Grumpy Old Nasho

Young voters really need to learn about the consequences of voting, rather than just the "feel good" aspect of voting for a party they think will be on their side. If a muslim English Channel boat person rapes their girlfriend, and the party responsible was the party they voted for, they'll suffer extreme "voters remorse". So they should be made to study the policies of the various parties first before attending a polling booth. 16y/olds are too young to know how 40-60y/old candidates think deceptively.

Not really fair then, is it?

Democracy only serves the majority, everyone else misses out.

You can't make that comparison Nev, because Parliament is designed to treat each other like shyte.

In the 60's there was no checks at all for conscripts with mental health issues. My autism I was born with, a lifelong affliction, wasn't detected during the mandatory medical check, there was simply no check for it, so I suffered abuse from NCOs and Officers for the whole two years of conscription. They could tell something was wrong with me, but they still kept the abuse going. They were animals, with no respect for human life, much like the cops and politicians are today. Mental health is a non issue, except when they're trying to convince the public that an offender is not a terrorist, but has mental health issues instead.

Legal immigration would be good, but not illegal immigration.

Only if the ALP and the Coalition allow it, otherwise nothing will change or be improved, unless it's favorable to them.

The Army in the 60's was communist, everyone was equal, there was no private property, it was all owned by the State. Orders came down from the top, criticism wasn't tolerated, democracy was non-existent, everyone was dressed the same, and everyone was indoctrinated to think the same, punishment was dished out to anyone who deviated from the system.

The Labor party is the left leaning side, they are currently governing Australia, and with the Coalition in turmoil (due to my curse), Labor has free reign to carry on with it's "half-brain" leftwing politics.

The voters decided to elect the half-brain that appealed to them the most at the Fed election just gone. This is the base line of our politics, the best half-brain wins. Do ya'll get it now?

Why does the human brain have two hemispheres? And why are some humans dominated by only one hemisphere, and other humans dominated by the other hemisphere? Actually, it's a subconscious "choice", you can switch over if you train yourself to do it. Labor "chooses" to be dominated by their right side hemisphere. The conservative Coalition "chooses" to be dominated by their left side hemisphere. Both are conditioned "half-brains", opposing each other in Parliament.

Reminds me of the Liberal Coalition dumping 60's conscripts in the gutter once they'd finished with them.

Aren't you guys Middle Class? Trump is saving the middle class in the US.

Trump is making America healthy again.

If you took away your left side cerebral hemisphere, the conservative side, well, that's what we have now politically. Only a half a brain is running the country.

Cut the cost of keeping them in jail, crims get it too good now. Punish them more by giving them less benefits in jail, and cut out parole.

What's wrong with instructing the judges to impose much heavier sentences ... 100 days community service for robbery should be replaced with 500 days in jail ... 8 years in jail for manslaughter should be replaced with 20 years in jail ... 25 years for murder should be replaced with 35 years ... and abolish parole, it's useless.

I see that as a major flaw in our system - twenty years was far too long. Our system needs to be changed so that everyone gets a look in regardless of election results. Democracy could be more inclusive so that an elected government can't just do what it likes. Controversial policies, which many of them are, need to be thrashed out in public as well as in Parliament to eliminate the "controversy". Only then should they be implemented. For you guys, I'll start a thread about the "Feast and Famine Variable". You'll find it unbelievable because I discovered it. I discovered it in 1979, and researched it ever since.

It still boils down to the fact that the electorate was in the wrong during the 60s, and the social change, if any, was too little to put sense into peoples heads. But I don't remember any social change then anyway. It all came in 72. Big changes came after Vietnam, it was the main catalyst. The problem was, Whitlam waited till the next election in 72 to put forth those changes. The whole nation should have been discussing changes from 65 - on, but no, everyones self interest was the order of the day, selfish and couldn't give a stuff. In the meantime a great deal of damage was being done to the young blokes. No one took responsibility for their own bastardry, which included the voting electorate. They were wrong, but won't admit it. They can't wait for the conscripts die off, so they don't have to think about them any longer. So the one social change that didn't come about, when it should have, was compensating young blokes for being conscripted when it wasn't necessary to conscript them. Everyone now agrees with that. They are still the same today, because the system is still the same today .. wait till the next election to put forth changes.

Things don't change until there's an election. We had to wait till the next election to get the Liberal Coalition booted out. By that time, even more damage had been done. What I'm asserting is that once it was recognized that conscription was going to be damaging to young guys, and going to war in Vietnam was not such a good idea, then that's when something should have been done, and not waiting till 1972 to do something. If it was not good in '72, then why was it good in '65?. In only seven short years, voters had realized they had been totally stupid continuing to vote the Coalition in, and when they stopped, they still didn't feel guilty enough to force the government to give compensation to the conscripts. Conscription has never been popular in Australia, and there was doubts about our involvement in Vietnam from early on, no one even knew where Vietnam was. Many lives were lost, all for nothing. There should have been accountability outside of the electoral process. Voters were ignorant beyond belief, and Liberal politicians had mush for brains. A complete and thorough assessment of all the future consequences needed to be looked at BEFORE getting involved. Chances are, based on the '72 election result, we would have decided we'd have no conscription, and only very limited involvement with the US in Vietnam. Informed and educated foresight wasn't really a virtue of any voter or politician then, was it? Is it a virtue today? I haven't seen much lately.

And those who say there's not much crime, sympathize with the crims and go easy on them, no matter how vicious the crime.

There's a lot more people saying there's no justice anymore.

Have you seen families exiting court houses saying "There's no justice any more"?

You reckon you wouldn't get emotional if a machete was held at your neck?

Suffice to say that EVERYTHING changed after we got out of Vietnam. Everything changed because we just could not keep going the way we were. The political landscape changed completely. The Liberal Coalition got thrown out and had to wake up to themselves. The English cop Peter whatshisname was employed to de-contaminate the NSW police force. Aboriginals were being giving more of a fair go. The military was being asked to change to become a Professional military, completely different to the previous fight by the seat-of-your-pants military. Foreign relations with Vietnam did a complete 180degree turnaround, yet it was still communist after they won the war, and they are not under our beds.