May 2018
Barnaby Joyce and Vikki Campion want privacy, until a bag of cash turns up
Not long before (effectively) being forced to resign as Deputy Prime Minister due to his actions in office, Barnaby was pleading the point that his affair with his staffer, Vikki Campion, was private and no-ones business. He is on record as saying "as much as I can, I will keep private matters private" and "I am incredibly hurt that private issues get pulled out into the public arena".
That was before an apparent offer of $150,000 was on the table for a 'tell all' interview. How one's views can change when a bag of bucks is thrown your way. This begs the question if or not Barnaby will/would change (diametrically) his stand on political issues if there is financial consideration put in front of him. Lets not forget the embarrassing $40,000 cheque from Gina Reinhardt.
Back to Barnaby and his bucks. The reported $150,000 Barnaby and his partner are reported to be receiving is going into a trust for their son, as if this changes anything. Putting it this way is a PR stunt to soften the edges of the profit being made from 1/. Barnaby's political position and 2/. His philandering. You see, there is an inference by this strategy that Barnaby and Vikki are not profiting from the story - make no mistake, they are and doing so directly…
Firstly, as good parents Barnaby and Vikki would be contributing to their son's welfare now and into the future. That they are having $150,000 dumped into a trust rather than taking it as income is simply transferring the earnings from the story in a more tax efficient manner than simply pocketing it. So, for those of tender heart who think the action by Barnaby and Vikki is noble, there is nothing noble in this little charade (boo hoo, selling the story only for the benefit of the child).
Barnaby has an extremely well paid and highly responsible job in parliament and given the state of affairs in his party and electorate, he should have his full focus on his job and not his Media Career and literary business.
Mr. Joyce, the tax payer expects your full focus and doing side jobs on our time is not acceptable.
The $150,000 should be given to the tax payers that made the interview even possible - Without the tax payers that have paid your salary and benefits, there would be no story - It is only because of your political career that anyone knows you, don't forget that.
The interview could also serve as a good promo for the upcoming book.
AMA Youtube: https://youtu.be/K-7Sav19F0U
That was before an apparent offer of $150,000 was on the table for a 'tell all' interview. How one's views can change when a bag of bucks is thrown your way. This begs the question if or not Barnaby will/would change (diametrically) his stand on political issues if there is financial consideration put in front of him. Lets not forget the embarrassing $40,000 cheque from Gina Reinhardt.
Back to Barnaby and his bucks. The reported $150,000 Barnaby and his partner are reported to be receiving is going into a trust for their son, as if this changes anything. Putting it this way is a PR stunt to soften the edges of the profit being made from 1/. Barnaby's political position and 2/. His philandering. You see, there is an inference by this strategy that Barnaby and Vikki are not profiting from the story - make no mistake, they are and doing so directly…
Firstly, as good parents Barnaby and Vikki would be contributing to their son's welfare now and into the future. That they are having $150,000 dumped into a trust rather than taking it as income is simply transferring the earnings from the story in a more tax efficient manner than simply pocketing it. So, for those of tender heart who think the action by Barnaby and Vikki is noble, there is nothing noble in this little charade (boo hoo, selling the story only for the benefit of the child).
Barnaby has an extremely well paid and highly responsible job in parliament and given the state of affairs in his party and electorate, he should have his full focus on his job and not his Media Career and literary business.
Mr. Joyce, the tax payer expects your full focus and doing side jobs on our time is not acceptable.
The $150,000 should be given to the tax payers that made the interview even possible - Without the tax payers that have paid your salary and benefits, there would be no story - It is only because of your political career that anyone knows you, don't forget that.
The interview could also serve as a good promo for the upcoming book.
AMA Youtube: https://youtu.be/K-7Sav19F0U
Julia Banks states 40 bucks a day
11/05/2018 19:01 Filed in: Politics | julie banks | Centrelink | Newstart | dole | dole bludgers | poverty trap | politicians pay
Julia Banks has stated publicly on ABC Radio "I could live on 40 bucks a day knowing the government is supporting me with Newstart to look for employment" according to the new daily, ABC and other news outlets.
This is a surprising and concerning statement by a politician who gets very little publicity, airtime or attention and in general has little to express, except in question time, where she often appears gesticulating inanely, nodding, laughing (mockingly at the opposition) albeit in well-colored hair, which must cost a bit?.
Always appearing with a seemingly well-kempt and expensive coiffured hairdo, Ms. Banks does not appear to be an authority on the subject matter of poverty nor the ability to live on $40 a day.
Firstly, Ms. Banks receives a salary of around $200,00 + per annum or in excess of $540 per day and for brevity lets say 13 times a person on standard Newstart.
However, Ms. Banks also receives additional benefits such as her mobile phones paid for, an office allowance, vehicle and transport allowances AND significant 'allowed' tax deductions against her income simply for doing her job. Additionally she enjoys and will, even after leaving parliament specific benefits afford to politicians.
