RSVP Blog
"The only one who should have to pay for a bad relationship is the person in your next relationship."
Damn! You just met a really cool person but realized she had just come out of a painful break-up so you quickly realize that if you decide to walk down that road you are going to end up being the rebound guy. A situation that very few people feel comfortable with. The last thing you want is to be her fall guy. Or do you? What if you are a woman and just realised that the guy you met is on a rebound?
Is the rebound person always used to get revenge? Is it true that the only person that should pay for a bad relationship is the person in your next relationship?
Posted by May 27, 2008 11:08 AM
Latest Comments
Gotta avoid taking your talking points from Al Gore and Tim Flannery.
AGW (as opposed to climate change) is a myth. The Czech President is the only political leader with any courage to call it out for the scam and power grab that it is and not pander to the scum pushing it to try and buy votes (and I am including John Howard and George Bush in that assessment)
Yes there is climate change. The climate has been changing every day since this planet came into existence. In the past It has been much warmer and much colder than it is now (all before the industrial revolution).
Yes we can have an effect on the environment. I don't want chemicals pumped into the water. I don't want actual dangerous chemicals like sulfur or chlorine pumped into the atmosphere (they tend to result in acid rain) etc. Those are things that do pose a problem and it is something we can and should control. No arguments there.
Carbon dioxide however is plant food and it makes up between 0.03% and 0.06% of the atmosphere. You want to worry about greenhouse gases? Worry about water vapour.
Pretending for a moment that the amount of carbon Australia produces has any bearing on anything, with China alone bringing on several new coal powered plants every month, any cuts Australia makes will have no effect whatsoever.
But that doesn't matter to lefties and greenies. It doesn't matter that the poor are going to be the ones who suffer the most with increase fuel and energy costs (and thus increases prices in everything that uses fuel and energy). Destroying the global market economy is fine, as long as lefties and greenies get to make their useless gestures (and more importantly force everyone else to do the same) and feel good about themselves, that is all that matters to them. As stated I will not force people to pay the price and increase their cost of living so others can get off about how good and caring they are.
Not to mention all the hypocritical worms taking plane trips all over the world and holding massive concerts and talk fests in order to tell everyone to reduce their carbon output.
And alas my world will not be a utopia, not by any stretch of the imagination. Life will still be tough and it will still be unfair. My goal is to make it easier and to give people as much freedom as possible so they get on with their (hopefully) easier lives as they see fit.
The only thing I am encouraging is freedom. What people choose to do with their freedom is up to them and they will have to deal with any consequences of how they use their freedom.
I fully give credit to Keating for introducing Super. He saw a problem on the horizon and took steps to address it. Well done. I still think he is a vile politician and person but all credit to him for Super. It was a good policy at the time and remains so.
And I agree with you on education. That is why I want the education voucher system able to be used in any school. Currently parents either have to be able to afford to pay generally large private school fees or have to be able to afford to buy a house and move into certain areas to get into a desired state schools. That is a less than ideal situation.
Kaz - you can ration it to one glass a week or pour it all into your tub and bathe in it. It doesn't matter to me. It is that thing called freedom :)
Of course this whole thing could be moot. In a couple of months, the world's largest particle accelerator (google LHC) will collide two particles in an attempt to recreate the effects of the Big Bang, with the theoretical possibility of creating a mini black hole which could continue to grow and end up consuming the earth - which will seriously suck...
Sorry. It's late and I need sleep. Couldn't help myself :)
Posted by: stoic at June 18, 2008 12:32 AM
Well stoic, how about l put in for a ration of those bottles, and not all at once.....Me being selfless and all, wouldn't want them all at the same time, after all a victory party would surely be worthy of some nice top shelf stuff to savour.......
I am thinking 2 a week....but only on the weekends..................K
Posted by: auntykaz at June 17, 2008 10:54 PM
Stoic. Why would 'drug' trafficking attract the death penalty in your Utopia? The State sanctioned trafficking of tobacco and alchohol, by far the major problem drugs, is being encouraged.
The sort of ridiculous, libertarian nonsense you are spouting is so impractical it has never been tried.
The proven way to ensure freedom and liberty is to provide education in an egalitarian setting. From that comes full employment which is the best way of saving; in the form here of Keatings tremendously succesful compulsory super.
Talk about critical mass of idiots. You and OG the Irradiator. The symptoms of global warming are obvious and sinister. What if human emission reduction can prevent it getting to a critical high tempoerature feedback state and ending like Venus?
Do we just sit back and watch a few public executions?
Haha. Cheers Marcus
Posted by: laughsandtalks at June 17, 2008 10:51 PM
Good Kaz. Never let it be said that I am not willing to compromise :)
Posted by: stoic at June 17, 2008 10:34 PM
Yeah Kaz. You should be more selfless... like having the full force of government smash down upon individuals, stealing their hard earned money and volunteering it for spending, trying to dictate how they live their lives.
That is much more selfless (and melodramatic) :)
Posted by: stoic at June 17, 2008 10:10 PM
Stoic, you got yourself a deal..................K
Posted by: auntykaz at June 17, 2008 10:03 PM
Amber - it is the left that has destroyed personal responsibility. Socialism destroys personal responsibility. Demanding everything be provided by the government destroys it. Excusing criminals as has been done over the past 30 years (they had a tough childhood, they are poor, it is society's fault etc) and the frivolous lawsuits about every little "injustice", every hurt feeling, every lack of a sign or warning label, all destroy it. Every comment about it taking a village to raise a child when all it takes is dedicated and loving parents taking responsibility for their offspring destroys personal responsibility.
I know the fact is that 80% Australians earn less than 100k a year -that is why I want most of them to be as absolutely tax free as possible - so they keep everything they earn and have a chance at saving and providing for their future. That is why I want to keep everything as cheap as possible (food, housing, fuel, energy etc) unlike the ALP which is going to smash the poor by introducing the fraud of carbon trading under the guise of the biggest fraud of this millennium (even bigger than the Y2K scam) Anthropogenic Global Warming.
Not me. I refuse to make the poor (and everyone else) suffer because of a sickening need for power to dictate the lives of others.
Virgil - absolutely not. I hate smoking. I hate the smell of it. I am always yelling at my own mother when she comes over and smokes outside an open window of mine because I don't want it in my house. I have never smoked a cigarette and never will. But I will never ban it or tell anyone that they can't do it. While I am sure there are plenty of totalitarian wannabes out there who would, I will not. I don't want to run people's lives for them.
You are right about having a critical mass of idiots but that is no excuse to deny freedom and liberty to everyone else. They are free to be idiots and under my government, they will face any and all consequences of that.
OG - the problem with radiation treatment is that it still leaves them out on the street. Justice will be streamlined under my administration. Most juvenile offences and non-violent crimes will be dealt with Singapore rattan style.
The more serious offenders and violent criminals will be sent to prisons where they will also face the rattan. And for the worst offences (eg wilful murder, rape, paedophilia, drug trafficking, and treason) they will be swinging in the breeze.
And Kaz - while I would love to secure your vote, I can't in good conscience put that in my policy platform. That being said, I will be making bubbly much cheaper than it is now and if you vote for me I promise you can have all the leftover and unopened bottles from my victory party. Deal? :)
Posted by: stoic at June 17, 2008 9:42 PM
Marcus, now, now, if you like l will share............K
Posted by: auntykaz at June 17, 2008 9:07 PM
auntykaz at June 17, 2008 7:26 PM
I'm so glad that our nations future social policies are decided by unstintingly selfless people like you...
Cheers Marcus
Posted by: laughsandtalks at June 17, 2008 8:46 PM
Stoic, if you also put in your election preamble that Auntykaz gets a nice bottle of bubbly every week l will vote for ya.........................K
Posted by: auntykaz at June 17, 2008 7:26 PM
Hi Amber,
Well I have always read you posts in interest, while I admit I do not always agree with the soft approach you adopt I do conceed some points. But not on this occassion.
I have serving and ex Prison personell, talking to them they would vehemently disagree with you about the rehab of what they consider to be little more that animals, in private that is, so strike the front line officers. One of the things the Guards would like to see is the parole boards and the shrinks held responsible for the people they let out back into society as accessories before the fact, for any crimes committed after release. Like to guess how many there would be certain that rehab was a success, none would be my guess..
A recently deceased Brother of mine was a pioneer in the Police force with the Victims of Crime association, considered your, "decent, effective and properly funded anger management and self responsibility training" as a waste of resourses and a joke that the prisoners would take advantage of. This was from a high ranking officer that spent 20 years with the VOC organisation, with awards for Bravery and Commendations from the Premier, so he was not inexperienced.
My point would be who did the assesment in the first place to let her into that environment, kitchens don't work without knives and any amount of harm causing scenarios. I bet the person who did was not held responsible or would take responsibility for the incident, so I am all for self responsibility and have been all my life.
The point of punishment by radiation when fully considered is more humanitarian that the beastalising of a prisoner, and saves about (the last time I heard) $90,000 a year per prisoner.
Virg.
Stoics whole point is that you may do what you want inside what he allows, but you are right about the idiots and no hopers, what are your thoughts on them?
Cheers OG
Posted by: oldergent at June 17, 2008 1:06 PM
Its all very well to say what we might do, from the safety of knowing such things will never happen. Sadly, our society moves from left to right and back again, in an ever decreasing arc.
