Domestic Politics

[Tesla]

We can debate how much money should be spent on transport infrastructure.

We can debate how that money should be distributed amongst road/PT.

We can debate how far further out Melbourne should expand.

We can debate how dense our housing needs to be.

Can debate forever, someone in power can try make up numbers for it, hope they're somehow correct.

Or the government could just stop subsidising transport.

Let's not forget there is a correct answer to all these questions. What gives us the most efficient distribution of our finite resources.

Toll all current freeways and any new freeways, increase the registration fee to cover construction/upgrade/maintenance and a rate of return for all the roads under Vicroads jurisdiction, local councils continue to pay for local roads. Vicroads makes some contributions towards freeways and local roads as well, because Vicroads with their registration fee will be your "annual fee" for using the roads, so like $1,000 or w/e, without that you can't go on local roads or freeways so really vicroads is capturing some of the value that people would pay for those roads as well so it's only fair they contribute part of it to freeways / local roads. Freeways are then "premium roads" that you pay extra to use. Local roads are for serving houses and the local community so it's fair council (and therefore, most likely, developers in new estates) are paying for them.

Increase the cost of PT to cover the cost of construction/upgrading/maintenace of PT, price it properly so the further you travel (eg each train station you go by = more $, then hope on a bus and more $ again) the more you pay (because we can do that now with myki) rather than these "zones" and "2hr/daily" BS pricing.

The end result would be all of those questions and debates are now irrelevant, because now we can very simply get the answer that involves the most efficient distribution of our finite resources. It will be simply the amount the market decides it to be.

If there is sufficient demand for transport infrastructure to outweigh the cost, then it will be built.

If there is sufficient demand for a road to outweigh the cost, then it will be built.

If there is sufficient demand for a rail line to outweigh the cost, then it will be built.

If there is sufficient demand for new housing on the outskirts of Melbourne (this demand is now significantly lower than previously, as people living on the outskirts of town are now paying the true cost of the transport infrastructure they use) to outweigh the cost, then the city will expand further out.

If there is sufficient demand for low density housing to outweigh the cost (eg the opportunity cost of not building higher density housing on your piece of land and being able to rent out 3 dwellings instead of 1), then the low density will remain, if not then higher density housing will be built.

"But Tesla, everything you've said involved me paying more, how is that good?" Yes, transport will become more expensive, but that doesn't mean you'll be worse off. Ceteris paribus, the state government just saved a fuckload of money, maybe enough that they no longer need the GST revenue. So now we can get rid of GST and everything is cheaper, or the federal government can keep the revenue instead and reduce income tax, or reduce another tax, or if you're a leftie, increase spending on welfare.

"Tesla, I'm actually saving the same amount of money on my income tax as the increased amount of money I'm spending on transport, so I don't really care either way about that, but it now costs me twice as much to get to my job in Pakenham every day, it doesn't seem worthwhile spending so much money to get to my job." That's kind of the point, you'll now be making decisions based on the true cost of transport infrastructure. So maybe you'll move closer to your job. Or maybe you'll find a job closer to home. Or maybe the business you work for in Pakenham finds it now has to pay all it's employees another $30 a week to keep them from leaving. And maybe once that happens, they realise paying their 10 employees another $30 a week is costing them $300 a week, when they could move to Clayton and pay only $250 a week more rent for a similar office, so they move to Clayton instead.

"But Tesla, won't everyone abandon Pakenham then and it end up a derelict ghost town?" Not necessarily, certainly demand to live in or run a business in an outskirts suburb/town like Pakenham will be lower, meaning it's now less likely any new suburbs will be built on the outskirts of town, but it doesn't mean people will completely abandon somewhere like Pakenham. The cost of buying or renting a house or commercial/industrial property will be cheaper as demand is lower, so all of a sudden it becomes more attractive for someone who works closer to Pakenham to also live in Pakenham, or for a business that has no reason to be more central, it's all of a sudden a lot more attractive to save money and move to Pakenham. The end result is people will live closer to the places they need to travel too, which reduces demand for transport, which reduces the need for new transport infrastructure.

