Posts by Joe Wylie
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Sixteen's OK, it'd go some way towards offsetting the greying demographic bulge. Not fourteen, though - at fourteen they still know everything.
Nevertheless,:
-
I get my meds on Monday, when the nursing staff are back on deck ...
Good luck - maybe I'll have found my cardie by then.
-
. . . scroll back and look at my comments. I made various attempts to stay on topic, and my derision of FR is clear . . .
Like, for example:
Kumbaya my Lord, kumbaya
Kumbaya my Lord, kumbaya
Kumbaya my Lord, kumbaya
Oh Lord, kumbayaA bit deep for me Inty, but should F&R or their apologists happen to stumble across it I'm sure they'll feel rightly skewered.
-
Otherwise we're just venting?
I assume that you're speaking for yourself there.
In the context of the F&R 'settlement' the focus on supposed welfare cheats appears as a cynical attempt to recast discussion of the case as a Politics of Envy issue.
As for what more can be said that hasn't been said, why not just come out and say nothing to see here, move along.I'd suggest that a little more open and robust discussion is warranted if all that's emerged from your previous informed debate is a slim hope that the present government are now a 'little smarter' than those that allowed F&R to plunder largely unhindered.
-
Bryan you haven't added to the thread you've just complained, are you a British immigrant?
S'funny, it seemed to me that Brian made a damned good point about the rather strange direction that this thread's taken.
If you were attempting a joke with your 'British immigrant' reference, I'm afraid it slipped right by me. -
The advertising circuit in Singapore is pretty damn good . . .
As in Batey/Singapore Airlines being a license to print money? From my recollections of '87-'89, practically all creatives were expats. As, I'm willing to bet, were the 'industry people' Russell mentions. The complaints back then sound eerily similar - little room for creative challenge in catering to a target market whose prime interests were 'eating and shopping, in that order.' Most TV Singaporeans were portrayed by Honkie (Hong Kong) impersonators. 'Put a Singaporean in front of a camera, ask them to act, they smile and nod.'
I'm absolutely certain that there was some kind of state initiative in place back then aimed at fostering local creativity - the only result seemed to be an insipid theme-park recreation of Bugis Street. -
. . . without a single content person in the house. Not one.
Wow. Sounds just like a Film Commission outreach-to-Auckland-filmmakers event of nearly 20 years ago. All Coopers & Lybrand types, bugger all filmmakers.
-
The only ones who would vote would be those who are intelligent enough to get themselves enrolled, learn a little about what the parties stand for and then get motivated enough on election day to head to the polling booth.
And maybe go into politics?
This misanthropic vein got me thinking about a journalist who covered NSW State Parliament in the 90s. He took a friend into the press gallery as a guest to observe proceedings. "You know what all of these people have in common?" said his guest. "They all look as if they were kicked when they were at school." -
. . . why do people think once they've got a state house they're entitled to live there forever? (But that's a whole other subject).
Riiiight, the old culture of entitlement - assuming it's not a question of How Dare They, those folks whose abilities limit their expectations to providing such vital services as cleaning your workplace, or ministering to the bodily needs of your loved ones in their dotage, have no real prospect of buying their own home in the present economic climate.
In their golden years Fay and Richwhite are unlikely to be short of someone to change their incontinence pads. For the rest of us, an adequate supply of state housing can't be a bad thing.
-
The short answer is YES some land lords are criminal scum.
The critical word here being some?
As are some beneficiaries, some clergy, and possibly a few lady bowlers.
As long as we're not out to score points by unfairly demonizing any particular group I guess it's an exercise in stating the bleeding obvious.