Federal Court grants $144 million to Aboriginal families in stolen wages class action judgement 8-)

Brian Ross wrote on Nov 27^th, 2024 at 12:37pm:

Federal Court grants $144 million to Aboriginal families in stolen wages class action judgement 8-)

Justice Murphy was also due to determine the amount lawyers would be paid for their legal costs associated with the class action.

In April this year, Shine Lawyers travelled to more than 200 communities across WA to register complainants before the registration deadline of June 30, 2024, which was later extended to the end of September.

The firm's legal costs totalled to just under $30 million.

This will somehow make Crappler a victim like everything else...

Will be interested to see how he spins it, if entirely a waste of time.

An average of nearly $750,000 per community. Yeah, that sounds about right. As long as they factor in the food, medicine, housing, and safety that would have not been part of the 'aboriginals' welfare net. $144 million should cover about 12,000 indigenous people.

Good Lord - what on earth for?

SadKangaroo wrote on Nov 27^th, 2024 at 3:27pm:

This will somehow make Crappler a victim like everything else... Will be interested to see how he spins it, if entirely a waste of time.

Well now - since you ask.... why is the taxpayer paying this money? 

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Nov 27^th, 2024 at 6:24pm:

SadKangaroo wrote on Nov 27th, 2024 at 3:27pm: This will somehow make Crappler a victim like everything else... Will be interested to see how he spins it, if entirely a waste of time. Well now - since you ask.... why is the taxpayer paying this money?

It's evident if you read the story:


Quote:

"In the course of the proceeding, the court heard evidence from many Aboriginal people who were taken away from their families at the young age, placed into into an institution run by the state, or a church where they are then required to work for no pay or little pay," he said. "Many of the children suffered inestimable grief and trauma by being forcibly removed from their families, and many were cruelly treated within institutions and discriminated against. "Many suffered lifelong psychological scars as a result." The judgement comes following a discriminatory government policy between 1936 and 1972.

Discriminatory government policy enabled this injustice, and it is only right that they bear the responsibility for compensating those affected.

This is the sort of atrocity that should never have occurred and certainly should never have required a class action lawsuit to force recognition as a stain on our history. This underscores the critical importance of Truth-Telling as a cornerstone of reconciliation efforts, ensuring that these wrongs are acknowledged and addressed openly and transparently.

Weren't these things all settled years ago?  Why is a Federal court involved in what were state matters?  Isn't this a double payment?

Nothing to do with centralising power of government, is it?

These things are based on historical records - nothing to do with 'truth-telling'.

Now that we've got that out or your bile, boy - is this going to stop the woman beating and killing, the child abuse and neglect, and the absenteeism from school and all that?

Take your time.

Taxpayers who didn't steal anything from the Aboriginals will now have to compensate the families who didn't have any wages stolen from them.

Australia is turning into a banana republic thanks to leftards

"In the course of the proceeding, the court heard evidence from many Aboriginal people who were taken away from their families at the young age, placed into into an institution run by the state, or a church where they are then required to work for no pay or little pay," he said.

"Many of the children suffered inestimable grief and trauma by being forcibly removed from their families, and many were cruelly treated within institutions and discriminated against.

"Many suffered lifelong psychological scars as a result."

Perhaps you could explain what all that has to do with wages withheld from employees?  Kids in institutions didn't 'work for no or little pay' - they did the menial work of cleaning and such as a teaching tool to show them how to respect the place they live in - a useful life tool in learning to live reasonably clean and well - they were paid in feed and lodging and training and education all for free. 

All that guff about 'stolen generation' has been already settled twice - and still goes on and on..... and on and on ....... and on and on.  Every generation thinks they are entitled to payout.   Time to put the cargo cult money to good use and raise and educate the kids so they don't have to be taken away and their children don't have to be taken away due to abuse and neglect.

Put all those funds into an education trust fund for the kids so there is a better future ahead - and not just a big party in the dust until return to living in the dust.

These judges have to start looking at what the ISSUE is in front of them rather than living in some fantasy land of perpetual victimhood of Aborigines, and working out that since one thing far away related to some Aborigine - it must therefore apply to all and that it must be 'generational' and the cause of their problems, and that somehow all 'issues' relate to the one before the court in some symphonious way ....

... and yet the same people who pursue this line of non-reasoning refuse to accept that such things as violence etc are 'part of the culture' and proven by real figures ... are ready to instantly say that one Aborigine's withheld wages causes grief for all and all whartey is responsible - but not that one Aborigine's murder of the missus affects all and all blackie is responsible.....

Getchu heads outchu asses, inmates!!

They can't remain victims of a culture they reject forever.... either they get with the program .............. (distant thunder) ..... AS SO VERY MANY OF THOSE REMOVED FROM DANGER HAVE AND HAVE THUS PROSPERED ... or they continue to live the way they choose and go nowhere.