"But Tesla, my family own 10 properties in Pakenham, we're going to lose $500,000 in the value of these assets" Can't really say much here apart from that there are always winners and losers, and in this case yes you would be a loser. It's unfortunate, and perhaps unfair, but how is it any different to the current situation? For example, someone bought a farm in Werribee South for $100k 10 years ago, and now because the area has been included in the urban boundary and zoned residential they'll get $20m for it from a developer who will then build a bunch of 2-bedroom $1m apartments on the beach, while all the taxpayers pay for all the new transport infrastructure this, and every other outskirts suburb, requires. Because of this, the government can't afford to build a new hospital in Pakenham, and so when your son Tommy is sitting in the bath tub playing with a hair dryer and electrocutes himself, he ends up dying because Casey Hospital in Berwick took just a little too much time to get too. Is it fair that little Tommy died so some farmer can make exorbitant capital gains on his property and a developer huge profits? Winners and losers either way, so really only the bigger picture matters.

TLDR: The free market solves all problems.

[cadete]

As Tony Abbott receives Bipartisan support for his policies on the dreadful ISIS Situation: The ALP should be commended for putting petty politics aside to show that they are a Left Wing Political Party that has always been capable of dealing in reality and the Business of forming Government.

 

Meanwhile the Greens on the other hand have suggested the best way of dealing with the situation is through Humanitarian Aid...

 

Yep another great suggestion from everybody's favourite "Feel Good Political Option" as I sure that some Tents, Bandages and Cans of Baked Beans are going to really assist the countless numbers of innocent Christian and Muslim people alike who are being beheaded on a daily basis due to crimes of being not devout to the cause of ISIS.

 

Seriously PPL need to wake up to the fact that this is the kind of crap that Australian Political System gets to enjoy when they vote Greens... not more Koalas.

[hedaik]

Ive voted Greens in the last 2 fed elections as public transport and the environment are up there with my priorities, but I agree that a lot of their policies such as their refugee stance (as much as I completely respect their plight) are unworkable. I think they are a good influence on some aspects, but I couldn't vote for them if they were actually involved in dictating Government policy. 

[n i k o]

Ive voted Greens in the last 2 fed elections as public transport and the environment are up there with my priorities, but I agree that a lot of their policies such as their refugee stance (as much as I completely respect their plight) are unworkable. I think they are a good influence on some aspects, but I couldn't vote for them if they were actually involved in dictating Government policy.

GTFO

[n i k o]

....please

[jw1739]

As Tony Abbott receives Bipartisan support for his policies on the dreadful ISIS Situation: The ALP should be commended for putting petty politics aside to show that they are a Left Wing Political Party that has always been capable of dealing in reality and the Business of forming Government.

 

Meanwhile the Greens on the other hand have suggested the best way of dealing with the situation is through Humanitarian Aid...

 

Yep another great suggestion from everybody's favourite "Feel Good Political Option" as I sure that some Tents, Bandages and Cans of Baked Beans are going to really assist the countless numbers of innocent Christian and Muslim people alike who are being beheaded on a daily basis due to crimes of being not devout to the cause of ISIS.

 

Seriously PPL need to wake up to the fact that this is the kind of crap that Australian Political System gets to enjoy when they vote Greens... not more Koalas.

The Iraqi Ambassador to Australia has denied that his government has asked Australia to become involved, contradicting Abbott's assertion earlier in the day.

[HeartFc]

Quite frankly id trust Tony Abbot over any Iraqi 

[HeartFc]

We need to destroy this evil group of psychopaths before they do anymore damage. I whole heartedly support the offensive and Id be willing to take arms to protect my fellow Australian's from this pure evil. The world is not a safe place if this movement is not engaged immediately, its entire force needs to be slain including its leader....

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Christine Milne.

[Tesla]

The Shadow Minister for Foreign Affairs doesn't know that Africa is a continent

Labor

Cutting foreign aid is probably the best move this government has made, it does nothing to help people in developing countries, in fact, probably has an overall negative effect for them. Even if it did help, in times like these, cuts have to be made, which can then be reconsidered in more prosperous times. Even the most charitable individual wouldn't take out a loan to give to charity when they can't pay their bills and are drowning in debt (not too mention that no one would provide such a loan), so why should our government?

[malloy]

The Shadow Minister for Foreign Affairs doesn't know that Africa is a continent

Labor

Cutting foreign aid is probably the best move this government has made, it does nothing to help people in developing countries, in fact, probably has an overall negative effect for them. Even if it did help, in times like these, cuts have to be made, which can then be reconsidered in more prosperous times. Even the most charitable individual wouldn't take out a loan to give to charity when they can't pay their bills and are drowning in debt (not too mention that no one would provide such a loan), so why should our government?

