Braveheart
-
Posts
2,442 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
53
Posts posted by Braveheart
-
-
True detective season 2 is picking up pace. Very entertaining so far
Thoughts so far, gents?
I can't believe I'm actually able to take Vince Vaughn seriously but it's working for me.
-
"Post-graduate" or "postgraduate" was correct IMO. Means relating to or describing a course of study undertaken after completing a first degree.
It's semantics but having one degree does not make you a PG student when you start a second. It does however make you a Graduate. At universities that have a strong focus on Research e.g. Melbourne, a graduate course is one you complete, generally via Coursework i.e. Grad Dip/Masters (CW) after a general UG whereas the term PostGraduate is only attributed to a research Degree e.g. (PhD, MA) with a specialisation in a certain field which necessitates a level of research e.g. Honours/Masters (R) as a prerequisite. For instance, once you complete a general science degree at UOM you can gain entry into Masters of Engineering etc. (which after checking just now you only need a generalist UG degree e.g. Commerce, Environments etc.) because you are a Graduate. There is no specialised research involved to gain entry to or to complete the Masters. To obtain a PG qualification such as a PhD you must be able to demonstrate extensive specialised research expertise in the specific field and this work is viewed as being of a "higher" or"further", hence the 'post' prefix, level than those who have obtained entry into a Graduate Masters/Grad Dip. program via Coursework or minor research.
-
that's why I'm the undergrad I suppose.
Haha all good mate. Most people don't make the distinction. I'm just a wanker who's been at uni way too long
-
I personally really like the model that Melbourne Uni has these days. They make you do a one of five generic undergraduate degree as science, arts, environments, commerce or biomed and only offer medicine, law, engineering and other more career specific degrees as post-grad graduate. In my experience very few people coming straight out of high school really know that they want to do. Plus it means when you do your post-grad graduate studies you are studying with people who are committed to what they are doing.
Sorry to be pedantic.
-
1
-
-
The flaw in your argument is that taxpayers pay for the medical consequences regardless of whether the smoker is incarcerated or not. But even that's not really an accurate and fair statement, because the excise on cigarettes goes beyond the medical costs taxpayers have to cover for smokers. So really the smokers are paying, and most likely overpaying, for their smoking, whether incarcerated or not.
As for your last paragraph, neo-cons would have jaywalkers jailed if they had it their way, if they don't care about the cost of their 'send everyone to prison' mentality then your convoluted argument is hardly going to hold any weight.
You're slipping TBH. Greek situation got you fucked up? Questioning your beliefs seeing the left condem millions to a life of poverty? Or was it that the left sent a country on the brink of collapse within 5 months of taking government? Not too late, the free market holds no grudges, you're welcome to switch over.
Any and all items that attract significant amounts of excise go above paying just for the problem they are creating. Excise taxes on Fuel, alcohol, smoking etc. are intrinsically designed to engender positive societal benefit beyond the scope of the problems they cause. Not in any of your economics textbook's readings that detail the simple sum ease of "how to govern a country" and as much as it grinds your gears, not everything in our society is dollar for dollar due to our propensity for a sense of social justice that sees the redirection, reallocation of capital from individuals, sometimes disproportionately, to obtain an overall more just society, case in point being that smokers pay for my healthcare with both their personal tax and their bad choices
you may view this as irrational or unfair in your own twisted, Friemanite conception but in Australia it's the reality. Enjoy 1) The Rightest/Neo-lib fiscal and financial doctrine central to the composition of the Eurozone mechanism from its conception to it's current economic minatoar form coupled with the extortionate usury practices of the ECB and IMF have everything to do with the current situation in Greece. The market is broken. You'd say stop meddling and let the market correct itself but what happens in the mean time before this economic utopia materialises? Those numbers on the spread sheets of Reaganite politicians and economists are actually people. Come up with a real solution to the crisis that affords the people that it is actually effecting some form of realtime assistance/relief instead of just having 'faith' that the market will inevitably look after them. Are you denying that some form of state/public sphere intervention is not needed in this situation? The church of the Market is very irrational and inflexible sometimes for an institution that claims to have the monopoly on economic sense and authority.