I'll put my claims in for 'generational disadvantage and trauma' against the lairds in Scotland for the Highland Clearances, the English in Ireland ... and Germany for the Jewish connection, and Denmark and Sweden and so forth... then my children can claim 'generational trauma'... and my grand-children...

There are numerous programs and schemes aimed at redressing similar issues involving white children who were removed from their families and subjected to unpaid labour. Are these schemes equally objectionable in your view? Consider the following:

- Tasmanian Redress Scheme (2003): Tasmania was the first state to introduce a compensation scheme for those who suffered abuse or mistreatment in state care, including unpaid labour.

- National Redress Scheme (2018): Established in response to the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse, this scheme offers financial compensation, counselling, and formal apologies to survivors of institutional abuse, including forced labour.

- Redress for Forgotten Australians: Referring to the estimated 500,000 predominantly white children placed in institutional or out-of-home care during the 20th century, many endured forced labour, abuse, and neglect. While no national scheme exists, states such as Queensland (Redress Scheme, 2007), Victoria, and South Australia implemented compensation programs.

- National Apology (2009): The Australian government formally apologised to Forgotten Australians, acknowledging the harm caused by forced labour, abuse, and neglect in care institutions.

Shouldn’t these redress efforts, addressing comparable injustices, provoke the same level of outrage from you as well?

Quote:

The landmark judgement means money will be split between 8,750 claimants.

By my calcs that is $16,000 each. Doesn't seem like much for 5 decades of stolen wages. $330 per year.

SadKangaroo wrote on Nov 27^th, 2024 at 9:38pm:

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Nov 27th, 2024 at 6:24pm: SadKangaroo wrote on Nov 27th, 2024 at 3:27pm: This will somehow make Crappler a victim like everything else... Will be interested to see how he spins it, if entirely a waste of time. Well now - since you ask.... why is the taxpayer paying this money?  It's evident if you read the story: Quote: "In the course of the proceeding, the court heard evidence from many Aboriginal people who were taken away from their families at the young age, placed into into an institution run by the state, or a church where they are then required to work for no pay or little pay," he said. "Many of the children suffered inestimable grief and trauma by being forcibly removed from their families, and many were cruelly treated within institutions and discriminated against. "Many suffered lifelong psychological scars as a result." The judgement comes following a discriminatory government policy between 1936 and 1972. Discriminatory government policy enabled this injustice, and it is only right that they bear the responsibility for compensating those affected. This is the sort of atrocity that should never have occurred and certainly should never have required a class action lawsuit to force recognition as a stain on our history. This underscores the critical importance of Truth-Telling as a cornerstone of reconciliation efforts, ensuring that these wrongs are acknowledged and addressed openly and transparently.

Since that time ... most of these people who signed up for the class action never had their wages "stolen".

This was 52 to 88 years ago. Those affected by Govts managing their wages - because they had no idea about managing money - have more than likely passed on.

The rest if living remotely & not ever working have been living off the taxpayer ever since ... with the provision of welfare and housing and amenities.

This is just another stupid decision by the High Court.

The Aboriginal & Torres Strait Islander budget is close to $40 billion dollars a year.

Enough of this wasteful guilt ridden appeasing.

There is nothing truthful in this Truth Telling and there is nothing of a reconciliatory nature in it .... if anything it is divisive and widening the gap.

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Nov 27^th, 2024 at 6:24pm:

Well now - since you ask.... why is the taxpayer paying this money?

Why do they pay your pension?  ::)

SadKangaroo wrote on Nov 28^th, 2024 at 12:04pm:

There are numerous programs and schemes aimed at redressing similar issues involving white children who were removed from their families and subjected to unpaid labour. Are these schemes equally objectionable in your view? Consider the following: - Tasmanian Redress Scheme (2003): Tasmania was the first state to introduce a compensation scheme for those who suffered abuse or mistreatment in state care, including unpaid labour. - National Redress Scheme (2018): Established in response to the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse, this scheme offers financial compensation, counselling, and formal apologies to survivors of institutional abuse, including forced labour. - Redress for Forgotten Australians: Referring to the estimated 500,000 predominantly white children placed in institutional or out-of-home care during the 20th century, many endured forced labour, abuse, and neglect. While no national scheme exists, states such as Queensland (Redress Scheme, 2007), Victoria, and South Australia implemented compensation programs. - National Apology (2009): The Australian government formally apologised to Forgotten Australians, acknowledging the harm caused by forced labour, abuse, and neglect in care institutions. Shouldn’t these redress efforts, addressing comparable injustices, provoke the same level of outrage from you as well?

No - because they were for every Australian treated that way ...... not just Aboriginals.

As is the case with Rudds apology, The Stolen Generations ..... and the further chasing of reparations based on race.