Many good points stoic. Not sure about the zero tax on cigarettes. Maybe that would make it easier to ban them outright!
Thing is, your model would work if people could act sensibly, but with an almost critical mass of idiots and no hopers running around, the country would quickly descend into chaos.
Posted by: virgil at June 17, 2008 11:05 AM
OG,
Once you've done that then wouldn't criminals have even less to live for? What then stops that person from "taking as many people with them" as they are able?
A bit like the person with AIDS who thinking they have a death sentence themselves, then decides to "pay back" society by infecting as many other people as she/he can.
I think stoic's idea of "self-responsibility" is great, but there still needs to be a certain amount of compassion. What about young people who get involved with "dead beat" life-long criminals?
Decent, effective and properly-funded rehab programs (which people who work in the prison system are begging for) which focus on anger management and self responsibility, should be tried first.
If someone is resistant to this, then maybe throw away the key?
That case which stoic cited about the girl who killed the TAFE lecturer, to me she should have been in a secure mental health facility, not an ordinary youth detention centre.
So maybe her lawyers are right, but getting money for her should not be the object, intensive treatment should be.
If that doesn't work then for the sake of the rest of society she should be locked away permanently in a secure mental health facility.
Many of those in our prisons actually have severe mental health problems, which the system does nothing to fix, but actually makes worse.
To the detriment of all of us.
Posted by: amberlight58 at June 17, 2008 10:26 AM
Actually stoic,
Surprisingly, I actually agree with a lot of what you have said! (not all of it, of course)
Despite the fact I tend to "lean" to the Left, I think personal responsibility is one thing that we seem to have discouraged in our society. We are always looking for someone else to blame these days, if our life goes awry.
Even if it was our choice and actions, that caused the problem!
However, the fact is that 80% of Australians earn a lot less than $100,000.
Even the so-called "average" wage is a myth for many Australians, especially those working as the underdogs in retail, hospitality, and for carers in child-care and aged-care. Yet these people are the back-bone of our society!
How do these people save for their future? When they are struggling to buy a house and raise a family?
On the radio this morning they were talking about the changes to Fringe Benefits, and how charities and agencies such as Centrecare and Anglicare who pay lower wages for their workers use salary packaging to make themselves competitive.
This will now affect Family Payments, etc in a big way.
I have not bothered with salary packaging in my own job, even though I could, because the CSA has always taken a completely different approach to this. I would be paying my ex a fortune, because I would actually be assessed by the CSA to be earning thousands MORE than I do as a standard PAYE taxpayer!
I have the major care of our son, and buy him his clothes, shoes, pay his sports fees, school fees, haircuts, etc.
My ex has him 3 nights a fortnight and buys him nothing, despite having been receiving over a third of our son's family payment since we separated.
He works part-time in a PAYE job and runs his own business in which he gets lots of "cash in hand" work.
On "paper" he earns $10-12,000,00 a year less than I do.
Under the New system I will still have to pay him some child support for the 3 nights a fortnight he has our son.
Because I earn more than he does, according to the tax system.
I don't see this as particularly fair, but I can do nothing about it, that is the way it is.
How would your system impact on someone like me?
Posted by: amberlight58 at June 17, 2008 9:58 AM
Well posted Stoic, add to that the firearms still be licenced but available, then make it a mandatory 10 year sentence on top of the normal sentence in the commission of a crime, so conversely do not build any more prisons but build sites to administer a suitable dose of radiation that will reduce their life span by the required amount, put them back out on the streets at a minimal cost and save the money of sustaining them in prison and negate the money wasteage you described with the knife incident. That saving alone would aid in the drain on consolidated revenue
Now I have taken my hearing aids out to avoid the screams and wailing of the bleeding hearts, but look forward to reading their rantings.
Cheers OG
Posted by: oldergent at June 17, 2008 8:54 AM
Nope. No taxes on cigarettes and alcohol. Just because some are irresponsible and will abuse their new found freedom, that is absolutely no excuse to limit the freedom of others who enjoy partaking in their particular vice. That being said, it your life and you will take personal responsibility for whatever happens - it goes hand in hand with freedom.
It is not for others to fund their treatment. It will be up to them to provide for their own health care and treatment. They will have a lifetime of keeping every cent they earn under $100,000 (or whatever). Everyone today knows the risks. If people still decide to spend their money on things other than saving and providing for any possible treatment as a result of their vices, well they have that right, that freedom to do so, but then they take personal responsibility for it and live with the consequences and not expect everyone else to bail them out. Freedom is a two way street.
I will not, as a government go up to people who have provided for themselves and done the responsible thing and say "Good on you for being responsible and self reliant. Now hand over more of your hard earned money so you can pay for those who have not been responsible and now want to be bailed out, or else."
If they want to volunteer to help out, then I will shake their hand again and say "Good on you. You do yourself credit." but I will not force them to do so.
Now as for the elderly, the disabled, and carers - if I had my way today I would scrap every bullshit "green" energy rebate, every cent of arts funding (those professional bludgers will stop sucking the blood of the taxpayer and will be forced to produce something that people are willing to pay them for or get another a job), and the $35 million paid to Toyota (weren't they the same company that got nearly a billion dollar tax bill from the tax office 12-18 months ago?) to do what they had already decided to do (and probably any number of other bullshit programs the government wastes our money on) and put it straight into elderly, disabled, and most definitely carer support.
I probably should have stated it earlier, but the no tax below $100,000 or whatever threshold will be phased in. It is really only in the last 10 years that we have had consistent tax cuts (albeit far less than deserved). That means a great many years that the elderly have been working and taxed to the eyeballs and I would not feel comfortable saying "Thanks for working for the last 40 years and handing all your hard earned money, but now you are on your own."
I would also steal the one tangible and sensible thing Barack Obama has said and make any income earned by anyone over 65 from any kind of work totally tax free and I would do that starting today -though I would probably go 60 myself.
I made the campaign promise that law and order would be central and I do intend that to be the case. I am thinking being drunk or drugged should be an aggravating circumstance rather than a mitigating one, calling for, say an automatic tripling of the sentence. If the standard sentence for driving irresponsibly and causing grevious bodily harm is 5 years, then if you do that to someone while drunk, the sentence is automatically 15 years.
It is that personal responsibility again. Yeah you can drink until you can't stand up if you want, but you are going to have to deal with any consequences resulting from that. "I was drunk and didn't know what I was doing/wasn't in control of my actions" will no longer cut it.
And talking of personal responsibility, I see this online. If this does not highlight everything I have said that is wrong with society, I don't know what does:
****************
Teen teacher killer sues state
A WOMAN imprisoned for fatally stabbing her juvenile detention cooking teacher is suing the state of NSW for allowing her access to knives.
The Daily Telegraph reports Debbie Adams was just 16 when she stabbed TAFE teacher Scott Bremmer, 23, during a cooking class at Yasmar Juvenile Justice Centre in July 1999.
She was jailed for manslaughter until 2012.
Now 25, Adams is suing the state for negligence, saying authorities should have known she had an "unusually enhanced interest in knives''.
"The defendant ... ought to have known that (Adams) was a dangerous and violent person, had an unusually enhanced interest in knives (and had) used knives to threaten and assault others,'' documents lodged by Adams's lawyers to the Supreme Court said.
Her lawyer, John Turnbull, said: "What should have been done could have been done before the incident.
"It's ... akin to false imprisonment. It's imprisonment as a result of negligence.''
****************
That's right. It is not that she is a lowlife criminal scumbag who deserves to be strung up from the nearest tree branch for murdering someone trying to help, it is the state's fault for providing classes and rehabilitation programs. Utterly disgusting.
Posted by: stoic at June 17, 2008 12:05 AM
Okay Stoic,
No taxes on cigarettes and alcohol? So how do you fund the care of those who develop long-term disabling illnesses from the use of these drugs?
What about the disabled and older frail-aged people? How do you propose to find the money to care for them?
In fact, how exactly will you fund health?
And what about welfare? There are those who genuinely just can't work (perhaps not quite as many as we support now) those with long-term physical illnesses, mental illness, severe intellectual disability.
Also child protection services, as all those people who can now drink alcohol freely and cheaply go home to their families and terrorise their wives and children? Lived through that myself as a child, in the days when there was no place to go except the side of the road in a car.
How would your low-tax, liberal society deal with these people?
Posted by: amberlight58 at June 16, 2008 8:38 AM
Virgil - a few good comments.
I thought the republic was soundly defeated last time. And like you, I voted no because I do not want politicians to have any more power. And the ONLY way I will support a parliament-appointed president (even if the position is ceremonial) is if all my previous provisos were met - ie no former politicians, union leaders, sports people etc. Failing that, I will be voting No when that model comes up again.
What messed up the society given by TW and OG's generation is the welfare and paternalism mentality that has come up since the 60's and 70's where everyone thinks they are entitled to something for nothing from the government or society or whoever. That is the cancer that has riddled society. Mark Twain said it best when he said "Don't go around saying the world owes you a living. The world owes you nothing. It was here first."
It is the death of personal responsibility that is killing society. The belief that someone else is to blame or it is someone else's responsibility to do something is the problem. I remember one case where this idiot got drunk and dived off some rocks into shallow water, hitting another rock and paralysed himself. He sued the local council (and initially won millions) because "they should have signs up" or something equally as stupid. Bullshit. I remember back in year 3 or 4 and working through the Kangaroo Creek Gang Safety Book. Not diving off rocks and into water where you don't know how deep it is is not being safe. It was covered. During swimming lessons (both in and out of school) we were told "do not dive head first into water until you know how deep it is". Anytime we went to an Aunt and Uncle's place that had a pool, both they and my parents would tell us "Don't dive into the water at this (the shallow) end."
