Home > Regular Features > New sandpit

New sandpit

December 16th, 2010

Another sandpit thread

Categories: Regular Features Tags:
  1. Alice
    December 29th, 2010 at 07:16 | #1

    @Fran Barlow
    Greens actually advocate investment in public transport, publicly provided, not funded by user pays charges Fran…so why on earth you think you are a green is beyond me. You clearly have no idea of what Green policies are on public transport – so let me help you out (it is important if you choose to be a member of a political party and you are willing to hand out for that party, you have at least a basic understanding of what their policies are…

    http://greens.org.au/policies/sustainable-economy/sustainable-planning-and-transport

    In particular

    5.Australia’s transport system must function on principles of ecological sustainability, equity of access, and public ownership of critical public transport infrastructure.

    Take note – user pays road charges are not equitable and nor is a system of patchwork privatised PPSs that discriminates adversely against people who are poorer and live further from workplaces.

  2. Alice
    December 29th, 2010 at 07:32 | #2

    @Charlie
    says of me “It seems obvious, especially from the former’s comments, that neither of you has ever been to New York, London, or Tokyo, Shanghai or Beijing.”

    Two out of five Charlie – which means you fail the test of objective evidence.

  3. Fran Barlow
    December 29th, 2010 at 08:45 | #3

    @paul walter

    Fran, what will you do when something presents itself that can’t just be waved away with the blanket ad hominem, “misogynist”.

    This is ironic, because the orginal claim — that my claims should be discounted because women as a class are prone to be weakminded or corrupt — is a textbook example of ad hominem argument. As is often the case, the defenders of the indefencible project their own failings onto others. Again, I am going to use your post to contrast to common and incorrect usage of ad hominem with correct usage.

    As this is the first time in recent memory I’ve accused someone of misogynist ad hominem, the substantive part of your question has no adequate referent.

    It is clear from your posts that you are ignorant and incapable of systematic analysis, and, much like Alice, are motivated by what is culturally visceral rather than what is intellectually coherent.

    Be well with yourself Mr Walter.

  4. Fran Barlow
    December 29th, 2010 at 08:48 | #4

    @Alice

    Nothing I’ve proposed violates the clause you cite Alice. Indeed, it affirms it very powerfully because it removes externalities imposed largely by the privileged onto the less privileged.

  5. BilB
    December 29th, 2010 at 09:18 | #5

    “intellectually coherent”??

    Please, Fran, you’re all over the place with your arguments.

  6. Alice
    December 29th, 2010 at 11:18 | #6

    @BilB
    BilB – nothing unusual about that.

  7. Alice
    December 29th, 2010 at 11:43 | #7

    @BilB
    Bil B – Fran has all the classic signs of the ALS devotee. They simply love using the words “strawman” and “ad hominem” and when their arguments fall short on so many fronts, they resort to insults (labelling others misogynists or sock puppets or trolls – when in reality the shoe may actually be on the other foot, being derisively dismissive, doctrinairre, and are prone to claiming they are some sort of progressive or used to be (ex green, green is usually the favourite stance, but “understand the need for “user pays” “nuclear energy” “privatisations’ because obviously we all have to be “sensible and face up to the fact that they want to shrink government activity everywhere by any means fair or foul, and are wanting the market to rule as miserably as it has been…

    etc etc best to ignore

  8. Alice
    December 29th, 2010 at 12:15 | #8

    @paul walter
    Paul – whats wrong with the London Underground? – they started construction in the 1890s. In 1933 it became part of an integrated public transport system, functioning very well. Interestingly, the population of Greater London isnt that much bigger today than it was in 1890.
    So what exactly has gone wrong with the London underground that maintenance and public investment and cessation of privatisation wouldnt fix?

    Lazy ineffectual governments who care more about their credit ratings and who are unwilling to take on debt, cost and burden shifting the debt required for public investment to the private population through privatisations and higher user charges. The private sector suffering removal of subsidised transport and other public services, with higher user charges everywhere from governments and private operators, suffer lower free incomes to get on with their own businesses and accommodation needs, are now carrying too much debt and higher unemployment in part contributed to by fewer public sector employment opportunities… and in turn this loops back and affects government budget negatively.

    And so on it goes – a vicious circle.

    The problem with the London Underground is poor economic policy on public investment, nothing more.

  9. Salient Green
    December 29th, 2010 at 12:49 | #9

    “Please, Fran, you’re all over the place with your arguments.”

    I wouldn’t dignify her abuse as ‘argument’. ‘Xenophobia’ was the favoured chaff until ‘mysogyny’. Wonder what my third badge of honour will be. lol.

  10. Alice
    December 29th, 2010 at 16:00 | #10

    @Salient Green
    I hate to think Salient – are you a kleptomaniac? I am a mere sock puppet, a troll, and I get turned on by the culturally visceral along with Paul (that sounds like a strange sort of foreign sausage doesnt it?)
    I do like black pudding if its made well.

  11. paul walter
    December 29th, 2010 at 18:05 | #11

    Black pudding?
    Alice, are you a “too and from”?
    Your up-fess as to your status as sock puppet for anonymous cowards has me in mind of Shani Wallis and Lamb Chop, going back a generation and more, unless its Darryl Sommers and Emu.

  12. Salient Green
    December 29th, 2010 at 18:44 | #12

    Alice, count on an insult of maximum cringeworthiness tailored to the person and the situation.

    What annoys me is that the people on the receiving end of such abuse are good people, trying to be a force for good in the world. She hears it wrong sometimes, especially in this case, and the lash comes out without regard to the possibility of misunderstandings.

  13. Alice
    December 29th, 2010 at 18:46 | #13

    @paul walter
    Well actually I was comforted by the fact that it was alleged I apparently shared my sole sock puppet identity with Ernestine (ahem – two different names – same puppet). I cant think of a better person to share my sock puppetry with (I was rather flattered…that anyone could consider myself and Ernestine one and the same to be quite truthful about it)!

    I do like black pudding, but the best ones are only bought in England. I have tried so many dried out tasteless things yukky black puddings here…I think its the tavelling that does in a good black pudding Paul!

    Too far away here! It reminds of my poor days in the UK as a nurse in a public hospital. Meat was so expensive. Black pudding wasnt when you needed a bit of meat!

  14. Alice
    December 29th, 2010 at 18:52 | #14

    @Salient Green
    Salient – you are a force for good..I do get more than a little tired of people who are a force for confusion and delay and damage…. but being a force for good puts you rather at a disdvantage….

  15. Alice
    December 29th, 2010 at 19:14 | #15

    @paul walter
    No – sort of a pom Paul – have stonger Irish blood in my veins probably escaping the famine and the only english came out on the second fleet as a convict, but I suspect by the look and behaviour of certain quick to incite relatives, more than a bit of the black irish…
    from Galway – moor port town attractive to Spanish visitors and olive skin, black hair and green eyes is the mark…also mostly rooned by the tato famine…

Comment pages
1 2 3 9274
Comments are closed.