John Smith wrote on Nov 28^th, 2024 at 1:53pm:

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Nov 27th, 2024 at 6:24pm: Well now - since you ask.... why is the taxpayer paying this money?  Why do they pay your pension?  ::)

Because he earned it?

Gnads wrote on Nov 28^th, 2024 at 1:55pm:

John Smith wrote on Nov 28th, 2024 at 1:53pm: Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Nov 27th, 2024 at 6:24pm: Well now - since you ask.... why is the taxpayer paying this money?  Why do they pay your pension?  ::) Because he earned it?

how would you know :D

Gnads wrote on Nov 28^th, 2024 at 1:54pm:

SadKangaroo wrote on Nov 28th, 2024 at 12:04pm: There are numerous programs and schemes aimed at redressing similar issues involving white children who were removed from their families and subjected to unpaid labour. Are these schemes equally objectionable in your view? Consider the following: - Tasmanian Redress Scheme (2003): Tasmania was the first state to introduce a compensation scheme for those who suffered abuse or mistreatment in state care, including unpaid labour. - National Redress Scheme (2018): Established in response to the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse, this scheme offers financial compensation, counselling, and formal apologies to survivors of institutional abuse, including forced labour. - Redress for Forgotten Australians: Referring to the estimated 500,000 predominantly white children placed in institutional or out-of-home care during the 20th century, many endured forced labour, abuse, and neglect. While no national scheme exists, states such as Queensland (Redress Scheme, 2007), Victoria, and South Australia implemented compensation programs. - National Apology (2009): The Australian government formally apologised to Forgotten Australians, acknowledging the harm caused by forced labour, abuse, and neglect in care institutions. Shouldn’t these redress efforts, addressing comparable injustices, provoke the same level of outrage from you as well? No - because they were for every Australian treated that way ...... not just Aboriginals.

Same with this ruling, it just happened to only be Indigenous children that were subjected to this treatment in this instance.


Quote:

As is the case with Rudds apology, The Stolen Generations ..... and the further chasing of reparations based on race.

It appears you've already made up your mind, dismissing the details entirely, simply because Indigenous people happen to be the beneficiaries in this instance. Your bias is glaring begs the question, what is fuelling it..?

What would Blair Cottrell say?

https://www.bitchute.com/video/ChuDnICOdgI9

Bobby. wrote on Nov 28^th, 2024 at 3:19pm:

What would Blair Cottrell say? https://www.bitchute.com/video/ChuDnICOdgI9

Of the United Patriots Front?

It’s irrelevant what that criminal might say.  His far-right extremist views are indistinguishable from those espoused by many individuals here. They’ve already shared their beliefs openly, so we are fully aware of the stance he would take.

SadKangaroo wrote on Nov 28^th, 2024 at 3:41pm:

Bobby. wrote on Nov 28th, 2024 at 3:19pm: What would Blair Cottrell say? https://www.bitchute.com/video/ChuDnICOdgI9 Of the United Patriots Front? It’s irrelevant what that criminal might say.  His far-right extremist views are indistinguishable from those espoused by many individuals here. They’ve already shared their beliefs openly, so we are fully aware of the stance he would take.

Transcript.

Blair Cottrell

Such as when is it gunna be enough?
how much money do these people need?
how much blood do these people need?
how much sacrifice on our behalf is gunna be enough for them
for them to finally feel like they're satisfied? -
and the answer is it will never be enough
it's never gunna be enough -
if you support this Voice referendum thing -
that's not gunna be enough -
there's gunna be something after that
and then there's gunna be something after that -
as Joel explained they're gunna be pushing
and pushing and pushing as much as possible
so you have to say no from the beginning - yeah -
you have to say no to everything these people ask for
and everything they demand -
they have no right to demand anything.

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Nov 27^th, 2024 at 6:22pm:

Good Lord - what on earth for?

There were landholders who did not pay aboriginal stockmen the right wages, considering how good they were at their jobs. There are still stockmen and families of stockmen who are realistically entitled to getting their money owed. I see no problem with this.

Whilst I understand that the landholders were taking some of the wages and putting them towards funding food, clothing, shelter, and other assorted work and lifestyle benefits, the aboriginal stockmen were still getting paid anywhere between 60 to 75% of their full entitlements -- if I remember the article about this. So, the landholders were making a profit off the aboriginal stockmen's labour.

If I worked 9 in the morning until 6pm at night for 5 or 6 days straight every week, I would probably wonder about my work conditions treatment if I was only getting paid $15/hr instead of a reasonable $25/hr.

John Smith wrote on Nov 28^th, 2024 at 2:44pm:

Gnads wrote on Nov 28th, 2024 at 1:55pm: John Smith wrote on Nov 28th, 2024 at 1:53pm: Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Nov 27th, 2024 at 6:24pm: Well now - since you ask.... why is the taxpayer paying this money?  Why do they pay your pension?  ::) Because he earned it? how would you know :D

How do you?

