The glorious, overindulged Gina is at it again

[freakiness]

SHe must be mighty angry about dropping a few bucks and spots on the richest list.

http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2014/03/07/rinehart-has-double-standards-latham

Former federal Labor leader Mark Latham has accused Gina Rinehart of double standards after the billionaire mining magnate slammed Australia for its "entitlement" mentality.

"She wants to be a bigger welfare recipient herself," Mr Latham told the Seven Network on Friday.

"She's against social welfare but she's very much in favour of business welfare for herself.

"I think that's an appalling double standard, there is no bottomless pit of money and that should apply to Gina as much as the people she's bagging today."

Mr Latham's comments come after the mining tycoon took aim at welfare recipients and the political left for spending the "bottomless pit" of revenue created by mining.

"We are living beyond our means," Ms Rinehart, worth an estimated $19.89 billion, reportedly wrote in a column for the Australian Resources and Investment magazine.

[monman12]

Gina must obviously read CS, because she also said:

"The left don't want to address the issue. Instead they get hysterical and personal about who speaks out."

nɥºɾ

[boris1gary]

double standards to match her double chins. I think I have discovered that whoever writes the PMs speeches also writes rineharts, because the UK is doing so well, a lot of what was started by the "courageous" thatcher  - broken Britain, what a shambles. 

Thatcher - ding dong the wicked witch is dead,  understood "fundamental economic matters",  yes she understood them so well that she ended Britain' coal industry in an attempt to destroy a Trade Union - well done.

"Europe and the free world sadly lost a courageous leader last year, Baroness Thatcher," Ms Rinehart wrote.

"Our political leaders are fortunate to have a leader they can emulate, a leader who well understood fundamental economic matters, critical for all countries and their standards of living."

[*mrgrizz*]

not sure who has more creditability Gina or Mark Latham

[freakiness]

---

@monman12 wrote:

Gina must obviously read CS, because she also said:

"The left don't want to address the issue. Instead they get hysterical and personal about who speaks out."

nɥºɾ

---

Who gets personal?

You must have been reading with blinkers on.

[freakiness]

---

@*mrgrizz* wrote:

not sure who has more creditability Gina or Mark Latham

---

You could read one of the dozen newscorp stories about the same topic if you'd rather.

I try to avoid linking to them partly because they pop up paywalls to some.

[*mrgrizz*]

---

@freakiness wrote:

---

@*mrgrizz* wrote:

not sure who has more creditability Gina or Mark Latham

---

You could read one of the dozen newscorp stories about the same topic if you'd rather.

I try to avoid linking to them partly because they pop up paywalls to some.

---

i don't need to. i know she is a whack job

[*mrgrizz*]

anyhow what does one do with $20 billion?

[debra9275]

Perhaps she wants those welfare recipients to work in her mines for a dollar a day

[lakeland27]

i don't hate the woman but i wish for her own sake she'd shut up. she's proof that success and wealth are in some cases a random series of occurrences and nothing at all to do with hard work and intellect.

latham may have been somewhat of a loose cannon, but he's a very intelligent one who had no advantages. his success was all his own doing.