A Royal Commission into Union corruption? Why?

[i-need-a-martini]

Is this really necessary given that it is a criminal matter?

Like how much does a Royal Commission cost? $400million? $600million?

And why is it that the Liberal Party are forever making the excuse that the 'public' have concerns and this is the reason they have to do something? ("Senator Brandis confirmed...it would be "irresponsible for the government not to respond in an appropriate way" to public concerns."). What concerns? I think the public is more concerned about the secrecy regarding the governments handling of the asylum seekers yet they don't think THOSE public concerns are important.

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/royal-commission-into-union-corruption-confirm...

[poddster]

I beg to differ they are as communist as can be.

I would also hazard a guess that there are others posters on this forum who have lived under a communist regime who now no longer do. Why would that be do you think ?

[freakiness]

Trying to link our unions to those communist regimes mentioned is stretching delusions too far.

[*crikey*mate*]

considering that stretching delusions is a Labor thing, I wouldn't have thought so.

[poddster]

Where did you get that notion?

 By the way, so you recognise those countries as communist, Boris dosen't, perhaps you can inform Boris. 🙂

[freakiness]

---

@crikey*mate wrote:

considering that stretching delusions is a Labor thing, I wouldn't have thought so.

---

Wow, it's only a few days since you said you knew very little about them 

[poddster]

Some people learn faster than others 🙂

[boris1gary]

it is not that i don't "recognise" the countries mentioned by yourself as communist - it is a fact - if you knew the difference between a socialist society and a communist one - you would not have asked the question. Just to make it a little easier for you...below is a quote from Karl Marx, point 2 is referring to a socialist state, 3 is referring to a communist society which whatever your opinion may be, the reality is that there has not been a modern communist society.

And now as to myself, no credit is due to me for discovering the existence of classes in modern society or the struggle between them. Long before me bourgeois historians had described the historical development of this class struggle and bourgeois economists, the economic anatomy of classes. What I did that was new was to prove:
(1) that the existence of classes is only bound up with the particular, historical phases in the development of production,
(2) that the class struggle necessarily leads to the dictatorship of the proletariat,
(3) that this dictatorship itself only constitutes the transition to the abolition of all classes and to a classless society.

does this help at all

[boris1gary]

---

@poddster wrote:

Some people learn faster than others 🙂

---

This may be true, but obviously some don't learn at all............

[boris1gary]

---

@freakiness wrote:

---

@crikey*mate wrote:

considering that stretching delusions is a Labor thing, I wouldn't have thought so.

---

Wow, it's only a few days since you said you knew very little about them 

---

what delusions have they been stretching crikey?

[poddster]

(2) that the class struggle necessarily leads to the dictatorship of the proletariat,
(3) that this dictatorship itself only constitutes the transition to the abolition of all classes and to a classless society

Do you think that the above are admirable traits?

Are you in favour of no distinction between people, that they all become homogenise into a uniform goo with no individuality?

Perhaps you see yourself as an overseer of the homogenised mass of uniformity?

But how could that happen? All would be equal, without distinction.