Poor old Gerry Harvey gnaws like a dog with a GST bone

I see Gerry Harvey is bitching again about GST not being paid on items valued under $1000 and purchased overseas from various websites.

Get over it Gerry.

What you are saying is that you want the Australian government to implement GST collection on everything purchased, irrespective of value.

You're obviously a smart businessman, and you would well know that it would cost the government more to implement this collection than what it would make in the collection of GST. But deep down what do you care? You're only interested in your empire and your profits. You might disguise that as "speaking for all retailers", but I'm not so sure.

 

"Oh, that GST pain is getting worse"

 

Whether you like it or not, the face of retailing is changing. Some shoppers are getting savvy and are moving away from traditional sources to make purchases. Not everyone mind you - I'd never buy clothes over the internet. It's not worth the hassle if they don't fit etc etc. There are some things you have to put your hands on before spending your hard earned money.

 

Retailers like Harvey Norman make good profits, and profits are still being made, but lets face it - Harvey Norman retailers aren't exactly the cheapest in the market, so do you blame shoppers becoming more savvy and shopping around?

 

Take this example: I went to buy a new computer monitor a few years ago. I checked out a nice LG 17" at Harvey Normans and it was valued at $799 (yes, a few years ago!!). I didn't buy immediately and decided to hum and ha about it for a while. By pure chance I dropped in to a small computer shop just around the corner a day or so later and picked up a pricelist on their counter. Damn it, but there was exactly the same monitor for $550. I double checked the model to make sure it wasn't a lesser 17", but no, it was the same. I went back to Harvey Norman with said pricelist in hand and asked if they could match or better it. No, he couldn't. I think the best he could do was $599. Needless to say, I ended up back at the small computer store. OK, they had to get the monitor in, but next day, I picked it up and parted with $550.

 

Maybe the business model of Harvey Norman is starting to date. Gerry has had it good for a while, but franchise arrangements may not be the way of the future. The store has to make a profit for itself, and they have to give some of that profit to Gerry, so overall, their competitiveness is not as good. That's not the consumers fault, that is just the way Gerry's business model works. Why should the consumer have to pay more to support Gerry and his empire? Where Gerry does do it well is with all the promotions they have "24 months interest free, no repayments till blah blah". Even I have taken advantage of this system, and given I'll have 24 months to pay something off, don't mind paying extra for it.

 

Take another example of how things are changing. I have to buy a new set of cutters and foils for my Remington razor. I checked with a few retailers of shavers in Adelaide; my replacement would be around $45 irrespective of retailer.

 

A quick check on eBay revealed the following (copied and pasted at end of email):

 

If I purchase through eBay, It'll cost me around AU$24.50, that's 50% less than what I can buy locally. It also includes postage, and even if I had to pay GST, would only push up the cost to around $27, still much less than what I can buy it for locally. Good ol' Gerry seems to think people are only saving 10% or so buying from overseas or on-line.

 

What do I do? Fork out my hard earned money and pay the $20 extra and support local business, or buy wisely, wait for 10 days and get my item off eBay and save $20?

 

In time, I think the whole retail industry will be forced to look hard at how they do things. Maybe one day, the importer will sell direct to the retailer and cut out the wholesaler? I don't know how it will pan out. And, even if GST were charged, I still don't think it would make a lot of difference.

 

CD and DVD retailers are in the same boat. Many consumers are starting to watch movies streamed from various internet sources and slowly sales and movie rentals will die off. It's sad, but that's the way it's heading. Adapt and make changes or slowly see your sales ebb away.

 

Get Real

 

Remington RS4400 Foil & Cutter Combi Pack SP69 - REMSP6...

Location: United Kingdom

Store: PentagonGPS

Seller User ID: burrowsgps

Feedback: 60,174 | 99.5%

Watch this item

 

AU $17.95

+AU $6.50





SA Liberal Senator Cory Bernardi - Is this the most stupidest comment a politican has made?

I cannot believe the comments made by one of our politicians - SA Liberal Senator Cory Bernardi.