2) You are genuinely kidding yourself if you actually believe that Tsipras created this situation. I personally think the bloke is a populist and have no love for him. You may think he's going about it the wrong way in trying to clean it up but he didn't create the mess and you know it.
-
This may not be a side note. One of the news report (Channel 9 I think) said that the problem started when some prisoners had stocked up on cigarettes whilst other missed out causing a high level of tension. This could be interpreted to mean that scarcity has led to a severe price rise on a precious commodity leading to rampant profiteering and the ghost of Lenin rising to lead the inmates that didn't have smokes.
The underlying assumption here is that the prisoner population suffers a greater incidence of these diseases compared to the general population AND that the problem originates in the prison system.
Carl Williams demise did not occur because of his smoking habit; indeed if I was informed that I had to share a cell with MJ I would take up smoking knowing full well that it will never kill me as it won't have the time to do so.
I am not aware of statistics regarding the health issues of prisoners or whether they get tracked over time. that could be interesting reading but I can't see anyone funding any such studies. And even if cigarette smoking is banned in prisons there is nothing to stop the inmate from taking up the habit once they are released.
Also I am not sure that the taxpayer pays for the cigarettes. If the inmates pay for it then the issue becomes more of a general health problem rather than a financing of a habit.
An argument for allowing smoking is that illicit drugs do get into the prison system anyway and they form a black market. Banning cigarettes will add another item into the black market. And in my books there are few sins worse than the creation of an artificial black market.
Actually I am for the supplying of soma (Brave New World) to prisoners. The cost of keeping them perpetually drugged and in a state of blissful tranquillity should reduce the cost of jailing them.
1: Where did I assume that the prison population has a higher rate of anything?
2: I have zero idea what your Carl Williams tangent has to do with anything let alone my point about prison healthcare?
3: Of course there isn't? Once again, I, at no point in my post insinuated that prisoners would be rid of the smoking habit via the ban just that they would have a greatly reduced capacity to acquire the cigarettes and thus be less of a drain on the health system while incarcerated. The fact they can begin smoking again once released is philosophically void as once the judiciary has decided that the denial of personal liberty to a transgressor ceases upon release and moreover, the reinstating of the freedom to partake in behaviours that the state has not deemed beyond the realms of social acceptability (only a matter of time btw) e.g. smoking should occur, then they are free to do so and we pay for their smoking related healthcare just as we do any other idiot who choses to smoke in our society. The question is why are we affording people, who we have been denied basic liberties due to their unacceptable behaviour, the privilege of the choice to smoke and then foot the bill for that choice when we deny them access to other potentially costly/illness inducing luxuries such as alcohol or gambling while in the same position? I genuinely don't understand why there would be a pushback from those who are not currently incarcerated against this policy.
4: I at no point claimed the tax payer pays for their cigarettes. It is not a general health problem simply due to the origin of the purchase, it is a public health problem because of the implicit duty of care mandated for any person residing at Her Majesty's Leisure which encompasses our healthcare standards and inevitably the taxpayer foots the bill for that.
5: They are already an item for barter which drives conflict and the creation of said 'black-market' intrinsically implies that they are harder to get within this confined setting thus via simple deduction their scarcity assures fewer cases of prisoners contracting smoking related ailments which we in turn have to pay for.
-
But what's the point to it?
We (the taxpayer) currently pay for all the medical treatment of those incarcerated in our prisons. Smoking induced emphysema, heart disease, lung disease, all types of cancer, diabetes etc. are all afflictions that the community need not have to pay to treat when considering the vastly reduced propensity for these to occur in our prison population if smoking is banned.
From the libertarian side of things, we forgo certain rights when we transgress in society e.g. personal liberty and tbh I have zero problem with restricting access to potentially lethal and inarguably costly privileges such as cigarettes.
Also, for the cons and neo-libs on here, how can you be against limiting the amount of public expenditure on prisoners on top of the already astronomical cost of housing and monitoring them? It's nonsensical.-
3
-
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
TTDIM: Titties.
Seriously how fucking good?
-
10
-
There is a simple solution for all this housing affordability nonsense, just wait for the bubble to burst
It's gotten to the point where I almost want to happen, even though it would fuck up the economy, just because the whole thing is retarded
You know things are bad when cunts are camping out to buy land in Rockbank.