SadKangaroo wrote on Nov 28^th, 2024 at 3:00pm:

Gnads wrote on Nov 28th, 2024 at 1:54pm: SadKangaroo wrote on Nov 28th, 2024 at 12:04pm: There are numerous programs and schemes aimed at redressing similar issues involving white children who were removed from their families and subjected to unpaid labour. Are these schemes equally objectionable in your view? Consider the following: - Tasmanian Redress Scheme (2003): Tasmania was the first state to introduce a compensation scheme for those who suffered abuse or mistreatment in state care, including unpaid labour. - National Redress Scheme (2018): Established in response to the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse, this scheme offers financial compensation, counselling, and formal apologies to survivors of institutional abuse, including forced labour. - Redress for Forgotten Australians: Referring to the estimated 500,000 predominantly white children placed in institutional or out-of-home care during the 20th century, many endured forced labour, abuse, and neglect. While no national scheme exists, states such as Queensland (Redress Scheme, 2007), Victoria, and South Australia implemented compensation programs. - National Apology (2009): The Australian government formally apologised to Forgotten Australians, acknowledging the harm caused by forced labour, abuse, and neglect in care institutions. Shouldn’t these redress efforts, addressing comparable injustices, provoke the same level of outrage from you as well? No - because they were for every Australian treated that way ...... not just Aboriginals. Same with this ruling, it just happened to only be Indigenous children that were subjected to this treatment in this instance. Quote: As is the case with Rudds apology, The Stolen Generations ..... and the further chasing of reparations based on race. It appears you've already made up your mind, dismissing the details entirely, simply because Indigenous people happen to be the beneficiaries in this instance. Your bias is glaring begs the question, what is fuelling it..?

Bullshyte.

And what you're saying makes no sense because all children treated this way had already been covered.

And in most cases they were removed for their own safety & because of neglect .... it's still happening today to children of all racial backgrounds not just Aboriginals you dickhead.

Why do separations have to be made based on race?

Well one race. ::)

UnSubRocky wrote on Nov 28^th, 2024 at 5:28pm:

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Nov 27th, 2024 at 6:22pm: Good Lord - what on earth for? There were landholders who did not pay aboriginal stockmen the right wages, considering how good they were at their jobs. There are still stockmen and families of stockmen who are realistically entitled to getting their money owed. I see no problem with this. Whilst I understand that the landholders were taking some of the wages and putting them towards funding food, clothing, shelter, and other assorted work and lifestyle benefits, the aboriginal stockmen were still getting paid anywhere between 60 to 75% of their full entitlements -- if I remember the article about this. So, the landholders were making a profit off the aboriginal stockmen's labour. If I worked 9 in the morning until 6pm at night for 5 or 6 days straight every week, I would probably wonder about my work conditions treatment if I was only getting paid $15/hr instead of a reasonable $25/hr.

You're absolutely clueless.

What were the right wages????

The Aboriginal Stockmen and their families were housed, fed as well as received a wage.

There would be flat out being any who had their monies managed for them that would be alive today.

They have existed on taxpayer welfare ever since.

Why should their descendants or communities be paid for work they never performed?

Jackaroos and Jillaroos today are paid a wage as well as being supplied with free board and keep.(food/meals) - their wages are commensurate with the board and keep component.

And btw there are still employers today who do not pay the right wages..... and get away with it.

re: the last highlight - profit? bollocks.

They had a job & housing & keep ..... more than they do today.

The tax payer keeps them now for nothing.

After all those years - I think any debt has been paid many times over.

It was very common for folk of all kinds on farms and stations to be paid less while being provided with accommodation and food etc.... of course, once industrial relations here entered the later 20th Century - that ceased, and wages had to be paid..

There are still employers who negotiate wages and rates down, many recent immigrants are lured into that.  I pay you for job - not for hour.... and then they get caught.....

Gnads wrote on Nov 28^th, 2024 at 6:13pm:

You're absolutely clueless. What were the right wages???? The Aboriginal Stockmen and their families were housed, fed as well as received a wage. There would be flat out being any who had their monies managed for them that would be alive today. They have existed on taxpayer welfare ever since. Why should their descendants or communities be paid for work they never performed? Jackaroos and Jillaroos today are paid a wage as well as being supplied with free board and keep.(food/meals) - their wages are commensurate with the board and keep component. And btw there are still employers today who do not pay the right wages..... and get away with it. re: the last highlight - profit? bollocks. They had a job & housing & keep ..... more than they do today. The tax payer keeps them now for nothing. After all those years - I think any debt has been paid many times over.

If you have to ask that sort of question about what are the right wages, that undoes your first sentence about me being the "clueless" one.