What the court should have said, when they were done laughing, was "You have nobody to blame but yourself. Nobody forced you to drink so much as to lose control of your common sense and nobody forced you go diving while you were drunk. We are not going to make the innocent rate payers in this shire pay for your self-inflicted stupidity". I do believe the initial win was overturned on appeal but the fact it even got up at all is a disgrace. But most people want everyone else to pay for their lives and their wants.
As I have said all along, the only thing anyone owes anyone else is to respect their individual rights and to leave them alone to get on with their lives with as minimal impact as possible.
What would I do specifically about the varied salaries? Nothing. There is nothing moral that can be done. If someone has worked hard and applied themselves and gotten their skills to be in such a demand that they can get a million dollar salary (though I would LOVE to know what I have to do to get in on these million dollar salaries) then to my mind they are to congratulated and emulated. It is not for government to say to business "No. You cannot pay that person that salary". Similarly it is not for government to say to people "No. You are not allowed to earn that salary." If a business is willing to pay a person that amount, that is not the government's business.
What the government can and must do is put as little a burden on all citizens as possible.
Now, assuming I usurped dictatorial powers and could do whatever I wanted...
Just picking a figure, say an even 100,000. No income tax before that. Every single dollar your earn you will keep, then after that a flat marginal rate of ideally not more than 15%. The actual figure would probably come out at closer to 70 or 80,000 and probably a rate of 20% after that but yeah - no deductions or anything, no rebates, no salary sacrificing to save on tax (since you will be paying so little of it) just the absolute bare minimum of tax. I will look at dropping the corporate rate to 25% to make Australia even more attractive to business. Business = jobs.
I would slash the fuel excise to only the amount that is required for road maintenance. I read somewhere that roughly 11% of the current fuel excise taxes is required for building and maintaining roads (though less than that is actually spent). The rest goes into general revenue. So based on that 11% figure, the current 38c/litre excise will become 4.2c/litre excise. Production is now cheaper, transport is now cheaper, and so your grocery prices (among others) are now cheaper.
Similarly, the taxes on cigarettes and alcohol will be greatly reduced, if not eliminated altogether. It is your money and your life. What you choose to do with them is up to you. You should not have to pay the government to enjoy a drink or a smoke.
All stamp duty will be scrapped (of course it was supposed to be scrapped with the introductions of the GST but the state governments had other ideas) - the fact that we have to pay the government for the privilege of buying a house and/or land is outrageous and nothing more than legalised theft.
I don't know about the rest of Australia but here in WA the main cause of sky rocketing house prices is a lack of available land - once again a deliberate move by the state government in delaying and minimising zoning approvals for residential properties. A shortage of land = higher prices= more stamp duty for the thieving scum.
Accordingly all government land will be sold off, a priority given to residential zonings. Here in WA, I would stop the deliberate and malicious state government delays on a new clay brick factory that has been badly needed to ease production shortages, taking one more pressure off housing costs.
I will provide a greater education revolution than some bullshit about giving a laptop to every student. I'd be looking at introducing education vouchers provided to parents that will be usable in any school that meets the minimum academic requirements (giving parents access to schools they currently would not have access to). It will be up to the schools to woo parents and their vouchers, and so in their interest to reward and keep the good teachers and turf the bad out on their arse, all of it hopefully leading to a higher standard of education all round.
It is getting late, but so far I have slashed taxes, reduced fuel costs, eased the housing crisis and made it affordable, reduced the cost of food and those vices that make life enjoyable for those who choose to partake, and helped everyone access a better standard of education, all the while maintaining my prior commitment that "I was informed that their main interest is liberty and that in that cause I am doing the very best I can."
Posted by: stoic at June 16, 2008 1:27 AM
Rokinon, that's the most sensible thing anyone has said on the bogs all weekend!
Totally agree - people should get their own act together before bouncing around all over the place. Whatever unresolved issues they carry from their last relationship will just spill onto any new one. Very sensible what you did. Well said, and on topic too :)
Posted by: riversong01 at June 15, 2008 11:02 PM
Thanks Amber.
Posted by: iaminperth at June 15, 2008 10:46 PM
The generation before the baby boom gen, gave us a much more egalitarian society, My parents generation, That of TW and OG.
Didnt take us long to stuff it up.
Now kids cant afford a home of their own.
Our generations legacy to our children?
Assets once owned by taxpayers, now in the hands of foreign corporations.
Posted by: virgil at June 15, 2008 8:54 PM
Stoic.
What would be your policy on the increasing polarisation of this society, whereby the haves, often command a salary in excess of a million dollars, and the have nots exist on an hourly rate under $20 an hour?
Posted by: virgil at June 15, 2008 8:46 PM
What I find most distasteful is the chaging nature of Australian Society.
In the 1970's there was a much higher proportion of homes built by the State Housing Commission, in affordable areas like Medina, Balga etc. This would give many a start in real estate ownership, that would see them do well, at an affordable price.
Posted by: virgil at June 15, 2008 8:43 PM
Good advice, Perth
Posted by: amberlight58 at June 15, 2008 8:30 PM
The Presidential Model
In our referendum of 10 years ago, my recollection is that the republic was narrowly defeated.
I was one who voted against a republic at the time because I felt I wanted the people to elect the president, as is done in the USA.
I knew if I voted for the model that pollies elect the president, that would be our system forever, but similar to WA daylight saving referendums, if the result comes out wrong, just keep having them till you get the right result.
Posted by: virgil at June 15, 2008 8:22 PM
Hi to all.I am a new commer to blog so I will just say what I think then sit back and wait for the barrage of comments Ha ha .Deep down I dont think anyone should"Pay" for the ending of a relationship .We have all had relationships that have ended badly but its up to the people involved to sit back after everything has imploded and dust themselves off and have a good hard look at how to move forward.It may take some time to get your compass back on track but it does happen.Personally ,I was married for 18 years and apon my divorce decided to hang back a little.I had been out of the loop for that long that I really didnt know how to move forward and deep down whether I was ready.Thats the key.Rebounding from one partner to the next may be ok for some but to have a good honest relationship with someone that you care about it isnt right to dump the trash of a previous relationship onto them.
It took 18 months and a lot of soul searching to finally dip my toe into the pond and enter into a relationship and quite frankly it was worth every one of those night during that 18 months that I felt lonely.Entering into a new relationship without all the heartache of a prior one formost in your mind was awsome and allowed for the new relationship to grow.
So here I am 15 months after that finished with my partner passing away from breast cancer.Its a little different this time around but I have resisted the temptation to enter into a rebound relationship for 2 reasons.
I had to honestly say to myself that I was ready to move forward.
I had to consider how moving into a new relationship while still grieving over another would affect the new relationship and more importantly my new partner.The last thing I ever would want to do would be to hurt anyone.
I have reached that particular cross road in my life and am dipping that big toe once again.
My appologies to anyone that thinks I am just rambling on but my point is this.
Rebound relationships I suppose can work but no one should have to pay for the mistakes or the circumstances of a previous relationship.I put myself in a box a couple of times just so that my next relationship could be given every chance.I dont bounce so well I suppose.
Cheers Jack
Posted by: rokinon at June 15, 2008 8:14 PM
His wife repossessed him. I think it's great to be friends with someone at that stage of their life if you like them, but don't open your heart too much it's too dangerous. Be a good friend if you enjoy their company and enjoy spending time together but that is it until all the other issues are resolved. And also being a good friends means it needs to be reciprocated and not just a one way street listening to all their woes, no keep your wits about you and prepare to be objective.
Posted by: iaminperth at June 15, 2008 10:20 AM
met a really lovely man, but he had been dumped by his wife 8 months earlier, he didn't want to have a rebound relationship. After some weeks he ended it, telling me that the kids/wife wanted him back: I think that she saw him happy and couldnt stand it. Using the kids as an excuse.
Posted by: livingnotwaiting at June 15, 2008 9:32 AM
Gee Stoic, if your internal defence policy extended to the blogs as well, I'm sure you would win ;)
Posted by: riversong01 at June 13, 2008 9:18 AM
Ha ha ha. Sorry to disappoint you Riversong but there will be no anarchy under my presidency :)
To borrow another quote:
"Security from domestic violence, no less than from foreign aggression, is the most elementary and fundamental purpose of any government, and a government that cannot fulfil that purpose is one that cannot long command the loyalty of its citizens. History shows us - demonstrates that nothing - nothing prepares the way for tyranny more than the failure of public officials to keep the streets from bullies and marauders."
To wit, my administration would primarily be concerned with enforcing law and order - both criminal and contract law (since a stable monetary and fiscal climate and thus a free and a competitive economy require that contracts be enforced and aggrieved parties have recourse should a contract be broken) and most especially private property rights.
I promise to you, I will keep the streets free from bullies and marauders and more importantly, will give you the right and protection under the law to defend yourself, your loved ones, and your property as you see fit should said bullies and marauders threaten you.
Feeling suitably placated that anarchy is not my goal now? ;)
Posted by: stoic at June 13, 2008 12:41 AM
Actually, Stoic, I dunno - do they have Presidents for anarchistic revolutions??