He pathetically includes same sex marriage, bestiality and polygamy in the same paragraph.

In other words, if society accepts same sex marriage, it's just about a given fact that in time, we will soon accept sex with animals and multiple partner bedroom romps. Can you believe that? And this bloke is a Minister in our government for gods sake.

I have never heard so much bullshit. It's like me saying that having male clergy in the churches will lead to pedophilia.

I'll bet you anything Cory Bernardi is some sort of religious nut who tries to masquerade his religious undertones with his version of reasoning.

I think that Cory Bernardi has to realise that the very institution of marriage is changing. This is not being led by the gay community, but by the heterosexual community. People are realising these days that there is no need to get married to enjoy a happy and fulfilled life. I personally know of many couples that live and exist together and are unmarried. They feel no need to have a piece of paper that supposedly binds them. Some people may need that piece of paper, some not. It's their choice.

Picture courtesy of The Advertiser

And to think this bloke is in our government!

Shame Bernardi, Shame

 

SACK CORI BERNARDI

 

Get Real

 

UPDATE 19/09/2012

 

CORI BERNARDI HAS QUIT HIS ROLE AS PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY TO TONY ABBOTT ... YAY.. PEOPLE POWER CAN SOMETIMES WIN........... GOOD RIDDANCE!!

 

Get Real



Rape accused Joey De Mesa life destroyed in NSW police stuff up



Picture c/o The Telegraph

As a result of a botched police investigation, a wrongful arrest and charge was made against Joey De Mesa which resulted in destroying this young mans life.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/rape-accused-my-life-is-in-ruins/story-e6freuy9-1226474720728

Check out the above story at the Daily Telegraph website to see the level of incompetence shown by the police.

This bloke should have the right to sue the NSW Police Force for big bucks after the stuff up. But of course, the government always protects itself from potential litigation when it stuffs up things. What do the police care if they have the right person or not? Arrest poor Joey, throw him in some hell hole cell for two days, say "Oops, wrong person", "Off you go". Now it's been splashed over all the newspapers in the land, and Joey's stuffed.

Someone, give this bloke a chance and give him a job.

And like I've pointed out previously in this blog, laws should be changed to protect the names of people accused of certain offences until the charges are proved and they are convicted in a court of law. Police are all too willing just to jump in and arrest people willy nilly and don't give a hoot either way whose life they destroy. Laws should be changed to allow the police force to be held accountable for arrests where there is no evidence and the accused ends up being released. You see this all the time in reports where police suddenly drop charges against an accused because there is not enough evidence (or alternatively, it gets thrown out of court). It happens more often than you think.

Police have this tendency to arrest first, then try and find evidence to fit. A bit of a dangerous thing don't you think?

Get Real

Anti Islamic Film Protest in Sydney ends in violence - Child photographed promoting Islamic violence. Is this what Australia wants?

The Islamic population of Australia should be disgusted with this photograph.

What sort of parents would let their child hold up a sign such as this?

Is the person(s) who made this sign, the type of person(s) we want living in Australia?

Is this what Islam is all about - the slightest bit of provocation about the Prophet and we'll kill you? (after all, it happens overseas).

The Christian God is belittled and condemned every day, but you don't see Christians going around threatening to kill people.

Does any person, irrespective of religious background, think this sign promotes peace and wellbeing for all Australian citizens?

Using children to promote violence is not on. It might be OK in Islamic countries, but it's not OK in Australia. If you don't like Australian laws, there is nothing stopping you from going back to where you became from. The only problem is if you protested where you came from you'd probably be shot. Don't turn Australia into a deadly religious playground. Islamic people have no more or no less rights than any other person in Australia.

The above photo was snapped at a protest rally held in Sydney which (surprise surprise) turned violent. Toughen up a bit. Islamic people can't keep on protesting every time someone says a bad word about Islam and the Prophet. If every other religion in the world reacted the same as Islamic people, the world would be thrown into a religious world war. Is that what you want?