Charity begins at home....

[Shahanga]

The Shadow Minister for Foreign Affairs doesn't know that Africa is a continent

Labor

Cutting foreign aid is probably the best move this government has made, it does nothing to help people in developing countries, in fact, probably has an overall negative effect for them. Even if it did help, in times like these, cuts have to be made, which can then be reconsidered in more prosperous times. Even the most charitable individual wouldn't take out a loan to give to charity when they can't pay their bills and are drowning in debt (not too mention that no one would provide such a loan), so why should our government?

My understanding is that we haven't cut our aid budget.  Rather we have not expanded it to the level proposed by the previous government.

[cadete]

Seriously some PPL like Green Senator Peter Whish-Wilson need to be deported into a Hamas Base to Palestine to actually get a fucken reality check.

 

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/defence/greens-senator-peter-whishwilson-slammed-for-terrorists-comment/story-e6frg8yo-1227047378338

 

Apparently according to this Winemaking Greens Senator we should never label members of ISIS as Terrorists because they as worthy of the label as members of the Australian Defence Force in Iraq.

 

Why the fuck is somebody capable of referring to our Armed Forces in such an appalling manner representing the Australian Public as a Senator?

Edited September 4, 2014 by cadete

[Nate]

Seriously some PPL like Green Senator Peter Whish-Wilson need to be deported into a Hamas Base to Palestine to actually get a fucken reality check.

 

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/defence/greens-senator-peter-whishwilson-slammed-for-terrorists-comment/story-e6frg8yo-1227047378338

 

Apparently according to this Winemaking Greens Senator we should never label members of ISIS as Terrorists because they as worthy of the label as members of the Australian Defence Force in Iraq.

 

Why the fuck is somebody capable of referring to our Armed Forces in such an appalling manner representing the Australian Public as a Senator?

Completely out of touch, and yet another example of political correctness solving nothing. 

 

What's especially interesting/concerning is that he apparently completed his undergraduate degree at ADFA.

[Begbie]

Out of interest, has anybody (particularly those on the left) changed their view of Abbott since he was elected? 

[cadete]

Out of interest, has anybody (particularly those on the left) changed their view of Abbott since he was elected? 

The "Far Left" of this forum stopped posting in here ages ago because apparently they are "Above" the arguments and discussion made in this thread.

 

Mind you I still don't understand how posting a Sex Affair Rumour about Tony Abbott and Peta Credlin really qualifies as more highbrow than anything us regulars talk about in here.

[xXJawsaXx]

Out of interest, has anybody (particularly those on the left) changed their view of Abbott since he was elected? 

My opinion of Abbott is still pretty low, mostly because of his stances on social issues (same-sex marriage, etc.), and I don't like the things he is cutting. However, I thought we would be far worse off when he was first elected, and his cuts aren't nearly as bad as I envisioned them being, I also think he is handling foreign affairs like the plane crash in Ukraine fairly well.

So I dunno. It is kind of a mixed bag for me.

[Nate]

Out of interest, has anybody (particularly those on the left) changed their view of Abbott since he was elected? 

I wouldn't say I'd associate myself with the left or right but as someone who loathed Abbott pre-election, he's actually been a pretty impressive PM at times this term. I still think he's out of touch with regards to social justice and human rights but he's dealt with foreign affairs quite well.

 

I was never going to vote for the Libs at the last election though with Mirabella at the helm, felt good to have her ousted! I might vote differently this time.

[hedaik]

Out of interest, has anybody (particularly those on the left) changed their view of Abbott since he was elected? 

 

Probably hate him more. As Ive said here before, I have no problems with budget cuts or tax increases, but I just really don't like how those cuts have come about and whos been advantaged vs disadvantaged. 

 

I dont mind his cuntiness on the world stage though. Seems his Indonesia strategy has paid off. 

[Tesla]

Out of interest, has anybody (particularly those on the left) changed their view of Abbott since he was elected?

 

Probably hate him more. As Ive said here before, I have no problems with budget cuts or tax increases, but I just really don't like how those cuts have come about and whos been advantaged vs disadvantaged. 

 

I dont mind his cuntiness on the world stage though. Seems his Indonesia strategy has paid off.

Kind of agree.

