Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> wrote:

There is a pay walled article in the Herald today in which a policy of
the Maory Party to allow Maori to receive NZ Super at age 55-57 is
discussed in the context of Labour needing the Maory Party to form a
future government.

That article makes clear that Labour will have difficulties because of
this, but I would think this highlights how racist TMP is and that any >government that included TMP would be wildly unpopular from day 1.

While a vote for TMP is a voter for a Labour-led government, a vote
for Labour is a vote for TMP included in a government.

That gives me the horrors. We would see thousands going overseas and a large percentage of those would be of Maori descent.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

There is a pay walled article in the Herald today in which a policy of
the Maory Party to allow Maori to receive NZ Super at age 55-57 is
discussed in the context of Labour needing the Maory Party to form a
future government.

That article makes clear that Labour will have difficulties because of
this, but I would think this highlights how racist TMP is and that any government that included TMP would be wildly unpopular from day 1.

While a vote for TMP is a voter for a Labour-led government, a vote
for Labour is a vote for TMP included in a government.


--
Crash McBash

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Wed, 16 Apr 2025 15:34:09 +1200, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid>
wrote:

There is a pay walled article in the Herald today in which a policy of
the Maory Party to allow Maori to receive NZ Super at age 55-57 is
discussed in the context of Labour needing the Maory Party to form a
future government.

That article makes clear that Labour will have difficulties because of
this, but I would think this highlights how racist TMP is and that any >government that included TMP would be wildly unpopular from day 1.

While a vote for TMP is a voter for a Labour-led government, a vote
for Labour is a vote for TMP included in a government.

Small parties do have to push policies for their constituents - both
ACT and NZ First have had some horror policies (both ones that got
implemented and some thankfully not). I have not read the article, but
this is similar to the argument that men should get NZ Super at an
earlier age than women, because they die earlier - the difference has
been between 2 and 3 years for a long time. There is a significant
difference between mortality and morbidity between Pakeha and Maori -
I recall an argument about private companies having higher premiums
for Maori for Health and for Life insurance - the government of the
day said that there should not be that distinction in rates, although
companies could increase premiums for some health conditions. At that
time there was a difference of about 2 years between age at death
between male and female, and about another 2 to 3 years between pakeha
and Maori. Since then, the gap has widened to about 5 to 7 years -
pakeha die on average 5 to 7 years later than Maori. That is
considered to have resulted from poorer health outcomes, being a
mixture of poorer diet, more manual work, but the increase over the
years through. Maori tend to eat less well (they cannot afford better
food), go to doctors less (they cannot afford the appointments, and
probably live in an area with lower coverage), and cannot afford
private hospitals for severe and urgent conditions (and as we know
waiting lists have increased markedly for public health services, and
as hospitals use private hospitals more it is getting worse.

So it is fair enough for the suggestion to be raised- essentially they
are cheaper than pakeha - what does equality mean?

I disagree with the policy, and I suspect Labour would as well. The
answer is to address the problem directly, by bringing back having a
good level of public health care, but also by addressing some policies
directly to groups that are more susceptible. We have had programmes
that look out for diseases that are inherited from a parent; some
diseases are linked to race, and there is nothing wrong with
programmes directly identifying and treating those most at risk.

So yes TPM may well support Labour because they are likely to address
the health problems that have led to the suggestion. How bad does the difference in life expectancy have to get before the current racist
government realise there is a problem?

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Wed, 16 Apr 2025 03:49:58 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:

Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> wrote:

There is a pay walled article in the Herald today in which a policy of
the Maory Party to allow Maori to receive NZ Super at age 55-57 is >>discussed in the context of Labour needing the Maory Party to form a
future government.

That article makes clear that Labour will have difficulties because of >>this, but I would think this highlights how racist TMP is and that any >>government that included TMP would be wildly unpopular from day 1.

While a vote for TMP is a voter for a Labour-led government, a vote
for Labour is a vote for TMP included in a government.

That gives me the horrors. We would see thousands going overseas and a large >percentage of those would be of Maori descent.

Many Maori have found that they do not get the racist discrimination
they experience here from any National-led government; and having ACT
and NZ First as part of government makes that worse. Also once they
get a job in Australia they find that health services are better . . .
and that difference is increasing as the current government neglects
public health in its desire to push us towards a USA largely private
system.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Wed, 16 Apr 2025 03:49:58 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:

Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> wrote:

There is a pay walled article in the Herald today in which a policy of >>>the Maory Party to allow Maori to receive NZ Super at age 55-57 is >>>discussed in the context of Labour needing the Maory Party to form a >>>future government.

That article makes clear that Labour will have difficulties because of >>>this, but I would think this highlights how racist TMP is and that any >>>government that included TMP would be wildly unpopular from day 1.

While a vote for TMP is a voter for a Labour-led government, a vote
for Labour is a vote for TMP included in a government.