The western world is told over and over that Islam represents peace, tranquility and being good to each other, but all I see reported is violence, bloodshed and tears.

If the Islamic nation is going to get on with other people in the world, you have to toughen up AND you have to respect the fact that other people will disagree with you. If they do disagree, you have to let it go. You don't have to respond with violence every time someone says something nasty about Islam or the Prophet.

Everybody has the right to live their life they way they want. If I'm a Christian, it has no affect on my Islamic neighbours. They can practise any religion they want and it doesn't affect me. Everyone has to learn to live in peace with each other.

Like I said earlier, if ANY religious or non religious person comes to live in Australia is not happy with our system of fairness, understanding and laws, then they always have the option to hop on a plane and go back to their homeland.

All I want is Australians of all religions and origins to live in peace with each other, but I slowly see us being sucked into violence caused by religious intolerance.

Get Real

Update 18/9/12

The Mother in the photograph has handed herself into police.

(The following grab was taken from AdelaideNow)

A NSW Police spokeswoman confirmed this morning the mother of the boy who was photographed with a sign reading "behead those who insult the Prophet" approached police overnight to hand herself in.

The spokeswoman confirmed the woman would not be charged.

Community Services workers visited the woman's home and conducted welfare checks on her children.

A spokesman for Community Services Minister Pru Goward said the mother was not known to authorities or the subject of any reports to the helpline or agency - and the children were not found to be any immediate danger.

"Her understanding is that she didn't think the protest was going to get violent," the spokesman said.

He said no futher action will be taken against the mother.

"But when people make reports now they are always on our radar and in our system in case anything like this happens again," the spokesman said.

I actually take offence to the reported fact that "The mother concerned didn't think the protest was going to turn violent". Ahhh.. that explains it then. Because she didn't know the protest was going to turn violent makes it OK to print and make a sign such as this and let a small boy hold it up to be photographed.

I would be asking the questions:

• What sort of  "Australian" values is the family teaching this young boy? 
• I think multi-cultural societies are great, but really, is this the sort of people we want living in Australia?
• Should this family be given a warning and if there is a further offence, the family is deported?

Is Australia's commitment to multi-culturalism holding back the integration of immigrants into Australian society? Take the following example:

If I travelled to an Islamic country and wanted to set up a Christian school, would they let me? I'm pretty sure the answer would be NO. Given that, we let Muslim schools pop up left, right and centre in Australia.

Would Australian authorities be better to enforce the following:

"Sure, we'd love you to come and settle into Australian society, but you actually have to make an effort to integrate, so whilst you'll be allowed to build your Mosques for religious purposes, your children must be taught in Australian public or private schools".

Surely the integration of all school children (irrespective of religious background) is true multi-culturalism?

Or is true multi-culturalism letting people in who set up their own schools, their own supermarkets, their own places of prayer, their own suburbs and don't want to teach Australian values and tolerance?

Maybe my views of multi-culturalism are outdated, old fashioned and no longer "in vogue". Maybe true multiculturalism is letting people settle in Australia and if they want to integrate, great, but if they don't, great. Who cares? - at least we're multicultural.

Get Real

As an Addendum. I came across this photograph and thought it was very apt to this post:

 

Poor baby Ebony - Allegedly killed by her parents in Adelaide flat

The short life of poor baby Ebony is tragic one. This poor soul lost her life under the care of her teenage parents.

She was battered and had fractures to most of her body.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/national/teen-mum-released-despite-baby-ebonys-horrific-injuries/story-fndo471r-1226471809926

"The teenager is charged alongside the baby's father over alleged neglect that took place in their Brooklyn Park home between November 6 and 16 last year. They were initially charged with murder but charges for the mother and father were downgraded to criminal neglect."


"The sheer volume of injuries to this small child make this a very, very serious matter and of course no doubt led to the eventual death of the child."

Ebony's cause of death was blunt force head trauma.