Not that he has done anything too unexpected, just the things I knew I wouldn't like have become more prominent. The liberals are just so out of touch with all their technology and internet related policies, it's ridiculous. There were also probably better ways to cut spending than what's happened, and then they failed at getting most the measures through (so far).

Overall, a fuck load better then Labor, but far from perfect.

At least we're pretty much getting what you'd expect from an Abbott government, very conservative. I'm quite conservative myself, it's just a few things are really starting to get annoying.

[HeartFc]

Why do people always have a go at Abbott about gay marriage, Gilfart had no intention of changing it either and no one complains about that...

[hedaik]

Why do people always have a go at Abbott about gay marriage, Gilfart had no intention of changing it either and no one complains about that...

 

Whilst she wasnt in favour of it which I'm convinced was due to factional pressure rather than being a personal decision, she agreed to a conscience vote and where Abbott didnt. 

Edited September 5, 2014 by hedaik

[KSK_47]

Out of interest, has anybody (particularly those on the left) changed their view of Abbott since he was elected?

My opinion is exactly the same. He is creepy and sometimes looks like he has had a lobotomy. I think he may be a poorly programed robot of some kind. Maybe one that is full of viruses.

In terms of politics I think he has seen that by going too hard too early will just get him kicked out straight away so he is slowly chipping away now. His PR seem to have finally got through to him that the best thing for him to do is to shut the fuck up too.

[marn11]

Out of interest, has anybody (particularly those on the left) changed their view of Abbott since he was elected?

Still love the man.

[n i k o]

I don't know how anyone can love the muppets that are our politicians. They're all cunts.

[Tesla]

I honestly think Abbott cops a lot of unfair criticism. He isn't your average "slick talking" politician, but I don't think that's a bad thing. Makes it harder for him to lie and you can see he is actually trying to think before saying things

.

Why do people always have a go at Abbott about gay marriage, Gilfart had no intention of changing it either and no one complains about that...

 

Whilst she wasnt in favour of it which I'm convinced was due to factional pressure rather than being a personal decision, she agreed to a conscience vote and where Abbott didnt.

Hasn't there always been rumours that she's a lesbian? Wouldn't surprise me if it was the case, and she has had to keep it hidden for political reasons (though, in the current climate, it would probably increase popularity, the whole "gay is cool" fad shows no signs of subsiding)

[KSK_47]

He isn't your average "slick talking" politician, but I don't think that's a bad thing. Makes it harder for him to lie and you can see he is actually trying to think before saying things

I hate slick talking politicians just as much as everyone else (maybe even more so) but at least being able to lie effectively shows some kind of intelligence. Abbot has that same vacant look of a dementia sufferer. Then he opens his mouth and you think "wow! this guy is representing my country at international conferences!" Then it occurs to me that he was actually voted in. And that is a thought so terrifying, I dont want to think about the implications it has.

Edited September 5, 2014 by KSK_47

[Deeming]

The Shadow Minister for Foreign Affairs doesn't know that Africa is a continent :droy:Labor :droy:Cutting foreign aid is probably the best move this government has made, it does nothing to help people in developing countries, in fact, probably has an overall negative effect for them. Even if it did help, in times like these, cuts have to be made, which can then be reconsidered in more prosperous times. Even the most charitable individual wouldn't take out a loan to give to charity when they can't pay their bills and are drowning in debt (not too mention that no one would provide such a loan), so why should our government?

My big problem with this is the lack of transparency of the aid. Too much aid money ends up in corrupt hands

[Nate]

I honestly think Abbott cops a lot of unfair criticism. He isn't your average "slick talking" politician, but I don't think that's a bad thing. Makes it harder for him to lie and you can see he is actually trying to think before saying things

.

 

 

Why do people always have a go at Abbott about gay marriage, Gilfart had no intention of changing it either and no one complains about that...

 

Whilst she wasnt in favour of it which I'm convinced was due to factional pressure rather than being a personal decision, she agreed to a conscience vote and where Abbott didnt.

 

Hasn't there always been rumours that she's a lesbian? Wouldn't surprise me if it was the case, and she has had to keep it hidden for political reasons (though, in the current climate, it would probably increase popularity, the whole "gay is cool" fad shows no signs of subsiding)

 

I'm not too sure there's a "gay is cool" fad occurring, I just think society at large is finally reaching a level of acceptance that homosexuality isn't really a big deal and it's important that their basic rights are fought for.