Posted by: riversong01 at June 12, 2008 8:53 PM
Wow Stoic. I have no idea what you said, but it sounds impressive! Spoken like a true pollie! ;)
Posted by: riversong01 at June 12, 2008 8:48 PM
Ogre wrote. at June 12, 2008 12:15 PM
"...get rid of parties put in people whose only question to be asked on any reform has to be "is it the best for the Nation then the people"...blah blah blah..."
Haha Ogre. That form of national administration looks and smells very much like government by commission or Fascism.
Unfortunately for you (and Stoic's extreme laisess faire suggestion) those ideas have been tried and found to be insufficient. The most succesfull nations, using the recognised indicators, are parliamentary democracies with a house for legislation and one for review.
Cheers Marcus
Posted by: laughsandtalks at June 12, 2008 2:34 PM
Well said Sto,
get rid of parties put in people whose only question to be asked on any reform has to be
"is it the best for the Nation then the people" if in the affirmative pass it if not Black ball it. The only other thing is the matter of arms and currency. (and what part Marcus is to play in all this).
Cheers OG
Posted by: oldergent at June 12, 2008 12:15 PM
Well said amberlight.
Posted by: woodnwine at June 12, 2008 8:54 AM
Actually, my presidency will have very little to do with the production, distribution, and most especially the taxing of those products.
My presidency will have little to do with anything but giving people their freedom (and hard earned money) back.
"I have little interest in streamlining government or in making it more efficient, for I mean to reduce its size. I do not undertake to promote welfare, for I propose to extend freedom. My aim is not to pass laws, but to repeal them. It is not to inaugurate new programs, but to cancel old ones that do violence to the Constitution or that have failed their purpose, or that impose on the people an unwarranted financial burden. I will not attempt to discover whether legislation is "needed" before I have first determined whether it is constitutionally permissible. And if I should later be attacked for neglecting my constituents "interests", I shall reply that I was informed that their main interest is liberty and that in that cause I am doing the very best I can.”
Posted by: stoic at June 12, 2008 12:13 AM
Hi Amber,
Same can be said for drugs and any other number of things, Have heard similar stories from a friend in Qld, she is heavily involved in the health scene. But consider the fact that medicine has placed itself on the pedestal and kept alive people who nature would have dispensed with long ago, in the natural selection process. How can people like my grandfather, smoke from the age of 12 and die with a hot pipe in his hand at 90 odd. Another uncle that died at nearly 90 and they were not sure about cremating him he was so pickled. Genes somewhere are good, or not so good, the good survive most abuse the bad genes don't.
Cheers OG
Posted by: oldergent at June 12, 2008 12:11 AM
Sorry my spelling is awful tonight; hope at least some of it made sense!
Posted by: amberlight58 at June 11, 2008 11:24 PM
Hey OG,
The costs to the Health system would be much less if people indulged a lot less in alcohol and cigarettes.
The ED at the RAH spends most of it's time and staff on a Friday & Saturday nights looking after the seriously intoxicated.
That doesn't even include the cost of days off work due to hangovers, domestic violence fueled by alcohol, and those who are on disablilty pensions due to alcohol related health problems.
Plus the car accidents, a large percentage of which are caused by people who have been drinking.
I know of one young man in his 20s who has seizures brought on my over-indulgence in alcohol, (he has been drinking since he was 12 or 13) who is losing his ability to hold down a job and who already has short-term memory loss, and another man in his late 40s who requires a liver transplant due to cirrhosis of the liver. He has been on a disability pension for most of his life due to his severe addiction to alcohol.
Smoking related diseases cost us a fortune. A simple cold in a person with COPD requires a week in hospital, sometimes much longer. People with COPD tend to be "revolving door" patients, in and out every few weeks over winter. Then there are those who require home oxygen just to keep them barely functioning and out of hospital.
The amazing part is that people will come in on the verge of death, hardly able to breathe, begging for the doctors to save them and yet as soon as they are barely able to walk, they are busting to get outside to have a cigarette!
COPD is the most common smoking-related disease (although they tend to focus on lung cancer) and most smokers don't even realise they have it.
They may be slightly short of breath on exertion and just put it down to being unfit. It is quite often only when they perhaps come into hospital for minor surgery and their oxygen saturation is a little low that the doctors might pick it up.
Or they have a cold which just refuses to go away and is complicated by a chest infection which requires large doses of IV antibiotics to knock it.
COPD is a horrible disease, the end result is just as awful as lung cancer it justs takes many years longer to kill you!
I agree with Marcus, smokers who think they 'pay their way' for the cost of future health problems are seriously kidding themselves. Even if every cent of tax revenue a smoker generated was put towards their own future health care, it would barely cover the costs of one or two years of their life if they get COPD or lung cancer.
For those adicted to alcohol it would be much the same.
Posted by: amberlight58 at June 11, 2008 10:17 PM
love2travel77 a big dose of sympathy and kind thoughts to you. One of the big lessons from RSVP is to learn not to believe everything you read and to get to know someone before jumping in. Not everyone is in here for the same reason; not everything is as it seems. Treat it as a valuable learning experience. There are some not nice people in the world.
Don't kick yourself - it's more degrading for the low life who can do such vile and nasty things to lovely people (like you).
Posted by: riversong01 at June 11, 2008 8:50 PM
Marcus, forgot to add, drugs do nothing for the economy of the country, so maybe as you seem to indicate, we on the formation of the repbulic should legalise or at least tax them, seems to work in other countries so why not mess this one up too.
There was a paper under desk circulating in a ATO office a couple of years back, some bright spark worked out that if they banned all tobacco the average wage earner would have to pay $5.35 per week more in taxes, The same was started on the grog and stopped when the indications were that it could be 3 times again that increase, and it is well known that wowsers hate parting with money. Hi maybe we should ban gambling too, big saving there.
More thought my thoughfull friend lol.
Cheers OG.
Ps, Have worked out why this page is the size it is, Fairfax owned, newspaper column size.
Posted by: oldergent at June 11, 2008 2:32 PM
Marcus we are talking about a republic here, we can start a war whenever we want, why pay $4/ 5 an hour when we can get it for 3. Of course, you don't need the legal parasites, have the truth syrup policy bought in, now that alone would put the economy in the black forever, for things requiring the death penalty hire an off shore island and have the military do it. See all this is possible in a republic and more. Of course if you were sensible you would leave things the way they are, in a repbulic some may remember some of the nasty things you've called them, lol
Cheers OG
Posted by: oldergent at June 11, 2008 2:17 PM
Back on for a quick look at what's happening in the sandpit and wow... Lotsa politics... Interesting reading boys and makes for a change... Cheers... "G"
Posted by: amdoingit at June 11, 2008 1:13 PM
Ogre
I was under the distinct impression that our parliaments were places were laws are made. It would seem somewhat sensible to have people of legal mind and qualification involved in the generation of legislation perhaps even to have representatives of the signed up workers to apply a bit of bias. You wouldn't really want your grandaughter say, part time working for 4 or 5 bucks an hour would you?
As a bloke illustrated here enjoying a tipple it seems a bit unreasonable that you would seek to deny those who might enjoy (or have the habit) of taking an illicit substance, their poison?
And that excise revenue. I think when someone dies of a tobacco related illness the costs to the health system are many times their lifetimes tax contribution (assuming they paid and weren't a chop chop smoker)
Same logic for alchohol.
Posted by: laughsandtalks at June 11, 2008 9:37 AM
G'day Stoic.
again your wisdom is showing through, But on the actors thing in aust, are not all of them members of the power structure at the moment or at least have a pixie like character in the vicinity of a major orifice, surely that debars them.
Once again are not both those organisations fully paid up branches and heads of PR for said party.
I am adamant that there be no members ever of the legal proffession.
Now the military and ses and medical care people are most definately suitable.
You are young yet so I will stand in till you become eligble, no doubt you will gain from my vast knowledge and experience of the world and bars around the state.
See Marcus, concord achieved without involving the silver budgie.
Cheers OG
Posted by: oldergent at June 11, 2008 8:50 AM
Marcus,
What I had in mind for the drug takers was the withdrawal of the drugs from them, for the pushers a long correctional holiday. For the suppliers your gutting idea sounds pretty good along with confiscation of all property, goods and chattels. What is spent on the remedial aspects of grog and fags is far outweighted by the revenue they produce in excise and people employed in industry.
So no stoush I am sure we can work in "sweetness and light", he may occasionally have to resort to a few low and long ohm's but they will do him good,especially between draughts of the amber gold.
But you have sucked out a bit more than I intended on future policy, I am sure our detractors will use them against us, gee you're a sneaky devil marcus, but the moving fingers typing move on etc.
Cheers OG
Posted by: oldergent at June 11, 2008 8:37 AM
love2travel77 - 10.55pm. Sorry to hear about your terrible experience. Surely all experiences haven't been bad though have they?
Don't give up! That special someone will be out there somewhere. Treat this as another lesson in teaching you what you don't want.
Even though your new opening line is now negative - maybe it might just be the thing to catch the 'right' persons eye.
Good luck in finding him. Your profile reflects a vibrant and happy young woman.
You deserve someone special.
Jen
Posted by: jenniferhi at June 11, 2008 7:32 AM
Ogre. I think you and President Stoic might have your first policy stoush just after congress.