I also had this idea that stockmen should not complain about not getting all of their wages because some of it went towards food, housing, clothing, medicine, etc. But, it took the viewing of a documentary about stockmen in the 1980s getting treated like rubbish because there was no way that they could fight back against their employers. If that is how they were treated in the 1980s, imagine how bad it was in the 1960s or the 1930s/1940s when their indigenous grandparents had to go through worse ordeals.

Admittedly, I watched that documentary in high school history class. Nearly 30 years ago, to be honest. And having done my own research on the topic (even if it is a few articles in the publc library and the journal articles I have viewd online). I am convinced enough that indigenous Australians did not get paid the proper wages, regardless of whether they were fed, housed, etc. I would bet that the indigenous stockmen probably got new clothes and boots during Christmas; had to go hunt for some of their meals; lived in shacks not worthy of being called a shed; and were probably medicated during times when they broke their legs. Otherwise, sure, they were paid enough money to buy some rare items brought in from the towns or cities.

You have every right to say that most modern indigenous Australians have little right to complain about their lot in life. Again, another thing that I have barely researched over the years is the amount of privilege that indigenous Australians receive. I get probably $700-something a fortnight if I was unemployed. However, my underemployed status (until I get a second job soon) means that my meager income reduces the amount of welfare that I receive. Indigenous people don't have that kind of mutual obligation to fulfill. And I have to attend job network meetings, fill out job applications, be in training, or be doing a work for the dole. So, this "clueless" bloke is not so clueless.

We might only be talking 13 or 14 years ago. However, I was paid about $4/hr less than the standard minimum wage, just because we were still on some kind of antiquated award rate. The Fair Work Australia got a hold of the information and forced the business to pay us the right minimum wage. Given that my job was about as monotonous as flippin' burgers in a barely airconditioned environment, or as rewarding as gardening around the school ovals, a $4/hr increase in my payment was evidently welcome.

Happy to be done with that business. It folded when the head office could not give a damn about treating their workers correctly. Not clueless at all.

Gnads wrote on Nov 28^th, 2024 at 6:01pm:

SadKangaroo wrote on Nov 28th, 2024 at 3:00pm: Gnads wrote on Nov 28th, 2024 at 1:54pm: SadKangaroo wrote on Nov 28th, 2024 at 12:04pm: There are numerous programs and schemes aimed at redressing similar issues involving white children who were removed from their families and subjected to unpaid labour. Are these schemes equally objectionable in your view? Consider the following: - Tasmanian Redress Scheme (2003): Tasmania was the first state to introduce a compensation scheme for those who suffered abuse or mistreatment in state care, including unpaid labour. - National Redress Scheme (2018): Established in response to the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse, this scheme offers financial compensation, counselling, and formal apologies to survivors of institutional abuse, including forced labour. - Redress for Forgotten Australians: Referring to the estimated 500,000 predominantly white children placed in institutional or out-of-home care during the 20th century, many endured forced labour, abuse, and neglect. While no national scheme exists, states such as Queensland (Redress Scheme, 2007), Victoria, and South Australia implemented compensation programs. - National Apology (2009): The Australian government formally apologised to Forgotten Australians, acknowledging the harm caused by forced labour, abuse, and neglect in care institutions. Shouldn’t these redress efforts, addressing comparable injustices, provoke the same level of outrage from you as well? No - because they were for every Australian treated that way ...... not just Aboriginals. Same with this ruling, it just happened to only be Indigenous children that were subjected to this treatment in this instance. Quote: As is the case with Rudds apology, The Stolen Generations ..... and the further chasing of reparations based on race. It appears you've already made up your mind, dismissing the details entirely, simply because Indigenous people happen to be the beneficiaries in this instance. Your bias is glaring begs the question, what is fuelling it..? Bullshyte. And what you're saying makes no sense because all children treated this way had already been covered.

Clearly not all.

Seems like that truth-telling thing might have some merit after all huh?

"No - because they were for every Australian treated that way ...... not just Aboriginals. "

So Aboriginals were included - so they want to double dip, dip early - dip often.

"about stockmen in the 1980s getting treated like rubbish because there was no way that they could fight back against their employers. If that is how they were treated in the 1980s, imagine how bad it was in the 1960s or the 1930s/1940s when theirindigenous grandparents had to go through worse ordeals."

Did you note your leap there?

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Nov 28^th, 2024 at 10:17pm:

"about stockmen in the 1980s getting treated like rubbish because there was no way that they could fight back against their employers. If that is how they were treated in the 1980s, imagine how bad it was in the 1960s or the 1930s/1940s when theirindigenous grandparents had to go through worse ordeals." Did you note your leap there?

The documentary I watched was that of some type of "Landline" program.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PF_Okji7bPI
This link is not the story. But the documentary I refer towards is so "off-the-record", it will be difficult to find it anywhere. I would guess that the Qld state government don't want to give people the impression that white stockmen could be treated badly.