Prosecutor, Ms Amos said she expected the teenager would claim she could do nothing to stop the injuries.
Bronwen Waldron, for the teenager, who cannot be named because she was under 18 at the time of the alleged offence, confirmed that the accused would be making that claim.

"Clearly she will be saying she never caused any harm to her daughter and she herself was physically and mentally powerless to protect her in the situation she found herself," said Bronwen Waldron. 

I find it hard to believe that any mother could do absolutely NOTHING whilst her poor defenceless 4 month old baby is being bashed to death.

What bullshit.

You mean to tell me she couldn't go out screaming into the street during the bashing?

She couldn't run to a neighbours for help?

She couldn't call the police?

Since the mother will be claiming (in her defence in court) that she never caused any harm to her daughter, and no-one else apart from the father has been charged, the only conclusion is that the mother will be blaming the father for Ebony's death. A child doesn't get those sort of injuries just sleeping in a cot. They are caused by a person.

How the charges can be downgraded to criminal neglect for both of them is beyond me. Surely one would have to be charged with at least, manslaughter, and the other with criminal neglect. However, I'm not a legal person so I presume the prosecution will know what it's doing.

I hate hearing of stories involving kids being bashed and killed by their ill-prepared too young parents. I'm amazed in this day and age that unplanned pregnancies still happen so often. Does it take THAT MUCH to stick on a condom or get on the pill?

I don't know whether this poor baby was planned or accidental. But there has to be something we can do to stop ill prepared and immature people having a baby (babies). In this case, forced adoption would have been a much better case - even though the civil libertarians would have a field day with this.

I hope whoever bashed and killed this poor soul suffers the same treatment in jail. No loss to society - just gets rid of one more scumbag.

Get Real

UPDATE 24/9/2012

The father of the above baby has pleaded guilty to criminal neglect in relation to his daughters death. Let's hope this prick gets what he deserves in jail. It's times like this that we really Sharia Law - An eye for an eye and a death for a death!

UPDATE 17/11/2013

The father of the baby has now confessed to the crime, and changed his plea to guilty. If I were the presiding judge, I would add another 3 years onto his sentence for this outright lie. If he did the 'right thing' back two years ago, and manned up to his guilt, it would have been easier on all concerned (and cost the taxpayer a lot less money). If he gets bashed in prison and dies, it's no loss to society. We don't need scumbags like this being released in 15 or 20 years.

UPDATE 21/11/2013

The mother of poor 4 months old baby Ebony gives evidence in court as to how the father enjoyed hitting the child prior to the baby's death. Naturally, the mother tries not to implicate herself too much saying her boyfriend would have killed her if she told the authorities.

I just can't believe the violence inflicted on this poor little defenceless and innocent baby, particularly by the father. And what pisses me really off is the mother COULD HAVE GOT OUT OF THE HOUSE AND TO POLICE and possibly save the life of poor Ebony, but she did NOTHING. Her pathetic excuses don't ring of any truth with me.

These two are prime candidates for capital punishment in Australia. They will both need to be kept in strict protective custody in prison, as the other prisoners will be out to kill them. I have no problem with that.

UPDATE 20/12/2013

As this case runs it's course and is nearly finished, the couple should re-appear in court sometime in January to find out their sentences. What still bugs me is the scumbag father has been found guilty of criminal neglect which has a maximum sentence of 15 years in jail!. How can bashing the life out of a poor defenseless baby be neglectful? I can understand criminal neglect happens when a person doesn't feed a baby properly or doesn't take care of it as it should, but deliberately bashing a poor baby to death is, to me, a little more serious than criminal neglect. I would have thought that a murder would be more a appropriate. I'm sure it wouldn't have been pre-meditated, but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to realise that bashing a few month old baby is going to do harm to it. And still too, this scumbag remains hidden in anonymity because of our pathetic laws regarding minors. And since the mother was under 18 at the time of the offence, the father can't be named. Nor can she. Damned disgusting. The scumbag father will go to jail for 15 years I'm sure, where he'll be put into protective custody, which'll be a damn shame as I'm sure he would've received a good bashing himself in prison. Which I don't think any decent member of the public would be too worried about.