I can't wait until gay marriage is legalised and it's no longer a political issue to be honest, because there are more important things for us all to be worried about.

[cadete]

1. Gillard is bisexual - This is well known in the Labor Movement. (BH can back me up here).

2. When she did a deal with her "Faceless Men" part of deal was to never promote Gay Marriage as the PPL she did the deal with were of course the Catholic Right of NSW and Victoria. (Mind you I have lost count of how many Catholics I know who are Pro Gay Marriage - Being Catholic does def not mean you are Anti Gay as some Leftists try to make out to serve there Sectarianism against Micks and Jews.)

3. I always find it amusing when ALP members try paint the Libs as the Anti Gay/ Catholic party because as Gillard's lame efforts on the Gay Marriage front show... the reality is we run both parties that count.

3. I agree with Nate that I wish they would just hurry up and make Gay Marriage legal as its not a political issue IMO.

[Tesla]

1. Gillard is bisexual - This is well known in the Labor Movement. (BH can back me up here).

I thought what I had heard was credible, that pretty much confirms it for me as I know you'd know these things. I've also heard that her relationship is just a cover, which would make a lot of sense TBH.

It's interesting that politicians still have to keep these things secret despite what public opinion is like on it these days.

Nate, I cbf really getting into it, but I'm all for honosexual rights, I just think some of the proponents are getting a little carried away and at this rate it wouldn't surprise me if we started seeing straight blokes uploading videos onto social media of themselves sucking a dick as part of a "homosexualty awareness raising challenge".

[Nate]

 

1. Gillard is bisexual - This is well known in the Labor Movement. (BH can back me up here).

I thought what I had heard was credible, that pretty much confirms it for me as I know you'd know these things. I've also heard that her relationship is just a cover, which would make a lot of sense TBH.

It's interesting that politicians still have to keep these things secret despite what public opinion is like on it these days.

Nate, I cbf really getting into it, but I'm all for honosexual rights, I just think some of the proponents are getting a little carried away and at this rate it wouldn't surprise me if we started seeing straight blokes uploading videos onto social media of themselves sucking a dick as part of a "homosexualty awareness raising challenge".

 

lol, I can totally see this happening.

[Tesla]

1. Gillard is bisexual - This is well known in the Labor Movement. (BH can back me up here).

I thought what I had heard was credible, that pretty much confirms it for me as I know you'd know these things. I've also heard that her relationship is just a cover, which would make a lot of sense TBH.

It's interesting that politicians still have to keep these things secret despite what public opinion is like on it these days.

Nate, I cbf really getting into it, but I'm all for honosexual rights, I just think some of the proponents are getting a little carried away and at this rate it wouldn't surprise me if we started seeing straight blokes uploading videos onto social media of themselves sucking a dick as part of a "homosexualty awareness raising challenge".

lol, I can totally see this happening.

I don't think it would be too hard to manipulate some politically correct hipster lefty types into starting this (without having to suck dick yourself). Decent trolling opportunity. Once it takes off just reveal how you trolled everyone, and how retarded our society has gotten and how easy people are to fucking manipulate.

Would be hilarious TBH. But then you'd probably be accused of 'oral rape through manipulation' or some shit by the dumb fuck hipster cunts that got trolled.

Edited September 6, 2014 by Tesla

[Shahanga]

 

The Shadow Minister for Foreign Affairs doesn't know that Africa is a continent :droy:Labor :droy:Cutting foreign aid is probably the best move this government has made, it does nothing to help people in developing countries, in fact, probably has an overall negative effect for them. Even if it did help, in times like these, cuts have to be made, which can then be reconsidered in more prosperous times. Even the most charitable individual wouldn't take out a loan to give to charity when they can't pay their bills and are drowning in debt (not too mention that no one would provide such a loan), so why should our government?

My big problem with this is the lack of transparency of the aid. Too much aid money ends up in corrupt hands

 

I'm not sure that is the problem with government aid.  I think western governments would make a fair effort to avoid that happening and in fact try to ensure that most of the "aid" is actually paid to companies that are domiciled in the giver nation -ie it ends up back in the hands of the giver anyway.