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Nov 28^th, 2024 at 10:15pm:

"No - because they were for every Australian treated that way ...... not just Aboriginals. " So Aboriginals were included - so they want to double dip, dip early - dip often.

You could probably place the aboriginal people that missed out on wages in the same category as those Second World War generations that missed out on having a good life, because the country was on a war footing. I would not be out of place to theorise that both groups would have had experiences of living it rough.

What did we do for those people that were born between 1910 and 1938? As far as my brief time volunteering at an aged care centre has taught me, we did not value their middle ages during the 1960 to the 1970s era.

I can accept that Stockmen (and other indigenous workers of a bygone era) were treated harshly. The Australian taxpayer paying indigenous people special benefits for being indigenous Australians is considered unfair to the non-indigenous Australians. However, all that is going to change in the next few years. Other than a few health and educational funding considerations, it will be "sink or swim" time for anyone who identifies as indigenous Australian.

You can even see it in their collective faces. The special privileges are just drying up. And people of my generation know that this is something that should have happened 20 years ago. I just cannot wait to vote in the LNP.

Apart from voting in the LNP I agree with you.

Remember at the start of The Albo Great Revolution I told you all that his 'government' would be the next watershed in Australian politics - by showing us the very real failings of 'the left' and their oft-times utter stupidity, not to mention their way out of touch thinking.  We'll come back the massive self-interest of them all later - at the appropriate time....

Remember that I said the exact same thing about the Abbott 'government' at its inception; that it would show Australia clearly that the ways of 'the right' were fatally flawed, that it was way out of touch, and that their thinking was oft-times stupid and non-existent.

Both 'sides' of The Tag Team™ are the same in their deep failings - the deepest of which is their chosen path(s) of pursuing ONLY the interests of their respective sets of pet mates.   8-)

Mah men and wi-men... Mah Fellow Austraylians ... I am currently riding high...... my predictions are 100% .... Darwin Has Fallen ........ Brisbane Has Fallen...... the rest will soon follow.... only The Gaga Strip (ACT) continues to dwell in the deepest delusion and stupidity... which is precisely why New South Wales willingly set it aside ......  All the politics of division, the policies of exclusion (not inclusion) that have plagued this once great nation are foundering .... slowly but surely the good people of Australia are taking back the asylum and draining the billabongs...    8-)

UnSubRocky wrote on Nov 28^th, 2024 at 11:15pm:

You could probably place the aboriginal people that missed out on wages in the same category as those Second World War generations that missed out on having a good life, because the country was on a war footing

what a load of rot

they were SLAVES you farkwit, not soldiers

Gnads wrote on Nov 28^th, 2024 at 5:56pm:

John Smith wrote on Nov 28th, 2024 at 2:44pm: Gnads wrote on Nov 28th, 2024 at 1:55pm: John Smith wrote on Nov 28th, 2024 at 1:53pm: Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Nov 27th, 2024 at 6:24pm: Well now - since you ask.... why is the taxpayer paying this money?  Why do they pay your pension?  ::) Because he earned it? how would you know :D How do you?

I'm not the one pretending to know you dumbarse ;D ;D

John Smith wrote on Nov 29^th, 2024 at 7:48am:

Gnads wrote on Nov 28th, 2024 at 5:56pm: John Smith wrote on Nov 28th, 2024 at 2:44pm: Gnads wrote on Nov 28th, 2024 at 1:55pm: John Smith wrote on Nov 28th, 2024 at 1:53pm: Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Nov 27th, 2024 at 6:24pm: Well now - since you ask.... why is the taxpayer paying this money?  Why do they pay your pension?  ::) Because he earned it? how would you know :D How do you? I'm not the one pretending to know you dumbarse ;D ;D

::)  You're as dodgy as the rest, Smith - you should be playing for the Kangaroos with that sidestep ....  STATE policies MAY have been that employers were permitted to take board and lodging out of wages..... and to 'hold in trust' or send to 'the public trustee' or whoever the wages of those considered incompetent to handle their money.... but that was long ago, as many have said.

Now, of course - when the millions flow from royalties and handouts, the Silverbacks control it and use it wisely for themselves first and foremost while those considered incompetent to handle their own money have it 'held in trust' for them!!!  BIIIIIG difference!!!!

Why NOW does the AUSTRALIAN taxpayer - not the state or the employer - have to find money to pay the descendants of those people who had money withheld?  And what about the WHITE workers in the same boat?  You remember the development of the Snowies - southwards from Goulburn?  A 'shepherd' - most likely an Irish person etc .. would be given a few supplies and then would head off into the High Country to look after the boss' mob of sheep... build a humpy or cabin and settle down for the duration... receiving buggar all for it.  It wasn't just the Abo stockmen.... where's the handout to their descendants?