Once again, a poor baby or child suffers at the hands of parents who are hopelessly young and ill prepared to handle the responsibilities of parenthood. To this end, I don't think the baby bonus has been helpful at all. I realise there must be other young parents out there that, through accident, find themselves pregnant, and champion on to be great parents. But come on guys. With  birth control and other information being so easily available, there is absolutely no excuse whatsoever, to get 'accidentally' pregnant. I would rather see the State take a baby from ill prepared parents and adopt it out rather than the poor mite suffer as poor baby Ebony did. Tough ? yes, but I'd rather have seen baby Ebony in a loving home rather than the one she was in!

Get Real

Those nasty little Christians are at it again - Outlaw Jim Wallace and his pathetic cause

In a surprising move, The Australian Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, has cancelled a planned speech at the Australian Christian Lobby conference next month.

Ms Gillard took offence by the groups managing director Jim Wallace over offensive comments where he compared gay marriage to the health risks of smoking.

Well Jim, your church doesn't exactly have a strikingly good record of looking after it's flock do they? Just look at all the clergy in jail for pedophilia and assaults around the world.

Jim Wallace, you are offensive to the Australian public and should be dismissed. Typically, the views you hold are held usually by under-educated bogans.

I'm glad the successive younger generations woke up to the fact that there is no god, or higher spirit. As the older generation die out, eventually more churches will close and the nasty likes of Jim Wallace will be gone.

Just get on with your life and enjoy it, you don't need some supposed higher force to tell you what to do.

 Jim Wallace, the homophobe.

Get Real

The Australian government now want more of an ability to SPY on it's people

ATTORNEY-General Nicola Roxon has reversed her position on online spy laws today, backing plans for internet service providers to store user data for up to two years.

Well folks, like I said would happen some time ago, the Australian Government is up to no good again. Nicola Roxon has reversed her thoughts on data retention by ISP's allowing a green light for authorities to pretty much spy on everything you do on-line. Do you get the feeling we're being treated more and more like suspects?


"Many investigations require law enforcement to build a picture of criminal activity over a period of time," Ms Roxon told the Security Government conference in Canberra.
"Without data retention, this capability will be lost.
"The intention behind the proposed reform is to allow law enforcement agencies to continue investigating crime in light of new technologies.
"The loss of this capability would be a major blow to our law enforcement agencies and to Australia's national security."

Our government already does clandestine things behind our backs and lies to the Australian public so why should we trust the government on this issue?

What will be the requirement to have a warrant issued by the courts? Maybe the government might decide a blog such as this which at times is critical of this very same government, may need more scrutiny. Fine, be my guest.

I'm not being a drama queen and making a mountain out of a molehill, but again, it seems, just like the yanks, Australians are losing more and more privacy to the government. They want to poke their noses into everything. They want to have more and more say in what the people do. Soon, the Australian government will tell you if you can smack your child or not. It started the ball rolling to censor internet sites (and failed). People have to stand up to this bullshit and say NO!

Of course to do this, you would be seen as being pro criminal and making it harder for law enforcement to catch the bad guys.

I'm all for catching these baddies, but I'm just sick to death of our rights and privacy going down the drain.

Ridding society from graffiti vandals - A new approach to stopping graffiti

I have a new proposal to help stop graffiti! Great I hear you say... tell us more.

OK, let me tell you straight out, I actually don't mind the original graffiti, real graffiti. The stuff we used to get years ago from people that were intelligent and were real artists:

Both of the above examples I think are great. They show real artistry and cleverness.

What gets on my goat are useless tags just by themselves. To me, tagging without adding any real content is plain straight out vandalism. I remember one morning a couple of years ago seeing a couple of guys creating graffiti artwork over a few mornings on a wall in a park. It looked fantastic. I only wish now I'd taken a snap of it back then whilst it was still on the wall.