-
1
-
-
"insert Franjic's number" doesn't roll off the tongue very well.
we dont know Ivan Franjic's number yet.....as soon as we do then we'll insert the number into the chant itself.
What about we all buy dildos and sit on them
Just sign out and never log back in please.
Wow ur homophobic. Melburnians dont tolerate ppl like u pls hang urself He's not homophobic. He's just like the majority of forumites that think you're a faggot
last I looked im seeing a beautiful woman (for anyone wanting a clarification!
In need of clarification. Pics pls.
-
5
-
-
Who wants to chip in for a hit on this bloke?
pass the hat around, see what we can do.
tasteless
Eat a dick
-
2
-
-
I reckon the Greek construction worker will do it on the cheap, as long as we pay him cash in hand
Who wants to chip in for a hit on this bloke?pass the hat around, see what we can do.
I'm sure if we just opted for a kidnapping we would be able to get a better price
I know a few Chaps who could do it on the cheap
-
1
-
-
Who wants to chip in for a hit on this bloke?
pass the hat around, see what we can do. -
bump.
Ever get that Metcard Marty?
-
It's in the works lads. Key is ensuring we have enough funds to buy stock without compromising on tifo's etc Any hints as to whats in the works bt? Tshirts or hoodies. Will definatly be released at some stage in the first half of next season, hopefully earlier rather than later.That Kangaroo emblem came in late in the season, but am a big big fan of it.
Would wear it for sure on anything.
squeeze in a black wind breaker and a few polos then the best dressed terrace will be back
All options have been discussed
Now enough #bt50leaks thanks!This is what happens when I get a new job. Come home to see people have been leaking stuff.
It all falls apart without the Beard at the helm.
-
2
-
-
Didn't happen today but I was watching an local
AFLAussie rules/football match on Saturday.-
2
-
-
TTDIM: The Impy
He prefers Tyrion, mate.
-
2
-
-
DOGS.
-
So I won a Parramatta Eels jersey, I have no use for it so looking to sell it. Brand new, value at $160 apparently, etc.
Dont know if anyone here would be interested, but posting just in case.
Is there a forum for Parramatta fans? Want to quickly spam my ebay listing
-
1
-
-
Watching the football in Sydney is retarded... the AFL is kidding themselves if they think they have many proper conversations up there as the shit u hear PPL around you in the crowd say it's beyond ridiculous.I went up this season for our first game against sydney in sydney and certain sections of the crowd were booing Jobe watson whenever he got the ball. Where was Goodes public condemnation of his own supporters then?
The worst is the SCC Members - It's like a Young Members Event at Flemington, blokes just spend their time standing with their back to the game drinking pots trying to pick up Personal Assistants who are dressed like they are at a Nightclub.
Yeah - I def recall Hird being booed because my Mum used to like him at the time and was annoyed at PPL for doing it.I dont recall boo'ing Hird (and if we did we ended up having good foresight) but Buckley was/is a dickhead and Carey as well at the time was a fairly arrogant player. I know Perth people have a weird anti-vicco thing going on but I don't think any of the boo'ing had anything to do with being part of a vicco team, just that the players were gronks (plenty of others got boo'd as well but I dont have a cadete memory)
The most retarded thing you hear in Perth Crowds and much more from Eagles supporters than Freo supporters is when a decision goes against them that it's because the AFL is run by Victorians.. it's like they are stuck in 1985 and our still bitter Player X from their WAFL side has moved to Carlton for money.
No other team based in a Footy State has come close to receiving better Draft Concessions than the Eagles did all they way up to 1994 (They still recieved them after winning a flag!) but for some reason none of these PPL have ever actually flipped through an AFL footy guide. To be fair, aren't we all the exact same ib regards to the FFA being Sydney biased?
One thing thats kinda surprised me a bit since moving here is how little the Eastern states cares about Perth. I always grew up thinking WA vs VIC was a huge thing as far as SOO goes, but Viccos only seem to care about SA. Bit like the NZ rivalry where Aussies couldnt really give a shit.