He is a libertarian, and supportive of the rights of bar owners, for example. You are a socialist and interested in the welfare of the people. Your major policy platform from what I see is the eradication of drugs and filth that deal them in short order. given the two drugs that cause by far the most issues, medically and socially are alchohol and tobacco (followed by abused/over prescribed pharmaceuticals) As the head of the organisation that overseas the production, distribution, and taxing of these products and pockets a vast bulk of revenue from them you both have to be the first in line for evisceration, or whatever you had in mind for the scum. No?
Cheers Marcus
Posted by: laughsandtalks at June 11, 2008 2:56 AM
OG, I thought about the actor bit but it was an actor that took the lead in freeing Eastern Europe from the most murderous regime in human history (and the way the EU is going, all of Europe this time will be needing another)
Granted the chance of any of our actors ever filling that role is slim to none, but I am hesitant to rule it out completely.
For journalists, they will be ok but only if they have spent most of their time in a private environment and not sucking the blood of taxpayers at the ABC or SBS.
And I am very tempted to add "No lawyers" :)
Oh and it goes without saying that the public service rule does not apply to military and emergency services personnel. Exception also applies for nurses.
Clean criminal record of course also. Non-violent juvenile offences will be overlooked.
And unfortunately I am not eligible, not having been 10 years out of the public service, but geez my inauguration speech would be something to behold... :)
Posted by: stoic at June 10, 2008 11:40 PM
hey guys. I have never posted on the blogs before. but I think I have just suffered from someone having been in a bad relationship...or maybe they were a bad person already.
This guy is the absolute scum of the earth and is disgusting. He has done and said some disgusting things and has finally made me give up on finding someone. Too much heartache along the way.
I feel so stupid and degraded right now.
Good luck to everyone in their search
Posted by: love2travel77 at June 10, 2008 10:55 PM
Stoic,
on a further reading of your list of exclusions, Please add never a actor/ess, member of the media, journalist or person of political correctness or has their ambition mixed up with their ability. That should leave just you and me, how do you feel about Vice Pres, I should kark it shortly and you can do the Hillary.
Cheers OG
ps, see how easy it is to sort matters of State out.
Posted by: oldergent at June 10, 2008 10:28 PM
But to get back on blog. ( I can you know)
had a young friend the other day pose the same question, he met a rebounder and has got himself mauled good and proper. Asked me if he should try to win her back. I said, son, go and place your most prized posession on that bench and whack it with a hammer, feel the pain and discomfort, then magnify it ten fold and persue the past. See, when us old people die there is an entire world of experiences and good advice die with us.
Cheers OG
Posted by: oldergent at June 10, 2008 9:49 PM
Stoic,
Could not agree with your outlines more, don't know about you but I must be one of the few that qualify, ahh what a wonderful place I could make this, drugs and the filth that deal in them gone in 6 months, won't give the rest of the agenda away some other wannabe pres, might pinch it.
Jokes aside bloody well thought out, but only if we are stupid enought to change the system that is admired around the world and makes us the envy of the world.
Cheers OG
Posted by: oldergent at June 10, 2008 9:17 PM
So true Riversong,
I have also in the past, known of men who have had similar sad experiences, being caring and supportive and patiently waiting around until the lady was 'ready' to begin a new serious long-term relationship.
In both cases when the lady was ready, she wasn't interested in them.
Turns out they were seen as kindly 'comforters' but never seriously seen as potential new partners.
Very considerate and caring, good enough (in one case) to keep the bed warm, but not quite exciting enough, wealthy enough or good-looking enough, to be considered as a prospective long-term partner!
Both men were devastated.
Posted by: amberlight58 at June 10, 2008 9:09 PM
I really like the new format, makes it much easier to just scroll over the photographs and get an idea if you wish to go further. Good move RSVP, I think it looks good and is easy to use.
Posted by: iaminperth at June 10, 2008 8:48 PM
Riverblue, the rebound thing might not be an issue for the person ON the rebound, but it IS an issue for the person on the receiving end, who is used as transitional medicinal! Rebound relationships help the wounded party to get through, but they very seldom work, often leaving the other person minced and broken hearted.
Unless someone tips out the dirty water, clears the rubble, or any other analogy you might use to describe it, they are not free to build a new healthy relationship. On the rebound people are hurt and feel lonely. But plugging the hole with a new person doesn’t solve anything – just complicates the process.
Personally, I have learnt (from bitter experience) to keep well clear of “separated”, “still friends with on/off ex girlfriend”, and all the various shades of rebound men who are a plenty on this website!!
Posted by: riversong01 at June 10, 2008 8:04 PM
There was an article on the news tonight whewre feral cats are reaching plague proportions around the West Beach area, they are attempting to catch the and relocate them.
Would a family take on a cat that had been feral since birth?
I think all cats sold in pet shops should be de-sexed before the pet shop is allowed to sell them.
Our native animals have a hard enough time coping with people, let alone from being hunted by cats.
Surely also, it would not be inhumane to cats, to insist on collars with bells, that work to ensure they cannot hunt our native animals and birds in silence.
Posted by: virgil at June 10, 2008 8:01 PM
You said it OG - They simply can't stand you being able to exercise your free will in a way that goes against what they think you should be doing. Take smoking.
I hate smoking, but that being said, the owner of a restaurant or nightclub should have every right to decide whether or not he or she allows smoking inside his/her establishment. They bought the land, they own it, they have put their money on the line, they should have the say on how they run their business. If I don't like it, I will exercise my freedom and go elsewhere.
And amberlight - I am in full agreement with you and was (and am) highly critical of Howard for further disarming the population. He himself was unlikely to be a threat, same with Costello and Beazley, but my argument then was "what about the future?"
And lo and behold, all these years later, the Communist Sow and the Shadowy Treasurer appear (both materialising out of glowing upside down pentagrams on the floor and a cloud of smoke, both with poisoned blades just itching to be stuck in the backs of their respective leaders), both of whom I trust about as far as I could throw the Statue of Liberty.
And as for a republic, I can tell you the only way I will support a parliament appointed President is if the following rules apply:
* The President can never be a former politician, must never have sought election for either House or Senate at any time, and may not run for federal parliament at any time in the future
* The President must never have been a union leader/secretary (union member is fine)
* The President may not have been a public servant at any time in the past 10 years
* The President must have spent the majority of his or her working life in the private sector
* The President must not be a career academic and must have the spent the majority of his/her life outside the sheltered walls of academia in the real world
* The President must not be a professional sportsman/woman (or must be retired no fewer than 20 years)
I think that about covers it :)
Posted by: stoic at June 10, 2008 7:51 PM
Cars may well not be loaded weapons generally however tell that to the family of the woman who was innocently driving a few days ago and was cannonned into by the man who had stabbed his girlfriend then reportedly deliberately drove into this womans car. You can't tell the woman, she died as a result of her injuries.
In the wrong hands, a car is no different to a weapon. Thank goodness that those who use it as such are a minority................K
Posted by: auntykaz at June 10, 2008 3:12 PM
I don't think that the rebound thing should be as big an issue as people unfortunately make it to be, or fear it to be.
if you really like someone, who you think is on the rebound, then you just should give them the time and space to get over the other person- this shouldn't stop you from still seeing them.
especially with the knowledge that it is possible to like two people at the same time (because one likes them in different ways!)
This brings things to a more humanistic level - we all have the human condition (which is the struggle to be loved).
Posted by: riverblue at June 10, 2008 12:49 PM
woodnwine at June 10, 2008 9:08 AM
There's nothing like sitting back and talking to your cows. ~Russell Crowe
oops - now im mixing my double entendres with my poxy morons , (sorry - its still before 'cocktail hour' and my brain needs nurishment!)
Posted by: eatsrootsandleaves at June 10, 2008 11:07 AM
stoic at June 10, 2008 12:20 AM
Hey stoic,
Re your comment about guns, wasn't it your guy, one of the most conservative PMs in Australia's history who enacted the gun legislation after Port Arthur?
Hardly the kind of bloke one could compare to the 'comrades' in the USSR!
Which is the "they" you are referring to?
Rather ironic really that John Howard got his award on the Queen's BIrthday. Considering he was apparently an avowed monarchist, he did more to sideline the Queen's rep, the Governor-General than any Prime MInister before him!
Most of Australia had no idea who the Governor-General even was, because John Howard always inserted himself in the forefront to do the things that had always been part of the GG's role in the past.
It was hardly showing great respect to our constitutional monarchy to have the GG relegated to making speeches at official openings that were deemed far too boring, unimportant and unlikely to receive much media coverage, well at least not enough media coverage to satisfy our PM!
He can only blame himself, if Australia becomes a Republic in the near future.
He was the one who showed us that we can easily do without the Governor-General, and I am sure Rudd will follow in his footsteps, despite his token appointment of a woman to the role, which thanks to John Howard, definitely no longer has any relevance in our society.
Posted by: amberlight58 at June 10, 2008 10:36 AM
ERAL .... EARL .... REAL ....?
Posted by: woodnwine at June 10, 2008 10:24 AM
There is plenty of point in getting worked up about cats and the damage they do. It makes people aware of the problems they cause and the disdain in which they are held by responsible people, and has been directly responsible for number and behaviour control measures against them. Rego, microchipping, desexing and proper 24/7 cages for them are a start. Legal trapping, poisoning and shooting of ferals (feral = any cat not within it's owners property) need to be encouraged. Registered or identifiable cats caught killing protected wildlife should face exactly the same penalties as dogs that threaten or attack people or other animals. Cat bounties for hunters in the manner of those for fox, wild dog and feral horse, goats and pig etc would help.