A week or so after it was completed, I saw the same couple of lads one morning standing in front of their work and it was pretty much destroyed by tags. I can only imagine the thoughts going through their heads. Why would a tagger destroy the work of a fellow graffiti artist? Jealousy? Who knows...

Either way, our current laws are definitely not a deterrent to graffiti vandals. The Australian government has no balls so wouldn't enact any of my proposals anyway - but it's food for thought.

My proposal is to have those graffiti vandals who are caught and found guilty to have a finger surgically removed every time they are caught. The finger to be removed depends on whether it is public or private property which is defaced. If it's public property and a first offence, the finger removed would be the little pinky on the non main hand. It would be scaled accordingly every time they are caught and convicted. A different finger for offence seriousness.

I think however, unless the vandal was totally stupid, that it would only ever get to the one finger stage when most of the vandals would decide to give up there hobby (for fear of losing another finger).

Am I being too tough ? I don't think so. What gives graffiti vandals the right to damage public and private property? We all have to live in our city. Why do we have to put up with a few vandals that think it's OK to deface everything? Do you think the answer would be to create graffiti parks - like skateboard parks - whereby they can tag and draw away as much as they like?

OK, if you think my suggestion of having a finger removed is too "over the top" - what about this? When a graffiti vandal is caught and convicted. The punishment is to have the vandals front of the family home covered in graffiti (This assumes the vandal is living at home with the parents). The effect of this punishment creates embarrasment for the family, who then (under normal circumstances) would come down heavily on the vandal and they'd set the vandal the task of repainting and/or cleaning the front of the house.

If the vandal was over 18 and/or not living at home, they could be fined say, $4,000 to be paid within six months else personal possessions would be seized instead eg, Laptop, iPod, TV, Skateboards, Computer etc.

For those who say my thoughts on punishment are so way over the top they are ridiculous, look at the following grab of a reported news item from Singapore:

SINGAPORE –  SINGAPORE (AP) — Singapore sentenced a Swiss man to three strokes of a cane and five months in prison Friday for spray-painting graffiti on a subway car, reinforcing the city-state's reputation for severely punishing minor crimes. Vandalism in Singapore carries a mandatory three to eight strokes of a cane and a fine of up to SG$2,000 Singapore dollars ($1,437) or up to three years in jail.

OK, they don't cut off fingers, BUT, they have one of the cleanest cities in the world and with one of the highest living standards in the world. Why? Because they are tough on vandals, none of this pussy-footing around like we do in Australia. The would be vandals are pretty much too damn scared of doing anything in case the get caught. Great!! Bring this type of punishment to Australia.

I also noted in the story that Singapore has government sanctioned area's for graffiti artists to display their work. Walls were specifically built in certain area's for graffiting - great idea.

If any graffiti artists and/or vandals are reading this story, I'd be interested in hearing your side of the matter. Serious answers with some thought in them would be great instead of "yeah man, coz its kool".

• Do you graffiti public only or private only area's, or you don't care?
• Do you think about what would happen to you if you're caught?
• Do you care if you're caught?
• If caught, do you think "I'm under 18, stuff all will happen"?
• Do you think about your family and what they will think of you if you're caught?
• If you rented a house with mates and someone graffiti'd your front fence, would you care?
• If the owner or agent of the rented house said it's your responsibility to clean the graffiti on the front fence, what would you think?
• If you just took out a loan to buy a nice Holden/Ford Ute or other car of your dreams, is it OK for other people to graffiti your car?
• Do you think it's OK to graffiti other peoples property? Do you consider the dollar cost to them to re-paint or have the area cleaned?
• Do you consider your graffiti to be "artwork" or if it's just a tag, why is it important for you to put your tag on something?
• In 12 years time, when you're (maybe) out of the graffiti phase and you've just bought a house, have a great partner, good job, and some 14 year old tags your fence, is that OK?
• Would you leave the tag(s) on the fence and be proud that you used to do the same thing?
• Are there places you wouldn't tag or graffiti?

Get Real