 

I support aid myself, however, there's no getting away from my impression that corrupt leaders know they can happily ignore spending money on the needs of their country as if they step back (so they can spend the cash in France, Switzerland, Manila, Cairns or whatever) some well meaning western nation will fund the vital stuff for their country and help stop it failing.  if you look at PNG as an example, we have given them a lot of aid over a long period.  I'm sure its done a lot of good (and some bad!) but what would have REALLY helped PNG was competent honest government that had the best interests of the country at heart and not enriching themselves and their mates.  You could build an argument that by providing aid to PNG we have helped perpetuate a system where people are happy to elect incompetent criminals to parliament.  Stepping back and allowing a nation to fail in the hope that eventually the people would search for a better answer seems a pretty extreme alternative though.

[Tesla]

The Shadow Minister for Foreign Affairs doesn't know that Africa is a continent :droy:Labor :droy:Cutting foreign aid is probably the best move this government has made, it does nothing to help people in developing countries, in fact, probably has an overall negative effect for them. Even if it did help, in times like these, cuts have to be made, which can then be reconsidered in more prosperous times. Even the most charitable individual wouldn't take out a loan to give to charity when they can't pay their bills and are drowning in debt (not too mention that no one would provide such a loan), so why should our government?

My big problem with this is the lack of transparency of the aid. Too much aid money ends up in corrupt hands

I'm not sure that is the problem with government aid.  I think western governments would make a fair effort to avoid that happening and in fact try to ensure that most of the "aid" is actually paid to companies that are domiciled in the giver nation -ie it ends up back in the hands of the giver anyway.

 

I support aid myself, however, there's no getting away from my impression that corrupt leaders know they can happily ignore spending money on the needs of their country as if they step back (so they can spend the cash in France, Switzerland, Manila, Cairns or whatever) some well meaning western nation will fund the vital stuff for their country and help stop it failing.  if you look at PNG as an example, we have given them a lot of aid over a long period.  I'm sure its done a lot of good (and some bad!) but what would have REALLY helped PNG was competent honest government that had the best interests of the country at heart and not enriching themselves and their mates.  You could build an argument that by providing aid to PNG we have helped perpetuate a system where people are happy to elect incompetent criminals to parliament.  Stepping back and allowing a nation to fail in the hope that eventually the people would search for a better answer seems a pretty extreme alternative though.

I honestly think if there was no aid given to African countries, they'd be in a much better position than they are in now.

Regardless, globalisation and free trade has done more for people living in poverty than aid ever will.

[cadete]

Obviously Gillard's current relationship is very genuine FWIW...

And FWIW I think it's harder to just see Gay Marriage as inevitable and non political like a lot of us Straight PPL (like Myself) do when it's you that is Gay and in a Commited Relationship that means u have so much invested in one law change.

[Tesla]

When did it become the job of the government to protect the business of established players?

We all know this banning of uber is complete bullshit, designed to protect the almost monopolistic profits of those who invested in a taxi licence. Same shit was happening before uber, the industry could have been deregulated without any issues and the emergence of much more competition (driving prices down for consumers), but it never happened.

'Safety' arguments are pretty much always bullshit designed to maximise revenue for someone, whether it's taxies or all the BS licences for different trades/professions (eg you can't even install ethernet wiring in your house without a licenced electrician doing it LOL).

Apart from taxis, the desperation to protect foxtel's monopolistic position is extraordinary. Foxtel/Telstra must pay these politicians well, with performance bonuses and what not, rarely do you see someone so motivated and incentivised to do a job.

Edited September 9, 2014 by Tesla

[Tesla]

Victorian Labor our the of control again. They are effectively going to dump the EW link even if contracts are signed, should they be elected. On there way to turning into the Greens with policies like this that have no grounding in reality and are just a desperate attempt to win the vote of the delusional cunts on the left, regardless of what the consequences of such a decision are.

I honestly don't like the Victorian Liberals but at this point it's clear they're the only voteable party. The only cunts who won't completely destroy the state.

Edited September 11, 2014 by Tesla

[HeartFc]

Ye loving the 'trains not tolls' slogan. I mean everyone knows it's free to use trains. Always has been, always will be.

[Jimmy]

This is probably my favorite thread on the whole forum.

[cadete]

I guess this will mean a lot more Nerdy Leftists will be getting hit on their bikes with the ever increasing traffic on Alexandra parade...

 

Which is of course probably want these types want so they can put more of their GoPro footage up on Youtube in the hope that vision of them barking instructions at Motorists (Who just trying to make their way home on the insufficient roads) goes viral.

 

Because going viral helped their hero Julia a lot.

Edited September 11, 2014 by cadete