Marcus
Posted by: laughsandtalks at June 10, 2008 10:09 AM
ERAL - seems you are interested in cows.
Posted by: woodnwine at June 10, 2008 9:08 AM
And while I am on the animals thing. What about responsible ownership of little dogs who are bathed and groomed and told they are so cutsie and then left alone all day to bark and carry on like hyperactive idiots because they have absolutely nothing to do. Most of these little dogs are hunting or guard dogs, bred for work, not bred to look like powder puffs. No wonder they go insane and are always looking for attention from their owners. That, in my opinion is cruelty also.
Posted by: iaminperth at June 10, 2008 8:21 AM
In my opinion it's no point getting worked up about cats and obviously some people don't like them, that's fair enough. It is time that people get worked up about irresponsible owners. Desexing should not be an option, it should be compulsory, of the cat that is and responsible ownership should be law with heavy fines applicable. Let's face it, cats do catch rats and mice, although mine never did, but they do have a place in the eco system and let's look at the responsibility of the owners of both cats and dogs and indeed all pets.
Posted by: iaminperth at June 10, 2008 8:18 AM
I don't have problems with sign in either and can blog whenever I wish to. I don't understand what is happening unless your actual internet connection is unstable. The blogging on this site is free so I don't know what the comments are about with the site charging as it doesn't.
Posted by: iaminperth at June 10, 2008 8:11 AM
Marcus,
Have a look at the Sydney papers in the last couple of days, cars can be used as weapons and caused intentional death. Having lived on the Pacific Hwy for a number of years and observing several "unexplained " road crossings resulting in multiple deaths, one has to wonder if some were not intentional. Point on the cats taken, cats hunt and kill, people hunt and kill, check out the number of stabbings every week. Ban knives, then what will be the next weapon of choice to kill with. People are all for bans so long as it does not interfere with them.
Stoic.
Most people who are anti gun have never handled one far less shot one, the abolishonists have got rid of guns, Tobacco (nearly) now they are starting on Grog, when they get that gone, what next? Roll on 1984.
Cheers OG
Posted by: oldergent at June 10, 2008 8:07 AM
oldergent June 9, 2008 8:10 PM
Ogre. Err, what anti gun rant have I made?
I made the logical point that cats are like machine guns to wildlife. Cars do not deliberately hunt.
Regardless, I don't have to read the stats on car deaths to know that you cannot hold a loaded car to someones head and, terrorise, rob or shoot them, (or shoot wildlife) regardless of what the National Rifle Association says.
Cheers Marcus
Posted by: laughsandtalks at June 10, 2008 1:25 AM
bm1960 at June 9, 2008 5:51 PM
"....They just take your dollar and give very little back.."
This is a free blog BM. It doesn't cost a zac to post a comment. Where do you get the "they take your dollar and give very little back" from?
I have been blogging daily for months now and had no log on problems. Sometimes I'm edited but can always get straight on.
What is your procedure for posting a comment?
Cheers Marcus
Posted by: laughsandtalks at June 10, 2008 1:14 AM
OG - wasn't it you who mentioned a book awhile back written in Russia about what was needed to take control of a country - basically disarm the population and find a new currency standard?
There is your answer as to why they are so anti-anyone else owning a gun.
An armed populace is a lot harder to enslave and dictate to and we all know how much leftists hate you being able to ignore their diktats and live your life how you want to live it instead of how they deem you should :)
Posted by: stoic at June 10, 2008 12:20 AM
Marcus,
Read the stats on deaths and injuries caused by cars then tell me what is most dangerous guns or cars, the only difference you can come up with to justify your anti gun rant is that you use cars so it is alright.
OG.
Posted by: oldergent at June 9, 2008 8:10 PM
Sign in problems are caused by woeful 'customer support'.....did anyone notice that blogs went offline on a long weekend....high traffic time and no one to moderate??? They just take your dollar and give very little back..I am sick and tired of complaining here and to 'CS'....it doeswn't change anything.....
Definitely no cheers here....:-)
B....
PS...my original comment was against the topic title...it should be a question not a ridiculous statement, in my opinion....
Posted by: bm1960 at June 9, 2008 5:51 PM
Diaries of a dog and a cat .....
DOG DIARY
7:00 AM - Outside! My favorite thing!
8:00 AM - Dog food! My favorite thing!
9:30 AM - A car ride! My favorite thing!
9:40 AM - A walk in the park! My favorite thing!
10:30 AM - Got rubbed and petted! My favorite thing!
12:00 PM - Lunch! My favorite thing!
1:00 PM - Played in the yard! My favorite thing!
2:00 PM - Looked out the window and barked! My favorite thing!
3:00 PM - Wagged my tail! My favorite thing!4:00 PM - Chased a bird out of the tree! My favorite thing!
5:00 PM - Milk bones! My favorite thing!
6:00 PM - Watched my people eat! My favorite thing!
6:20 PM - Table scraps! My favorite thing!7:00 PM - Got to play ball! My favorite thing!8:00 PM - Wow! Watched TV with the people! My favorite thing!
11:00 PM - Sleeping on the bed! My favorite thing!
CAT DIARY
Day 983 of my captivity. My captors continue to taunt me with bizarre little dangling objects. They dine lavishly on fresh meat, while the other inmates and I are fed hash or some sort of dry nuggets. Although I make my contempt for the rations perfectly clear, I nevertheless must eat something in order to keep up my strength. The only thing that keeps me going is my dream of escape. In an attempt to disgust them, I once again vomit on the carpet. Today I decapitated a mouse and dropped its headless body at their feet. I had hoped this would strike fear into their hearts, since it clearly demonstrates what I am capable of. However, they merely made condescending comments about what a 'good little hunter' I am. [Offspring of unwed parents]! There was some sort of assembly of their accomplices tonight. I was placed in solitary confinement for the duration of the event. However, I could hear the noises and smell the food. I overheard that my confinement was due to the power of 'allergies'. I must learn what this means, and how to use it to my advantage. Today I was almost successful in an attempt to assassinate one of my tormentors by weaving around his feet as he was walking. I must try this again tomorrow -- but at the top of the stairs. I am convinced that the other prisoners here are flunkies and snitches. The dog continues to receive special privileges. He is regularly released - and seems to be more than willing to return. He is obviously retarded.
Posted by: jodes75 at June 9, 2008 5:18 PM
I would have to agree with bm1960 about the sign in process...what is that all about?!!
And as for what I thought the topic of discussion was, i.e 'rebound relationships', by the very definition of 'rebound', aren't most of us on this site either bouncing back from, or reacting to, a previous emotional situation?
I guess we all have life-history, but I doubt that it would take long to work out if someone is interested in you just because they have to have someone in their life, or worse, to 'get even'. My thought is, be totally honest and communicate openly. Most of us are not mind readers and abhor dishonesty.
Posted by: susieg53 at June 9, 2008 4:39 PM
man i know full well how this feels. all my ex used to talk about was the times she had with her ex even though she hated his guts lol. funny thing was i was fine with it in a way cause he was a real ........ dick head.. thats a polite way of saying it. anyway she ended up cheating on me after 2 months. that ended that.
oh well thats all in the past.
Posted by: bobthefitter at June 9, 2008 4:52 AM
misscruel at June 8, 2008 9:09
blah, blah blah..... " predators that are in danger of extinction (just off the top of my head, I'm sure there are many more): Siberian tiger, orca (the ocean's master predator), Arctic wolf, several shark species ... but hey, who cares, they prey on other animals so let them die out!.."
OK. That would have to rank as the most sub moron, ethically bankrupt, statement I have seen here. Allowing any species to die out is a moral and spiritual failure on our part. Top predators indicate and ensure the health of ecosystems. Remove them (WTF because you have aesthetic or vegetarian concerns?) and populations are unregulated.
By your own logic the first species you would have to let die out would be humans.
On cats. As we say the only good one is a dead one. Regardless of their introduction by humans they do an enormous amount of damage. Your logic on that is the same as the one gun promoters use; that it is not the gun that kills but the person holding it. Rubbish, no cats (or no guns) no chance of an accident.
Cheers Marcus
Posted by: laughsandtalks at June 8, 2008 6:33 PM
Hi all.....I am still amazed this topic is going...the title is the most ridiculous turn of phrase I have read in ages....almost as ridiculous as the sign in process!!!!
Cheers,
B.
Posted by: bm1960 at June 8, 2008 5:58 PM
Your dad sounds nice Marcus, a gifted man with a good sense of humour. My dad was nice and I still miss him. He passed away quite a few years ago. He liked nothing better in his later years to sit in his comfy chair with his cup of tea and cat in his lap, dog at his feet and just nod off. He unfortunately spent his last few months in a clinical hospital dying from cancer which dragged on and on. How much kinder it would have been to bypass all that pain and suffering and let him slip away in his chair with his beloved pets.
Posted by: iaminperth at June 8, 2008 11:32 AM
never a truer word uttered ER&L, lol
Posted by: iaminperth at June 8, 2008 11:28 AM
Wow ... Steve Irwin loved animals and look at what that did for him ... ok time for a 2nd cuppa coffee for me I think ...
