 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Australian Car Forums / General Car Topics (Australian group) / June 2007QLD Fixed Speed cameras
been told there is a fixed camera set up along Southpine Rd near Eatons Hill and that it also appears on some SatNav units as a speed camera Kev Kev blathered on in QLD Fixed Speed cameras: > been told there is a fixed camera set up along Southpine Rd near Eatons > Hill and that it also appears on some SatNav units as a speed camera > > Kev Because it IS a speed camera. When challenged after it was installed, the GovCo c.nts lied about the matter - claiming it was for surveys. The lie is because it's a speed camera on trial. The mob that supplied the thing for the 'trial' aka survey might have bragged about it being on trial on their website for a while IIRC. Missing to this point is the legislated-theft-statute-law-diddling associated with the thing. Won't be long now. They've started with the 'road toll is higher this year' tripe already. If anyone's got the balls, the legislation itself can be challenged - it needs to be, because at the same time the GovCo c.nts legislate for the thing, they WILL slide 'unattended' operation of the police-run RADAR speed cameras in under the table. That's to this point in contravention of the (already corrupted but there's room for more of the same ) Australian Standards. It's not on at the moment because of the FACT that RADAR beam propagation is by definition subject to side lobe problems no matter how much Gatso et.al. lie about their antennae being superior. There needs to be at least three photographs taken for accurate unattended use of RADAR, you see. And GovCo knows this - and thinks we don't. And then we'll get the Victorian utterly contemptible contractor-on-a-slice garbage foisted on QLD. -- Toby > And then we'll get the Victorian utterly contemptible > contractor-on-a-slice garbage foisted on QLD. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ If citizens of this country don't want fixed speed cameras, they would've voted out the pollies who installed them. Since, the cameras are all around, this implies the silent majority want them around. -- And.the.noisy.minority.have.no.say.in.the.matter. Just JT blathered on in Re: QLD Fixed Speed cameras: >> And then we'll get the Victorian utterly contemptible >> contractor-on-a-slice garbage foisted on QLD. >> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > If citizens of this country don't want fixed speed cameras, they would've > voted out the pollies who installed them. They try, but politicians pander to self interest - which appears to be your forte - in the marginal electorates - that way they get do whatever they like to the public, with public money. > this implies the silent majority want them around. Your 'silent majority' simply does not exist, because it's merely a euphemism for 'stupids' - who do exist - especially in self-interested strains - you being a prime example. -- Toby > Just JT blathered on in Re: QLD Fixed Speed cameras: > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > your forte - in the marginal electorates - that way they get do > whatever they like to the public, with public money. ~~~~~~~~~~~ Who's "they"? I have seen an "Australians against further migration" party but I have never seen an "Australians against speed cameras" party. There may be a slight chance that the majority are in favour of speed cameras to promote safety and to catch the hoons. >> this implies the silent majority want them around. > > Your 'silent majority' simply does not exist, because it's merely a > euphemism for 'stupids' - who do exist - especially in self-interested > strains - you being a prime example. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Stump and screen for all you like, the fact that no organised movement against speed cameras exists implies the majority favour them. -- It's.black.and.white.really. > If citizens of this country don't want fixed speed cameras, they would've > voted out the pollies who installed them. Since, the cameras are all > around, this implies the silent majority want them around. f.ck me.... So, by your logic, tax & excise on tobacco, petrol, alcohol and anything else people like to indulge in is "wanted" by the people because it exists? If that ain't the best "all cats have 4 legs. My dog has four legs therefore my dog is a cat" logic I've ever heard I'll bear my arse in Bourke Street at 5 o'clock on a friday night. -- Regards, Noddy. >> If citizens of this country don't want fixed speed cameras, they would've >> voted out the pollies who installed them. Since, the cameras are all >> around, this implies the silent majority want them around. > f.ck me.... No thanks. :-) > So, by your logic, tax & excise on tobacco, petrol, alcohol and anything > else people like to indulge in is "wanted" by the people because it exists? Sounds like the slumqueen's sort of logic. > If that ain't the best "all cats have 4 legs. My dog has four legs therefore > my dog is a cat" logic I've ever heard I'll bear my arse in Bourke Street at > 5 o'clock on a friday night. Much as I'd like to say that you'd be beautifyinng Melbourne, I don't think that there's much risk that you'll have to make good on that. :-)  SignatureAthol <http://cust.idl.com.au/athol> Linux Registered User # 254000 I'm a Libran Engineer. I don't argue, I discuss. >> If citizens of this country don't want fixed speed cameras, they would've >> voted out the pollies who installed them. Since, the cameras are all [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > else people like to indulge in is "wanted" by the people because it > exists? