@ True But: That’s exactly the attitude that is contributing …

Comment on First Nations want a ‘Voice’ enshrined in the constitution by Surprised!.

@ True But: That’s exactly the attitude that is contributing to the problem.
So why don’t you work out a formula for a one off payment?
Getting handouts based on conscience is very destructive for to the payer and payee.
If you are referring to land as assets then it should be simple to calculate a REALISTIC rental payment. Then we stop paying royalties and we could save hundreds of millions.
Your one liner, clearly shows you are happy to contribute and exacerbate the problem rather than working out an equitable solution.
I note none has been able to answer all of my questions.
May I suggest you become a politician!

Surprised! Also Commented

First Nations want a ‘Voice’ enshrined in the constitution
So how long should we keep paying? Common criminals get out of prison after serving their time, so are you also suggesting that we keep punishing them for the same crimes?
I agree there were atrocities committed but as I have said, failure to move on will only fuel the issue.
Whilst you express your sentiments perhaps attempt to offer a solution!
Please bear in mind that in order to continue to empower Indigenous people we need to move forward from our emotions and act with respect, acceptance and understanding.
Can someone explain why job advertisements can say “Aboriginal and Torres Strait islanders are encouraged to apply” without there being a little racist slur or why there are schools where whites can’t go?
I mentioned earlier it has to work both ways.
Let’s do that and prosper or keep wallowing in the past and see the further degradation of our wonderful country.


First Nations want a ‘Voice’ enshrined in the constitution
It is apparent and recognised that the many first people around the world were treated shockingly. We, in Australia need to be united as a nation of people where EVERYONE is treated equally.
I am unsure of the wording in the constitution but I hope it says something like all people and does not exclude anybody.
Whilst there is (unfortunately) some inequality in the dealings with some Aboriginal people, there seems that from a percentage ratio there is much more money provided to them.
I am all for equality, but equality has to work both ways, over all aspects.
In my opinion it serves no purpose to keep bringing up the past and in many instances it seems this is being used as a political tool. Doing this only generates resentment at possibly hatred and certainly racism.
We need to get on with life and work to build a strong and prosperous nation.
The moment the word “together” is used, it infers a divide. “Together” should be replaced with the word “All”.


Recent Comments by Surprised!

Make Oz Day a celebration of the future, not the past
I’m with Janet Brown on this. She puts it succinctly and eloquently.


Police seek information after attacks on two women
When I go walking my dog at night, I carry a knife for protection.
It’s about risk assessment. The risk of being attacked or menaced is a lot higher than being caught by the police, so it makes sense.
In the unlikely event I get caught by the police, I’ll cry that I had a bad childhood or use the race card and the court system will let me go with a smack on the wrist.
To do otherwise would be seen as racially prejudicial.


Robbed man gets empty wallet back
Wow, those girls must be so fu**ing tough. To be able to rob a 71 year old. Perhaps we could nominate them for some kind of award.
How about the Sewer Rat Award? We could get one of the piss weak pollies to be MC.


Suddenly everyone is talking about 1Territory
Why is it that the pollies who did this are not held to account?
Surely in the legal system there is an avenue as there would be for former company directors?
I wish 1Territory the best of luck and they will get my vote.


Wakefield insists on Anzac Oval, ignores majority
Steve Brown: You raise some excellent points Steve, however you seem to be overlooking one very important fact.
If the government wanted to consult the masses, they should have taken the opinions more seriously.
The fact that they didn’t, is disrespectful to the taxpayer. So, was it just lip service?
I think you’ll find that this may be what has pissed people off.


Be Sociable, Share!