Watch the parade
Richest 1% Now Own Half Of World’s Politicians
The surprising study found that the concentration of ownership of politicians in the hands of an elite few is becoming more pronounced. In 2004 only 45% of politicians were owned by the top 1%.
Social analyst Ronald Denegrave said politicians were often handed down from generation to generation, further widening the gap between the haves and have-nots. “It’s very common to see a politician, or even a whole political party, remain the possession of a wealthy family over a long period of time,” he said. “Once they’re bought, they’re tightly held. It’s very rare that they become available to the general population again”.
He said it was becoming increasingly difficult for up-and-coming businesspeople to break into the politician market. “It’s that old saying, ‘you need money to make a politician and you need a politician to make money’”.
One billionaire said he planned to give away the vast bulk of his politicians before he died.
Murdoch Media: Bill Shorten: Tony Abbott is a 'very unusual man' Is Abbott our Trump and News Corp our Fox News?
US Republican Candidates Divided Over Which Letter To Engrave Muslims With
Frontrunner Donald Trump, for example, says he will implement a letter ‘A’ engraving system if he is elected President, to denote a Muslim’s alien status. Ben Carson has gone a step further, insisting the letters ‘NLU’ (Not Like Us) be branded clearly on a Muslim’s forehead. Mr Trump later changed his policy to a letter T, for terrorist.
More centrist candidates like Jeb Bush have baulked at the extreme ideas of their colleagues, saying there is no need for a branding system. Mr Bush said a small piece of coloured cloth attached to clothing should suffice.
While some Republican voters are supportive of the idea, others have voiced their opposition, labelling it fiscally irresponsible. “The costs of implementing this would be huge,” one voter said.
Late this morning (US time) debate shifted to whether Muslims should be permitted to attend Republican televised debates, in order to allow candidates to demonstrate their policies.
Why is it that Bolt's arguments and in this case his argument about Chris Mitchell always sound like an offended schoolboy lagging on one of the other boys? Is he really justifying his reaction as only a personal sleight and then firing off at the messenger Chris Mitchell and the Australian rather than any subject matter? Say it loudly or quietly Bolt or even in a mellow tone the best you can come up with is a whinge Bolt. All style no effen meaning.
Matthew Knott 8:29 PM Conservative commentator Andrew Bolt says he hopes his participation in an upcoming ABC documentary on Indigenous constitutional recognition will show that people can disagree passionately on controversial issues without yelling or abuse.
Paul Keating 9:26 PM Our identity cannot be separated from that of Aboriginal Australia.