Well the comment was leveled at the ABC not yourself. As a taxpayer funded entity it has both a mandate and a moral obligation to remain politically neutral - an obligation it repeatedly ignores and subverts. Some of these instances may be unintentional but others are clearly in bad faith (e.g. stacked panels and biased framing in debate/panel shows such as Q&A as well as others). I say this as someone who is not a partisan for either left or right. In the case of the ABC, my tax dollars (and yours) are going to fund someone else's agenda. Agenda pushing is the place for a privately funded broadcaster, not the government. As a private citizen you have a right to be as biased as you like, and i personally think we all are to some degree - myself and yourself included.
Regardless of the above I somewhat agree with your view that lawyers exist to protect the powerful, or at least the rich. This is down to the way that the incentive structure works.
The question is how their incentives (profit) can be aligned to a more equitable outcome. Simply stating that "profit motive is bad" isn't a pragmatic response, though to be fair the original article was a little more nuanced than this.
The system can also break down into absurdity in other ways a fairly good example recently relating to Shine. See the below article:
Ratepayers worried they will foot the bill for class action against overcharging by Wodonga City Council
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-05-24/wodonga-ratepayers-launch-class-action-against-council/9791024
They've since pulled out of this class action but Shine was going to sue the council for overcharging the rate payers.... so if Shine won where does the payout come from? Council rates of course. So essentially rate payers are going to refund themselves because the council ripped them off - nothing is achieved except lawyers siphoning off council funds.
I'll ignore the personal comments since such a discussion isn't productive, however I don't believe i have expressed bigoted views. Please present an example as I make an effort not be bigoted and would prefer to correct such behavior.... Oh and the fact that my conception of the world differs in some ways from yours is not an example of bigotry.
- Forums
- ASX - By Stock
- SHJ
- Ann: Ceasing to be a substantial holder
Ann: Ceasing to be a substantial holder, page-97
-
-
- There are more pages in this discussion • 21 more messages in this thread...
You’re viewing a single post only. To view the entire thread just sign in or Join Now (FREE)
Featured News
Add SHJ (ASX) to my watchlist
(20min delay)
|
|||||
Last
86.0¢ |
Change
0.000(0.00%) |
Mkt cap ! $148.9M |
Open | High | Low | Value | Volume |
86.0¢ | 86.0¢ | 86.0¢ | $7.3K | 8.488K |
Buyers (Bids)
No. | Vol. | Price($) |
---|---|---|
1 | 10000 | 85.0¢ |
Sellers (Offers)
Price($) | Vol. | No. |
---|---|---|
86.5¢ | 1498 | 1 |
View Market Depth
No. | Vol. | Price($) |
---|---|---|
1 | 10000 | 0.850 |
1 | 14756 | 0.815 |
1 | 10000 | 0.810 |
2 | 3474 | 0.800 |
2 | 1948 | 0.740 |
Price($) | Vol. | No. |
---|---|---|
0.865 | 1498 | 1 |
0.870 | 10000 | 1 |
0.875 | 348 | 1 |
0.880 | 3410 | 1 |
0.890 | 44140 | 1 |
Last trade - 11.14am 13/11/2024 (20 minute delay) ? |
Featured News
SHJ (ASX) Chart |
The Watchlist
NUZ
NEURIZON THERAPEUTICS LIMITED
Michael Thurn, CEO & MD
Michael Thurn
CEO & MD
SPONSORED BY The Market Online