Notwithstanding the above, it should also be noted that Ms. Banks has had a career as a lawyer. She has worked in very senior positions with Kraft Foods and Glaxo Smith Kline (please note as this will be important in a later post) - it is fair to assume Ms. Banks did not work for free in these positions nor have to offer her services for three months trial just to get the jobs, and would have had significant benefits.
Simply put, Julia is not poor.
To state "I could live on 40 Bucks a day" when in such a privileged (and we are not stating such is not well earned, we know it takes 'graft' to get into parliament) position, it could be hard to believe that Ms. Banks has a grip on reality in so far as the Dole Bludgers are concerned.
Julia's Hairdo's cost a lot more than $40 a pop and it would be reasonable to assume that she visits the hairdresser rather frequently. Let's not go to the outfits.
Ms. Banks should, and has to apologise to the decent people who have to suffer the rhetoric and high handed horseshit that pours out of her (expensive) lip-glossed mouth. We have nothing against looking great and presenting as best one can, but don't say you can do it on $40 a day.
It's simple - If this viewpoint is incorrect, We will arrange a Big Brother-style event (AM media will arrange) for Ms. Banks to participate in where she will live on $40 a day for 3 months.
In the event Julia will not accept the challenge, then she should resign from parliament, NOW.
If you say it, back it up. Our spreadsheet shows (contact us for details) how out of order this woman is in regards to financial matters. Given She is/was a lawyer, is now a Member of Parliament of Australia, one would expect that she has a basic understanding of financial matters - I.e. capable of adding up using basic arithmetic taught in kindergarten.
It is time that these people who live in "cocoon land" back up their words - people are committing suicide in alarming numbers, dying in Australia due to the breakdown of the system, poverty afflicting innumerable families and people. Politicians, who make statements with no understanding nor care need to be held to account - Ms. Banks is one such person.
ArgueMyAss.com - Feel free to Argue OUR Ass off anytime
Sources:
https://thenewdaily.com.au/money/welfare/2018/05/02/liberal-julia-banks-newstart/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julia_Banks
Personal research and observation
This is a surprising and concerning statement by a politician who gets very little publicity, airtime or attention and in general has little to express, except in question time, where she often appears gesticulating inanely, nodding, laughing (mockingly at the opposition) albeit in well-colored hair, which must cost a bit?.
Always appearing with a seemingly well-kempt and expensive coiffured hairdo, Ms. Banks does not appear to be an authority on the subject matter of poverty nor the ability to live on $40 a day.
Firstly, Ms. Banks receives a salary of around $200,00 + per annum or in excess of $540 per day and for brevity lets say 13 times a person on standard Newstart.
However, Ms. Banks also receives additional benefits such as her mobile phones paid for, an office allowance, vehicle and transport allowances AND significant 'allowed' tax deductions against her income simply for doing her job. Additionally she enjoys and will, even after leaving parliament specific benefits afford to politicians.
Notwithstanding the above, it should also be noted that Ms. Banks has had a career as a lawyer. She has worked in very senior positions with Kraft Foods and Glaxo Smith Kline (please note as this will be important in a later post) - it is fair to assume Ms. Banks did not work for free in these positions nor have to offer her services for three months trial just to get the jobs, and would have had significant benefits.
Simply put, Julia is not poor.
To state "I could live on 40 Bucks a day" when in such a privileged (and we are not stating such is not well earned, we know it takes 'graft' to get into parliament) position, it could be hard to believe that Ms. Banks has a grip on reality in so far as the Dole Bludgers are concerned.
Julia's Hairdo's cost a lot more than $40 a pop and it would be reasonable to assume that she visits the hairdresser rather frequently. Let's not go to the outfits.
Ms. Banks should, and has to apologise to the decent people who have to suffer the rhetoric and high handed horseshit that pours out of her (expensive) lip-glossed mouth. We have nothing against looking great and presenting as best one can, but don't say you can do it on $40 a day.
It's simple - If this viewpoint is incorrect, We will arrange a Big Brother-style event (AM media will arrange) for Ms. Banks to participate in where she will live on $40 a day for 3 months.
In the event Julia will not accept the challenge, then she should resign from parliament, NOW.
If you say it, back it up. Our spreadsheet shows (contact us for details) how out of order this woman is in regards to financial matters. Given She is/was a lawyer, is now a Member of Parliament of Australia, one would expect that she has a basic understanding of financial matters - I.e. capable of adding up using basic arithmetic taught in kindergarten.
It is time that these people who live in "cocoon land" back up their words - people are committing suicide in alarming numbers, dying in Australia due to the breakdown of the system, poverty afflicting innumerable families and people. Politicians, who make statements with no understanding nor care need to be held to account - Ms. Banks is one such person.
ArgueMyAss.com - Feel free to Argue OUR Ass off anytime
Sources:
https://thenewdaily.com.au/money/welfare/2018/05/02/liberal-julia-banks-newstart/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julia_Banks
Personal research and observation