Posted by: jon2003 at June 8, 2008 10:57 AM
Sorry, Marcus, I didn't mean to rip your throat out - I can see your point of view ... however, I also love cats (and pretty much every other animal I've ever met - they're just so much nicer than most humans, and even those that are not ... well, it isn't their fault!).
Posted by: missrule at June 8, 2008 9:16 AM
Some people's idea of humaneness and pacificism (yes, that is a word!) is offbeat, to say the least. (The Pacific Highway must be the world's most inappropriately-named road.)
Most endangered or vulnerable Australian wildlife owes its current plight to habitat loss (man-made), pollution (man-made), non-natural diseases (man-made) and, yes, predators introduced by ... man. Just a couple of examples are numbats, Queensland tree kangaroos and eastern barred bandicoots. The Australian sea-lion has been hunted to near extinction. Man is the chief predator of almost every endangered species on this planet. So let's take a good hard look at our own role before condemning domestic pets, shall we?
Fact remains that cats are (in my experience) loving creatures that make wonderful low-maintenance pets, especially for elderly and disabled people who can't get out to exercise dogs. I do, however, still agree that their breeding - as with dogs - should be strictly controlled, if only to reduce the horrifying numbers exterminated in shelters.
Other predators that are in danger of extinction (just off the top of my head, I'm sure there are many more): Siberian tiger, orca (the ocean's master predator), Arctic wolf, several shark species ... but hey, who cares, they prey on other animals so let them die out!
Posted by: missrule at June 8, 2008 9:09 AM
Posted by: iaminperth at June 7, 2008 4:25 PM
Perth - "the secret" with dogs ( we are talking about dogs - right? ;~) ) is - the "cookie" !
Once they're hooked on the cookie, you can get 'em to do whatever you want after that ... LOL !
Posted by: eatsrootsandleaves at June 7, 2008 10:20 PM
missrule at June 7, 2008 4:56 PM
( "I would have both dogs and cats. AND a bloke...")
Why stop there?
Old Missrule had a FARM
EieieiYO
And on that farm she had a COW
EieieiYO
With moo-moo here
And a moo-moo there
Moo here moo there
Moo-moo everywhere.
;)
Posted by: eatsrootsandleaves at June 7, 2008 9:07 PM
Cooked a very nice chicken and asparagus risotto tonight and settled in front of the television with a glass of red to watch the footy. I hope the Weagles can make a mark, but hey, let the best man win!
Posted by: iaminperth at June 7, 2008 8:24 PM
My dad is a humane, pacific man with a great love of nature and Australian wildlife, particularly birds. He would say that he loved cats too, but couldn't eat a whole one.
Cheers Marcus
Posted by: laughsandtalks at June 7, 2008 7:33 PM
Among the things my old dad taught me (and he's been proved right on many occasions): never trust a man who doesn't like cats, he will have a cruel streak and will want a doormat as a partner. I have no idea what dad's reasoning was but as I say, he's been proved right on many occasions ... (He loved cats and dogs equally too.)
Posted by: missrule at June 7, 2008 5:20 PM
Amusing but far from brilliant ... predictable with a grain of truth thrown (sown?) in. For choice, if I could afford all the vet's bills, medication and boarding fees, I would have both dogs and cats. AND a bloke, of course, which is why I'm on the RSVP and not the RSPCA website.
Posted by: missrule at June 7, 2008 4:56 PM
It's all about balance ER and L, although I think dogs ER&L quite often as well!
Posted by: iaminperth at June 7, 2008 4:25 PM
Brilliant stuff, ERAL!
Nice to have a really good laugh to lighten up the day.
Much appreciated! Thanks
Posted by: amberlight58 at June 7, 2008 2:51 PM
Who needs a man? Get a Dog
( seems appropriate )
* If you want someone who will do anything to please you, get a dog.
* If you want someone who will bring you the newspaper without tearing through it first for the sports page, get a dog.
* If you want someone who'll make a total fool of himself because he's so glad to see you, get a dog.
* If you want someone who eats whatever you put in front of him and never says his mother made it better, get a dog.
* If you want someone who's always eager to go out any time you ask and anywhere you want to go, get a dog.
* If you want someone who can scare away burglars without waving a lethal weapon around, endangering you and all the neighbours, get a dog.
* If you want someone who never touches the remote, couldn't care less about Monday Night Football, and watches dramatic movies with you as long as you want, get a dog.
* If you want someone who'll be content just to snuggle up and keep you warm in bed, and who you can kick out of bed if he slobbers and snores, get a dog.
* If you want someone who never criticizes anything you do, doesn't care how good or bad you look, acts as though every word you say is worth hearing, never complains, and loves you unconditionally all the time, get a dog!
On the other hand...
* If you want someone who never comes when you call him, totally ignores you when you walk in the room, leaves hair all over the place, walks all over you, prowls around all night and comes home only to eat and sleep all day, and acts as though you are there only to see that HE's happy...
Get a CAT!
ERAL (Leo :~D )
Posted by: eatsrootsandleaves at June 7, 2008 2:07 PM
I got my little white 'fluff ball' from a dog shelter at Moorook in the Riverland.
I had previously had a Kelpie which I had loved very much, but she had been hit by a car after sneaking through the side gate (You'd think she would have had more sense at 8 1/2 years of age!).
I really missed our daily walks, so after a couple of months, I was looking for a new 'friend'.
I didn't really want a puppy, so I looked at a shelter dog. I had no intention of getting a little yappy 'fluff ball', but he looked so stressed and sad. Against my better judgment I brought him home.
He was sweet for a few days then suddenly 'Cujo' appeared. He jumped on the couch and I told him to get off, then suddenly he began snarling, and not just your average snarl! He also snapped at me. I wasn't keen to be bitten, so I pushed him off with a rolled up newspaper.
He was not a happy camper.
He had never been sure of my 11yo son, but now started snarling every time he came near him!
I was sure I had made the most terrible mistake. I was going to take him back. But for some insane reason I decided to persevere.
Now after 9 months, he is a different dog. I had him desexed, which made a small difference and without ever hitting him, I just never let him beat me.
I became quite adapt at pushing him out the back door with the broom when he became really nasty, and would follow him around the room until he got the idea he WAS going outside, now.
He now loves my son, has even made friends with my 18 year old son, whom he never liked at all, and seems to understand that snarling and snapping doesn't get him anywhere!
I started taking him to dog obedience 4 months ago, and this has helped even more. He has even stopped trying to dig out under the fence!
My younger son took him for his dog obedience session the other night and he worked perfectly for him, better than he does for me.
I guess his grumpiness was the reason he ended up in the shelter, but he must have been allowed to get away with this behaviour in the first place. Then I wonder maybe if he was then treated quite cruelly, to try to break his behaviour, going by his obvious fear and aggression, which was more obvious with men and boys.
You often see little "snappy" dogs. Just because they are litttle and cute, doesn't mean you can let them get away with bad behaviour.
I guess he is still living with us, only because he was a small dog, if he'd been a larger dog, I couldn't have risked it because of my son.
He just loves going for walks, and rarely ever barks. I can only agree that there are very few "bad" dogs just terrible owners!
Posted by: amberlight58 at June 7, 2008 12:41 PM
My little burmese is looking very rubenesque at the moment. They are not known for being totally loyal to their owners and I know that mine likes to visit other people in our culdesac. I think she is having morning/afternoon tea snacks at a few other houses as well. I do know she visits one elderly neighbour when he is cleaning his caravan and has a sandwich with him at lunchtime. Bit of a chub tub at the moment but very happy and contented.
Posted by: iaminperth at June 7, 2008 10:35 AM
My two dogs are perfect companions, they are together all the time and are made for each other.
One is a male ridgeback/staffy and the other a female lab.
Ridgey is the protector of all things at our house, hates trucks and the postie with a passion, men he isn't particularly fond of either.....His favorite spot is on his couch in the front room.
Lab is, as labs tend to be, a garbage guts, always on the hunt for food. She is somewhat "rubenesque" in her body shape, and the "bark" in the household. Her favorite spot is either in front of the fire or in the linen cupboard. Somehow she finds sleeping in there comfortable, though her snoring tends to verge on loud at times.
They both like to take me for walks around the hilly area where l live, usually a daily thing. Would not be without them.............................K
Posted by: auntykaz at June 7, 2008 9:51 AM
Posted by: decoratress at June 6, 2008 8:14 PM
Thank you Decoratress, gracefully accepted, no hard feelings. I'm sure "Ladysomelifeinmeyet" would also feel the same way. Let's all move on, hey! .....
:-) Happy birthday to you too "Deco" lol!
Am really enjoying reading the blogs about pets and the ongoing debates re cats,small dogs and the environment etc, or probably more correctly the responsibilites of pet owners towards our environment. Gotta dash so haven't the time to comment at the moment.
I have 2 small dogs (one elderly the other getting older) who do live inside (by default- long story) for most of the day but I agree with Perth, it is very much the owners responsibility to ensure pets are not destroying our wonderful wildlife. Fortunately, my dogs are too lazy or too old to be bother chasing birds or reptiles, but I am still very vigilant with them as they wander around my garden.
I also love Perth's idea for a blog topic on how pets can influence/affect a new relationship - I'm sure many bloggers that are pet owners (well, they really own us don't they lol) have some interesting experiences in relation to this :-).