Get a grip on TRUE Australian history, you lot.... just throwing you some truth telling there... sorry if it breaks into you smoke-filled dreams....   ::)  ::)  ::)                   ;D  ;D  ;D

Here's someone incompetent to handle his own money:-

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eUh5IShNwXo

John Smith wrote on Nov 29^th, 2024 at 7:47am:

UnSubRocky wrote on Nov 28th, 2024 at 11:15pm: You could probably place the aboriginal people that missed out on wages in the same category as those Second World War generations that missed out on having a good life, because the country was on a war footing what a load of rot they were SLAVES you farkwit, not soldiers

The War Generation were on a war-footing with the idea of having to share food, power, fuel, and clothing making sure that the way the country worked was to prioritise the safety of soldiers. People living between 1929 and 1946 had to go without what their parents had probably enjoyed (apart from what those WW1 veterans and family had to endure).

I mean, sure, the War Generation endured 18 years of going without the privileges that their children very much enjoyed. But, it gives some idea of what indigenous Australians working in various manual labour industries had to endure for 100 years prior (and probably another 20 years after the Second World War).

I would love to know what kind of loss of liberty and living on the edge of death that you, "John Smith", have had to endure for years. Because I am now pushing 36 of my nearly 46 years of having to keep ever vigilant about my safety. September 19th, 1988 was my first of 5 attempts on my life by a bunch of anti-Caucasian racists.

**** ***.... and the rocking horse you fell from.

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Nov 29^th, 2024 at 6:10am:

Apart from voting in the LNP I agree with you.

If you want to see the country get back to normality, voting in the LNP would be the way to go. Anthony Albanese is probably the most disloyal Prime Minister that the country has ever seen. Mr Albanese's pretentiousness about being in touch with social issues has started the mild bankrupting of the country.

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Nov 29^th, 2024 at 8:19am:

STATE policies MAY have been that employers were permitted to take board and lodging out of wages.

What wages you farkewitt ..... they weren't paid anything :D :D

UnSubRocky wrote on Nov 29^th, 2024 at 8:34am:

The War Generation were on a war-footing with the idea of having to share food, power, fuel, and clothing making sure that the way the country worked was to prioritise the safety of soldier

so they weren't slaves then?? Glad you cleared that up ::)

John Smith wrote on Nov 29^th, 2024 at 1:12pm:

UnSubRocky wrote on Nov 29th, 2024 at 8:34am: The War Generation were on a war-footing with the idea of having to share food, power, fuel, and clothing making sure that the way the country worked was to prioritise the safety of soldier so they weren't slaves then?? Glad you cleared that up ::)

FFS. They may as well be. Conditions of the people living between 1928 and 1946 were such that it would take someone living in a war zone to understand what it was like to be alive during that time. Me, for example. I was 14 years old and an unofficial member of the Australian Army. If you want to know how good a 14 year old can shoot, just ask me. I managed to save the life of a few helicopter pilots and their security with some well-placed shots. I happen to be the second youngest Australian (of the latter 20th century) to see combat. So much for that student journalist membership...

John Smith wrote on Nov 29^th, 2024 at 1:11pm:

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Nov 29th, 2024 at 8:19am: STATE policies MAY have been that employers were permitted to take board and lodging out of wages. What wages you farkewitt ..... they weren't paid anything :D :D

Ball's kite.

UnSubRocky wrote on Nov 28^th, 2024 at 9:07pm:

Gnads wrote on Nov 28th, 2024 at 6:13pm: You're absolutely clueless. What were the right wages???? The Aboriginal Stockmen and their families were housed, fed as well as received a wage. There would be flat out being any who had their monies managed for them that would be alive today. They have existed on taxpayer welfare ever since. Why should their descendants or communities be paid for work they never performed? Jackaroos and Jillaroos today are paid a wage as well as being supplied with free board and keep.(food/meals) - their wages are commensurate with the board and keep component. And btw there are still employers today who do not pay the right wages..... and get away with it. re: the last highlight - profit? bollocks. They had a job & housing & keep ..... more than they do today. The tax payer keeps them now for nothing. After all those years - I think any debt has been paid many times over. If you have to ask that sort of question about what are the right wages, that undoes your first sentence about me being the "clueless" one. I also had this idea that stockmen should not complain about not getting all of their wages because some of it went towards food, housing, clothing, medicine, etc. But, it took the viewing of a documentary about stockmen in the 1980s getting treated like rubbish because there was no way that they could fight back against their employers. If that is how they were treated in the 1980s, imagine how bad it was in the 1960s or the 1930s/1940s when their indigenous grandparents had to go through worse ordeals. Admittedly, I watched that documentary in high school history class. Nearly 30 years ago, to be honest. And having done my own research on the topic (even if it is a few articles in the publc library and the journal articles I have viewd online). I am convinced enough that indigenous Australians did not get paid the proper wages, regardless of whether they were fed, housed, etc. I would bet that the indigenous stockmen probably got new clothes and boots during Christmas; had to go hunt for some of their meals; lived in shacks not worthy of being called a shed; and were probably medicated during times when they broke their legs. Otherwise, sure, they were paid enough money to buy some rare items brought in from the towns or cities. You have every right to say that most modern indigenous Australians have little right to complain about their lot in life. Again, another thing that I have barely researched over the years is the amount of privilege that indigenous Australians receive. I get probably $700-something a fortnight if I was unemployed. However, my underemployed status (until I get a second job soon) means that my meager income reduces the amount of welfare that I receive. Indigenous people don't have that kind of mutual obligation to fulfill. And I have to attend job network meetings, fill out job applications, be in training, or be doing a work for the dole. So, this "clueless" bloke is not so clueless. We might only be talking 13 or 14 years ago. However, I was paid about $4/hr less than the standard minimum wage, just because we were still on some kind of antiquated award rate. The Fair Work Australia got a hold of the information and forced the business to pay us the right minimum wage. Given that my job was about as monotonous as flippin' burgers in a barely airconditioned environment, or as rewarding as gardening around the school ovals, a $4/hr increase in my payment was evidently welcome. Happy to be done with that business. It folded when the head office could not give a damn about treating their workers correctly. Not clueless at all.

