Would any rational person really believe that support for a plebiscite on SSM has dropped by 31 percentage points i.e. by 44%?
It has as much credence as the ridiculous conclusion reached by the dimwits at PwC that a SSM plebiscite would cost $525 million. The words stupid, inane and grossly prejudiced come immediately to mind. From The Australian 16/03/2016:
'We hit peak stupidity on Monday morning in the same-sex marriage cause when
accounting firm PwC tallied up the apparent financial costs to the country of Australians voting on same-sex marriage. More than half a billion dollars, say the
PwC number-crunchers.
Apart from the administrative costs of holding a stand-alone plebiscite ($158 million) PwC
guesstimated that $281m in lost opportunity costs to the economy because people have to take time out of their Saturday to vote. By that logic, we should get serious about saving money and do away with elections altogether.
Just think of the savings. If we scratch all local, state and federal elections, we could fund extra health and education services, higher pensions and so on. And consider the lost opportunity costs from millions of Australians having to find a car park, queue to vote, then completing the ballot paper at every election. The lost opportunity costs alone of Australians trying to decipher the Senate toilet roll ballot paper alone could surely fund handsome handouts to the middle class.
What about a refund for the lost opportunity costs of reading this tosh from PwC. You may as well try to calculate the lost opportunity costs of watching your child play Saturday sport rather than sleeping in. Or why not determine the lost opportunity costs over the course of history of all the great thinkers sitting quietly and thinking about the importance of free markets, the rule of law, property rights and so on.
A more principled and historically honest decision would have shown respect for section 128 of the Constitution — which says the Constitution may be altered only when a majority of voters in a majority of states agree to the change. Instead, a handful of arrogant, social engineering judges decided that Australians should have no say via a referendum to change the most long-settled word in the Constitution."
No more of this PC rubbish please; let's just utilise rational thought, which is clearly not very evident at PwC.