Kind regards,
Jacqui
Posted by: misspriss01 at June 7, 2008 9:02 AM
OG, I found that when all else fails with Councils and RSPCA, after all there is no law at present about owning and breeding cats and not much they can do legally, the local press helps. A well thought out letter to the editor highlighting the plight of the wild animals without showing any obvious bias towards the owner of the animals sometimes has great effect. I think a lot of people are quite happy to flaunt any unwritten rules of living harmoniously in society but do not like it when their dirty laundry is aired in public. It will also highlight the obvious cruelty to these animals that are allowed to breed and where they are housed and how they are fed. Be subtle, be compassionate and stay very focussed.
Posted by: iaminperth at June 7, 2008 4:26 AM
Nina... stop muttering... can hear you from here and that's miles away!! And ah yes to the memories!! If that's what you call them??
Must confess, I'm more than just a tad gobsmacked myself.. Who'd have thought??
Catch ya soon!!!!!........ "G",
Posted by: amdoingit at June 6, 2008 11:17 PM
Oh dear, Decoratress. La Slimy is real? Who would have thought? I have vivid memories of her doppelganger, Slimy, being extremely rude and abusive to myself and others quite some time ago.
I always thought those posts were one of our resident mischief-makers at work. I humbly apologise to anyone I may have maligned. Who would have thought any 'real' person could be so, so, .... wandering away muttering to myself, trying to think of the right words... nup. Can't find 'em. Words fail me.
Posted by: ninaschen at June 6, 2008 9:38 PM
Lets get away from cats... am a dog person. I have a recalcatrant Beagle who would be the best natured dog I have ever owned... better than the men in my life. He is always happy to see me even if I have just been to the clothesline, will sit, drop and stay on command... unless there is food within 200 metres, never complains if he has the same thing for dinner 6 months in a row.... sorry guys only joking... love you all
Posted by: eastofcbd at June 6, 2008 9:32 PM
Certainly not, eatsrootsandleaves (good name btw) ... a totally appropriate punishment I'd say, and I'm thinking of campaigning to bring it in for naughty schoolkids too.
Iaminperth, your comments on small dogs struck a chord. There's a yorkie terrier-type kept in a small yard near me and it yaps all day (luckily not at night or I'd have the shotgun out!). It is never walked, presumably because, as you say, the owners believe small dogs don't need exercise. Whereas in fact they not only need exercise, they need to socialise with other dogs and do their sniffing, just like all dogs do.
I'm a far from perfect dog owner but my border collie-cross gets a walk around our area and a run in the park every day, plus leash-free beach runs at the weekend.
Posted by: missrule at June 6, 2008 9:30 PM
eatsrootsandleaves at June 6, 2008 5:54 PM I agree that is a bit harsh... sheez gotta get back on the horse sooner or later, someone has ro be the first
Posted by: eastofcbd at June 6, 2008 9:18 PM
Posted by: enrepres at June 6, 2008 2:44 PM
Actually, the goddess' name was 'Bast' and was depicted as having a human body and cats head like most Egyptian deities. Not only were cats appreciated for keeping the vermin population under control, they were also regarded as the keepers of the underworld and considered to be spiritually advanced beings. Harming a cat was a crime punishable by death. It is believed that the modern Abyssinian cat is a descendant of the Egyptian temple cats.
And in order for this post to not be completely OT, I don't believe that the next person you are with should pay for the sins of the past. Instead, one should take the time to sort one's own issues out before embarking on a new relationship, rather than simply diving straight back in again. Until you are in a fit state (mentally in particular), you owe it to yourself and any future partner to clear away the cobwebs of the past and not let is cast a pall over the future.
Posted by: sesquipedalian76 at June 6, 2008 9:01 PM
Cats and chickens were always wonderful for horses convalescing. We usually had about 80 horses at one time on the property and a number that had come thru the University of Qld after injuries. Because these horses were penned and could become very lonely we used to encourage the cats or chickens to mill around and keep them company. It is amazing how they integrate together and keep each other company. Sometimes it can become a problem when the horse is returned to the racetrack as they actually miss the cat or chook that has kept them company for so long.
Posted by: iaminperth at June 6, 2008 8:48 PM
A few days ago I posted a copy of an unpleasant email which had been received by a female blogger. It contained a list of profile names belonging to a serial multi-profiler on the site, but unfortunately also two genuine members... misspriss & Ladysomelifeinmeyet.
I'd like to mention here that both ladies are genuine, & no disrespect was intended..
Posted by: decoratress at June 6, 2008 8:14 PM
We must remember that all these problems with animals are caused by the owners, not the animal. I see people purchase dogs because they are small and they have a small garden. No, a large number of small dogs are hunters and they need huge amounts of exercise, they are not lap dogs and really resent being left to their own devices, therefore, they bark like mad constantly and are generally disobedient little monsters. Large dogs in small yards, I can only speak of the gsd, have owned five. Medium exercise dogs, goes to the beach every day to run free, must have a job, looks after me, my family, her home and the cat. Also does trekking once a week in Pinjarra and needs to sniff out clues. We have a large dog who has a family to look after and 'herd'; she is a sheep dog originally, she has a job in life and she also is 'stretched' with her trekking exercises. Does not bark incessently and spends a lot of the time at home relaxing and having a sleep. In my view owners are the problem, not the animals.
Posted by: iaminperth at June 6, 2008 8:14 PM
Unfortunately I think the Great Plague of London was caused by the erradication of cats causing the prolific uncontrolled breeding of rates. Like everything in life balance is the key and we really need much more responsible ownership and not so much bloody minded 'I can do as I want' attitudes in life. That goes for responsible attitudes with animals, children and our relationships.
Posted by: iaminperth at June 6, 2008 8:08 PM
Definitely Marcus, Huge vicious things, people don't realize what a real feral cat looks like. They are usually battle scarred and very large. When a foal is born and the placenta expelled a feral cat will go in for a meal, if the mother tries to get in between the cat and the foal she will be attacked with sometim
Bah. Can’t sleep and the sedative hasn’t kicked in yet. I was doing some thinking about how the world could end (maybe that is why I can’t sleep :) and to be honest, it looks pretty good in the short term.
Stoic’s List of The End of the World or At Least the End of Human Civilization Possibilities
100% Certainty ie Absolutely Will Happen:
1. Our Sun going nova/dying out
Well not actually nova, but eventually our sun will reach the halfway point of its lifespan where it will begin to expand into a red giant, enveloping everything this side of Jupiter, before most likely shrinking into a white dwarf. Naturally everything on earth will be incinerated, but we still have a few billion years before it happens.
The alternative is that the sun simply fades after using up all its fuel and everything in this solar system freezes and dies.
Highly Likely Chance of Happening:
1. A massive asteroid impact.
It has happen several times in the past, and probabilities say it is only a matter of time before it happens again. It is likely it will happen before the sun goes nova, but we may get lucky and have all the really big ones miss us. But so long as we have team of rough but "lovable" oil workers willing to go into space and drill holes in the asteroid to plant nuclear weapons in, Hollywood assures us we will be fine.
Other Probable Possibilities:
1. A mutated/engineered viral outbreak ala I Am Legend, The Stand etc
I think it is unlikely to be a naturally occurring virus. All the worst ones like Ebola kill their host so quickly that the virus does not have time to mutate and spread, so outbreaks tend to be localized. But add in mutation and engineering (and possibly weaponization) and the possibility is there.
2. Global Nuclear War
Possible but unlikely. China and Russia are making too much money to risk rocking the boat and wiping out their customers. In the event of a nuclear exchange, Pakistan and India would most likely nuke each other, as would Iran and Israel, and if their last test is anything to go by, North Korea would miss whoever they would aim at and up nuking themselves. No doubt there would be great upheavals and much gnashing of teeth, but nothing on a planet destroying level.
Outside Chances:
1. The aforementioned LHC black hole.
Theoretically possible but unlikely (I hope ;)
2. A Zombie Outbreak
Don’t laugh too hard. A mutated toxoplasmosa gondii parasite could infect humans (the ordinary, non-mutated kind that change the behaviour of mice already do infect humans but aren't able to control our behaviour....yet ;).
There is also an enhanced sort of neurotoxin (think Serpent and the Rainbow and the case of Clairvius Narcisse).
There is neurogenesis and reanimation - as was done with rats hearts not too long ago. Yes, scientists got clinically dead rat hearts to start beating again, and they did it in a petri dish - not even inside a dead rat.
And then there are Nanobots - microscopic, self-replicating robots that can enter your brain and create, or destroy, or rearrange your neural connections and pathways - and nobody would even know it was happening to them.
All of these could cause a huge zombie outbreak :)
3. An Alien Invasion
Again it is possible (though there is no evidence either way if aliens exist or not) but one would hope that if they were advanced enough to overcome the very non-trivial challenge of faster than light and interstellar travel, they would not be wasting time on our backward, pre-light speed travel planet :)
4. A Robot Uprising ala Terminator, The Matrix
Again it is possible but one would hope with the movies serving as warnings, we would not put robots and computers in charge of vital defense and military assets. What''s thatyou say ? The British Ministry of Defense has bought some Predator B/ Reaper MQ-9 hunter-killer unmanned aerial vehicles? That sounds cool. Huh? And they put them under the control of a computer system called Skynet? Why do I know that name? Sya what? THat is the name of the computer that takes control over and destroys humanity in the Terminator movies? Thye did that evn with the movies as warings? oh dear... perhasp this one should be higher on the list :)
Posted by: stoic at June 18, 2008 2:46 AM