No it doesn't ... you weren't even a sparkle in your old mans eye when this sort of thing was happening.

SadKangaroo wrote on Nov 28^th, 2024 at 9:23pm:

Gnads wrote on Nov 28th, 2024 at 6:01pm: SadKangaroo wrote on Nov 28th, 2024 at 3:00pm: Gnads wrote on Nov 28th, 2024 at 1:54pm: SadKangaroo wrote on Nov 28th, 2024 at 12:04pm: There are numerous programs and schemes aimed at redressing similar issues involving white children who were removed from their families and subjected to unpaid labour. Are these schemes equally objectionable in your view? Consider the following: - Tasmanian Redress Scheme (2003): Tasmania was the first state to introduce a compensation scheme for those who suffered abuse or mistreatment in state care, including unpaid labour. - National Redress Scheme (2018): Established in response to the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse, this scheme offers financial compensation, counselling, and formal apologies to survivors of institutional abuse, including forced labour. - Redress for Forgotten Australians: Referring to the estimated 500,000 predominantly white children placed in institutional or out-of-home care during the 20th century, many endured forced labour, abuse, and neglect. While no national scheme exists, states such as Queensland (Redress Scheme, 2007), Victoria, and South Australia implemented compensation programs. - National Apology (2009): The Australian government formally apologised to Forgotten Australians, acknowledging the harm caused by forced labour, abuse, and neglect in care institutions. Shouldn’t these redress efforts, addressing comparable injustices, provoke the same level of outrage from you as well? No - because they were for every Australian treated that way ...... not just Aboriginals. Same with this ruling, it just happened to only be Indigenous children that were subjected to this treatment in this instance. Quote: As is the case with Rudds apology, The Stolen Generations ..... and the further chasing of reparations based on race. It appears you've already made up your mind, dismissing the details entirely, simply because Indigenous people happen to be the beneficiaries in this instance. Your bias is glaring begs the question, what is fuelling it..? Bullshyte. And what you're saying makes no sense because all children treated this way had already been covered. Clearly not all. Seems like that truth-telling thing might have some merit after all huh?

Absolutely no merit at all .... just more feigned victimhood mentality without truth.

John Smith wrote on Nov 29^th, 2024 at 7:47am:

UnSubRocky wrote on Nov 28th, 2024 at 11:15pm: You could probably place the aboriginal people that missed out on wages in the same category as those Second World War generations that missed out on having a good life, because the country was on a war footing what a load of rot they were SLAVES you farkwit, not soldiers

They were never slaves you lying farkwit.

John Smith wrote on Nov 29^th, 2024 at 7:48am:

Gnads wrote on Nov 28th, 2024 at 5:56pm: John Smith wrote on Nov 28th, 2024 at 2:44pm: Gnads wrote on Nov 28th, 2024 at 1:55pm: John Smith wrote on Nov 28th, 2024 at 1:53pm: Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Nov 27th, 2024 at 6:24pm: Well now - since you ask.... why is the taxpayer paying this money?  Why do they pay your pension?  ::) Because he earned it? how would you know :D How do you? I'm not the one pretending to know you dumbarse ;D ;D

Well if you don't know ... STFU.

John Smith wrote on Nov 29^th, 2024 at 1:11pm:

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Nov 29th, 2024 at 8:19am: STATE policies MAY have been that employers were permitted to take board and lodging out of wages. What wages you farkewitt ..... they weren't paid anything :D :D

What a farkin lie

If that were true how on earth were non existent wages stolen?

Dumbarse.