Lol ba boom! ching!

If nuclear was so brilliant the private sector would have done it already. They haven’t because the cost far outweighs the benefit.

And as far taxpayer intervention goes to prop it up I just don’t see any compelling evidence to suggest investment in nuclear will give you better bang for your buck than renewables.

In some countries without much wind, sun and waves nuclear might make sense provided they could cheaply get uranium and dispose waste cheaply. That’s not Australia and we have options.

Super is not the short term relief you are looking for though… More people floating around with more money would just push up the prices even more, offsetting any benefit from withdrawing super.

Now if we started talking about increasing supply perhaps, that would be a different story.

I think the point is if you are trying to fix housing early withdrawal of super is not the answer for all the reasons given.

There are other solutions and it would take multiple policies working in tandom.

Silence peasant! We need more slaves!

In any case, the RBA tut tutting will change precisely nothing.

With all of these streaming services upping prices piracy will become more rampant than ever.

The bigger question is how free to air still survives.

Ok. But if you’re ideological believe is that all can be reformed without a shadow of a doubt and you turn out to be wrong, that has some devastating consequences for many potential victims.

My point of view is, you can try reform some of the less severe cases, but when it comes to people like the one in the article, you need to lock them up and throw away key for the good of society.

Well going back to your question, you asked whether people are born evil. The question was framed incorrectly. Which is why I responded with some people really are born with certain disposition.

You believe this can be overridden in all circumstances. I do not. You can try but it’s very dangerous to believe without a doubt this is true.

I don’t mean to sound disrespectful, I just think it’s naive to think that early intervention is the magic bullet in all cases.

It’s like saying all paedophiles can be reformed.

If you can point to concrete empirical evidence that proves this, I would like to see it. I’ve not seen or heard of any myself.

Evil is a subjective term, but I believe traits of a psychopath are heritable and studies do support this.

https://www.sciencefocus.com/the-human-body/can-people-have-a-genetic-predisposition-towards-being-evil

I haven’t made one. My point still stands. This level of premeditated violence that was not done under duress (i.e. literal or metaphorical gun point) was an act of complete free will and are the actions of a psychopath.

Short of a lobotomy or extremely strong psychiatric drugs some people are beyond reform.

It’s amusing that you come across as directing your hostility to me on the Internet, which I’m sure you will deny. I’m not the one burning people here while their kids watch.

I know what they meant. I just disagree. Some people are just inherently fucked and intervention won’t always work. There are bad seeds out there unfortunately and ignoring this fact with wishful thinking won’t make it to away.

Uh huh. You know absolutely nothing about my life and what I’ve been through so if I were you I’d be very careful about making assumptions.

I’m sorry but the level of violence in this article goes beyond someone losing their temper because of life circumstances . These were premeditated actions, and suggests to me a psychopath beyond reform.

Penny Wong dressed down the ambassador. Lol like China gives a fuck.

What do you think makes up an institution ? It’s a grouping of people…a collection of individuals. So it seems you’re not getting it.

So yes, it’s still punishing individuals for what other individuals within an institution does.

You seem to be supportive of these paint attacks. That’s worrying because one day it’s paint, what else is next? Physical violence?

I’ve already addressed your point. It’s immoral to punish one group of people for someone else’s actions.

It’s not official policy of police to target lgbt, police management aren’t condoning dodgy behavior and yes it’s not easy to stamp out problem police. It’s an ongoing process and always will be. Ergo it’s silly to ban police from the march and sickening to see attacks on innocent police for something someone else did. Black and white thinking and not seeing someone’s humanity is problematic.

Our justice system is based on punishment against individuals and not collectives. If you like the idea of collective punishment there are many other countries you can move to where that kind of thing is acceptable.

This is unfortunately another form of tribalism and us versus them mentality where there’s really no need for it. The entire police force are not out to get LGBT in this country.

It is entirely possible to recognize the small pockets of problem police whilst at the same time celebrating and supporting those police doing good work. They aren’t mutually exclusive.

I think you are missing the point. If the institution has an official policy of being anti lgbt and it was systemic then I might have some sympathy for your argument, but it’s not at that level. And let’s face it if it was really that bad cops wouldn’t want march anyway.

Vicpol has over 20,000 employees and it is absolutely ridiculous to stop police marching outright because of the actions of a few.

And I stand by my point that it doesn’t justify attacking innocent individuals, not now, not ever, in uniform or otherwise. That’s called respecting individual rights and liberty. You don’t get to attack someone just because they put on a uniform. If you think that’s ok I can’t help you.

And as for history lots of bad things happened in history. The answer is not to bring it into the present with more toxic and hostile behavior from either side.