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~` Yep, refer to previous threads on high taxation and why we need it. People need welfare benefits thus taxes are needed and wanted. > If that ain't the best "all cats have 4 legs. My dog has four legs > therefore my dog is a cat" logic I've ever heard I'll bear my arse in > Bourke Street at 5 o'clock on a friday night. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Nope, that's totally silly logic. But feel free to bear your arse as this is a free country. -- Taxation.is.a.necessity > Taxation.is.a.necessity Perhaps, but it sure as sh.t ain't a *want* :) -- Regards, Noddy. Noddy (nospam) blathered on in Re: Taxes are needed and wanted (Re: QLD Fixed Speed cameras): >> Taxation.is.a.necessity > > Perhaps, but it sure as sh.t ain't a *want* :) Because nobody wants theft. -- Toby > Noddy (nospam) blathered on in Re: Taxes are needed and wanted (Re: QLD > Fixed Speed cameras): [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >> > Because nobody wants theft. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Let me get this straight, Toby. You disagree with FREE ENTERPRISE and you also disagree with TAXATION which funds SOCIAL WELFARE, correct? -- Or.are.you.against.everything? Just JT blathered on in Re: Taxes are needed and wanted: >> Noddy (nospam) blathered on in Re: Taxes are needed and wanted (Re: QLD >> Fixed Speed cameras): [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Let me get this straight, Toby. You disagree with FREE ENTERPRISE and you > also disagree with TAXATION which funds SOCIAL WELFARE, correct? Not quite on the mark. I disagree with everything you say, every time you say it. That's because you're one of the most disgusting pieces of sh.t I've had the mispleasure of dealing with on Usenet. I do hope that's clear enough for you. No matter if it's not - I'll just keep calling you out. Because you deserve it. Special bonus points are achieved for me, because you're a feelthy communist, and since you only know how to make sh.t up and ask questions that have nothing whatsoever to do with the content of posts you reply to, it's indeed fun to stick it to ya. -- Toby > I disagree with everything you say, every time you say it. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Ok. So you're a good-looking, intelligent, fine gentleman and married to a fine beautiful woman from a well-bred family. You also possess the wisdom of a sage when it comes to cars and anything else under the sun. -- I'll.say.no.more. Just JT blathered on in Re: Taxes are needed and wanted: >> I disagree with everything you say, every time you say it. > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > Ok. So you're a good-looking, intelligent, fine gentleman and married to a > fine beautiful woman from a well-bred family. You also possess the wisdom of > a sage when it comes to cars and anything else under the sun. We're way better than that, Arsehat. -- Toby >> Taxation.is.a.necessity > > Perhaps, but it sure as sh.t ain't a *want* :) ~~~~~~~~~~~~ But welfare, which is funded by taxation is a **WANT**. Of course a lot of people want SOMETHING for NOTHING. -- And.to.those.people:wake.up! > But welfare, which is funded by taxation is a **WANT**. Of course a lot of > people want SOMETHING for NOTHING. I'm sorry, but you're not even in the same ballpark with this sh.t. Your contention is that because taxes exist that the "silent majority" want them, and happy to tell you that such thinking is the most insanely ridiculous f.cking thing I've ever heard. The "silent majority", such as it is, doesn't get a choice in what is taxed or not, and claiming that they can vote governments out (or new governments in) at general elections is bullshit as far as this subject is concerned. Electing a government doesn't give you "control" over what they do, or even guarantee that they'll do as they intended to. The short answer is that the people have no choice. No choice at all, and in claiming that they agree simply because they don't *complain* is outrageous. -- Regards, Noddy. > I'm sorry, but you're not even in the same ballpark with this sh.t. > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > in claiming that they agree simply because they don't *complain* is > outrageous. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Then how do you explain the Coalition govt now in its 11th year with their agenda on GST? If people have no choice, why did people vote the GST party into power? -- Don't.underestimate.the.capabilities.of.the.electorate. >Then how do you explain the Coalition govt now in its 11th year with their >agenda on GST? If people have no choice, why did people vote the GST party >into power? Would that be the never ever non core promise GST, after it got them trounced, or the double backflip triple somersault GST the electorate thought the Demorats would never vote for? SignatureJohn H >> Then how do you explain the Coalition govt now in its 11th year with their >> agenda on GST? If people have no choice, why did people vote the GST party [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > trounced, or the double backflip triple somersault GST the electorate > thought the Demorats would never vote for? Both of which were BEFORE the last election. When Johnny got voted back in with increased numbers. Of course, I don't remember Labor promising to lower tax rates... > Then how do you explain the Coalition govt now in its 11th year with their > agenda on GST? If people have no choice, why did people vote the GST party > into power? The GST was an interesting issue in and of itself, but that has little to do with the current government remaining in power for so long. The Liberal party can be thankfull for the fact that it owes a great deal of it's longevity to the Labor party's lack of any real oposition for most of the last decade, and memories of the debacle Labor left behind when it was last in power. That said, the GST actually made a difference to the price of goods, and in a lot of cases they actually got cheaper. What wasn't realised, by both the people at large *and* the government, was how much it would affect areas that weren't taxed such as labour hire rates. People at the time concentrated on how much their grocery bill would change, or what it meant to them at the fuel bowser, but forgot about the fact that part of the Goods & Services Tax meant that you would have to pay a tax on labour charges as well. You got a guy in to steam clean your carpet, that'll be 10% tax on that thanks. A plumber to change a tap washer, 10% thank you. A gardener in to mow your lawn, that's an extra 10% tax thanks buddy. And on and on and so forth. At the end of the first full year of the GST, the government raised an extra 1.8 billion dollars in tax revenue that even they themselves didn't think would be generated, and their own estimates of the scheme were very optimistic. > Don't.underestimate.the.capabilities.of.the.electorate. If you really believe the people have the power to change anything you're playing with yourself. The people's power, such as it is, is limited to swapping one set of incompetent lying fuckwits who will stop at nothing to keep themselves in office for another. The people themselves have as much chance of doing anything about a particular issue as you have of being named top of the class at a Mensa convention. -- Regards, Noddy. > The GST was an interesting issue in and of itself, but that has little to > do with the current government remaining in power for so long. The Liberal [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > And on and on and so forth. ~~~~~~~~~~~~ Bottomline: the electorate did vote to change the taxation scheme. A wider tax base is better than increasing the income tax 'til people have to pay more than they actually earn like in some Scandinavian countries. > At the end of the first full year of the GST, the government raised an > extra 1.8 billion dollars in tax revenue that even they themselves didn't > think would be generated, and their own estimates of the scheme were very > optimistic. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Increased revenue is GOOD for a welfare state. >> Don't.underestimate.the.capabilities.of.the.electorate. > > If you really believe the people have the power to change anything you're > playing with yourself. The people's power, such as it is, is limited to > swapping one set of incompetent lying fuckwits who will stop at nothing to > keep themselves in office for another. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The electorate can't be stopped from voting a party which will decrease taxes in exchange for less welfare benefits. But it won't happen because the electorate are addicted to welfare. -- Welfare.state.discourages.productivity.and.encourages.slack. > > Taxation.is.a.necessity > > Perhaps, but it sure as sh.t ain't a *want* :) I want all of you to pay taxes so I can keep my Government job :) Marco > If that ain't the best "all cats have 4 legs. My dog has four legs > therefore my dog is a cat" logic I've ever heard I'll bear my arse in [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Regards, > Noddy. What's this (N)oddball, you looking for more arselickers?? :>) DAVO > What's this (N)oddball, you looking for more arselickers?? :>) You seem to think I have enough already, don't you? -- Regards, Noddy. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.