This really is true. I'm born and raised in Vic (Melbourne) and I don't even really have an opinion on WA or Perth for that matter. I have a real passion for the big V but it's odd because to me I don't care so much about who we play/ed/would play, it's more about me loving victoria. I know that's bizarre but it is the case for many like me as well.
Sorry to say but in both sporting and social rivalries WA and SA don't really matter. I know that's harsh but the fact I have no real dislike of WA or SA probably shows that I inherently don't think they are worth the rivalry (once again, sorry!) but that's probably the long and short of it.
The only rivalry that I buy into and I genuinely do let get under my skin is not state based. I don't even really care about VIC vs NSW but I certainly do care about the Melb vs Syd divide. I can get quite parochial when it comes to Sydney. I actually really like the place when Im there but geez the wider voices that represent the place ie Sports Journos, broadcasters, politicians and particularly the NRL can all get fucked
-
Paging bt50This is a serious question but what is the argument against same-sex marriage? Is there one?
There is an argument and it's a very valid one. I can't be bothered typing it out at the moment tho
I would love to hear it. (not trolling)
Civil unions already exist which essentially is marriage without being called marriage in the eyes of the law
Incorrect. You or the people who you have heard this from need to brush up on your Constitutional Law.
For instance the division of property and assets etc. comes under the Commonwealth Family Law Act and has not been changed to make provision for civil unions. In most states apart from QLD civil unions are the equivalent of de facto relationships which carry ALOT less weight when compared with a legally recognised Marriage especially when it comes to legally demonstrating cohabitation, commitment and shared property. See Commonwealth Marriage Act.
TLDR: Marriage is not equivalent to a civil union because under Australian Constitutional law it is considered a lesser agreement and thus is treated accordingly.
Change the law. That's all I want. Couldn't give to fucks about the religious side of things.
-
Paging bt50 There is an argument and it's a very valid one. I can't be bothered typing it out at the moment tho I would love to hear it. (not trolling) Short summary from our discussion recently from BT50 was;
This is a serious question but what is the argument against same-sex marriage? Is there one?
Basically he's indifferent. But he believed that as its a religious institution that by imposing it on the religious wasn't fair. Which is a fair enough point in that if it is legalised it has to be at the discretion of the given; minister, church etc. and that discrimination cases can't come out of it should they choose not to perform the ceremony.
What the actual fuck does that have to do with anything? Are you aware that thousands of people get married in this country every month with nothing but a Marriage license and a celebrant? Not a crucifix in sight. Nobody is advocating here for state-policy to intervene in matters of religious catechism? Are you aware that in this country that marriage is no longer a religious practice in essence? Sure, we draw the status we attribute to the institution of marriage from its historical religious significance but its standing in our (largely) secular society has long ceased to be anything to do with faith. This issue is nothing to do with religion and everything to do with fairness under the law. It's about the legal spousal rights and financial protections etc. that the state affords those with a Married status as opposed to those who are not. Non-hetero people are currently excluded from this dynamic by virtue of the pursuit of their own happiness and fulfilment. That's a crock of shit. I have zero problem with the Presbos, Maronites, Cathos, Orthodox, Jews, Muslims etc. saying that due to their dogmatic inflexibility that they are unable to provide a religious backing for same sex marriage. I wouldn't want to be a member of a club that didn't want me either tbh. Even for those who aren't that perturbed by religious discrimination and anybody with a Liberal bone in their body can't stand for the systematic denial of an individuals legal/financial rights for such an arbitrary reason.
This is about rights, not religious sensibilities.
So yeah, still waiting for the 'very valid' argument...
-
5
-
-
Paging bt50
This is a serious question but what is the argument against same-sex marriage? Is there one?
There is an argument and it's a very valid one. I can't be bothered typing it out at the moment tho
I would love to hear it. (not trolling)
-
1
-
-
Is this cunt dead yet?
TTDIM: Things that don't irk me
in The Club Room
Posted
http://musicfeeds.com.au/news/aussie-rapper-ur-boy-bangz-fires-back-at-jimmy-fallon-in-brilliant-new-track/
** SHOTS FIRED** Your boi Bangz destroying Gimmy Fallom (sic.) in this acid dis/reply track.
"Thank you anywayz, I'm out!"