, if not it might be a good idea.
1
@buildmotosykletist1987 Sorry I missed the question about communism. Although Karl had many insightful comments about the human condition his musings on economics and capitalism have shown to be wrong. I have never expressed or advocated for any form of communism. It is essentially a failed hypothesis. Worse than that, states like China and Nth Korea have taken the worst excesses of communism and turned it into some perverse form of totalitarianism. Is that clear enough for you?
1
@buildmotosykletist1987 I have addressed your question and answered it in explicit detail. The form of your question is idiotic. It is not a yes or no answer. It is like me asking you when did you stop beating your wife? It is a stupid question.
1
@buildmotosykletist1987 Sorry you will have to explain the comment about Aussie Oscar, rookie year, and win in a rookie year, for what, and who is Zhou? None of that made any sense to me as an old bloke. You young girls on your phones watching tik tok and instagram, I just can’t keep up. What year in high school are you sweetie?
1
@trueblue6039 Yes the government has clearly enunciated a three paragraph amendment to the constitution. You will be asked to answer yes or no to this amendment in a referendum question. The question is from an almost 10 year consultative process amongst indigenous people resulting in the Uluṟu statement which was a request from the indigenous community to engage with them in a request for constitutional recognition. Nothing is secretive and I will personally answer in detail any questions you have.
1