That gives me the horrors. We would see thousands going overseas and a large >>percentage of those would be of Maori descent.

Many Maori have found that they do not get the racist discrimination
they experience here from any National-led government; and having ACT
and NZ First as part of government makes that worse. Also once they
get a job in Australia they find that health services are better . . .
and that difference is increasing as the current government neglects
public health in its desire to push us towards a USA largely private
system.

Once more you digress - quite deliberately.
Maori that I know dislike TPM, almost with a passion. Why? Because the Maori I see every day are not greedy and they did not want co-governance and they did not oppose the bill. That is why they will move if TPM become a real factor, nothing to do with your fantasy.
You need to get out and meet some real people.
We are not moving to a largely private health system, that is another one of your fantasies.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Wed, 16 Apr 2025 07:15:14 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:

Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Wed, 16 Apr 2025 03:49:58 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:

Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> wrote:

There is a pay walled article in the Herald today in which a policy of >>>>the Maory Party to allow Maori to receive NZ Super at age 55-57 is >>>>discussed in the context of Labour needing the Maory Party to form a >>>>future government.

That article makes clear that Labour will have difficulties because of >>>>this, but I would think this highlights how racist TMP is and that any >>>>government that included TMP would be wildly unpopular from day 1.

While a vote for TMP is a voter for a Labour-led government, a vote
for Labour is a vote for TMP included in a government.

That gives me the horrors. We would see thousands going overseas and a large >>>percentage of those would be of Maori descent.

Many Maori have found that they do not get the racist discrimination
they experience here from any National-led government; and having ACT
and NZ First as part of government makes that worse. Also once they
get a job in Australia they find that health services are better . . .
and that difference is increasing as the current government neglects
public health in its desire to push us towards a USA largely private >>system.

The first line should have said: Many Maori that have gone to
Australia have found that they do not get the racist discrimination
they experience here from any . . .

Once more you digress - quite deliberately.

No evidence that your statement is anything but an attempt to dismiss
an issue that you know nothing about . . .

Maori that I know dislike TPM, almost with a passion. Why? Because the Maori I >see every day are not greedy and they did not want co-governance and they did >not oppose the bill. That is why they will move if TPM become a real factor, >nothing to do with your fantasy.
You need to get out and meet some real people.
We are not moving to a largely private health system, that is another one of >your fantasies.

No evidence to support your wild assertions.

I am off on holiday for a week or so and may not respond to posts for
a while - see if you can work out the difference between TMP and TPM .
. .

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Wed, 16 Apr 2025 07:15:14 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:

Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Wed, 16 Apr 2025 03:49:58 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:

Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> wrote:

There is a pay walled article in the Herald today in which a policy of >>>>>the Maory Party to allow Maori to receive NZ Super at age 55-57 is >>>>>discussed in the context of Labour needing the Maory Party to form a >>>>>future government.

That article makes clear that Labour will have difficulties because of >>>>>this, but I would think this highlights how racist TMP is and that any >>>>>government that included TMP would be wildly unpopular from day 1.

While a vote for TMP is a voter for a Labour-led government, a vote >>>>>for Labour is a vote for TMP included in a government.

That gives me the horrors. We would see thousands going overseas and a >>>>large
percentage of those would be of Maori descent.

Many Maori have found that they do not get the racist discrimination
they experience here from any National-led government; and having ACT
and NZ First as part of government makes that worse. Also once they
get a job in Australia they find that health services are better . . . >>>and that difference is increasing as the current government neglects >>>public health in its desire to push us towards a USA largely private >>>system.

The first line should have said: Many Maori that have gone to
Australia have found that they do not get the racist discrimination
they experience here from any . . .

The National government is not tracist, you have nevr shown that it is.

Once more you digress - quite deliberately.

No evidence that your statement is anything but an attempt to dismiss
an issue that you know nothing about . . .

You silly girl, you refuse to address the subject and become mildly rude again.

Maori that I know dislike TPM, almost with a passion. Why? Because the Maori >>I
see every day are not greedy and they did not want co-governance and they did >>not oppose the bill. That is why they will move if TPM become a real factor, >>nothing to do with your fantasy.
You need to get out and meet some real people.
We are not moving to a largely private health system, that is another one of >>your fantasies.

No evidence to support your wild assertions.

I made no assertion, you have not shown that we are moving to a private health system - that is a lie by you and the OP unless you have evidence.

Itrrelevant nonsense gone.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Wed, 16 Apr 2025 22:33:49 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:

On Wed, 16 Apr 2025 07:15:14 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:

Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Wed, 16 Apr 2025 03:49:58 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:

Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> wrote:

There is a pay walled article in the Herald today in which a policy of >>>>>the Maory Party to allow Maori to receive NZ Super at age 55-57 is >>>>>discussed in the context of Labour needing the Maory Party to form a >>>>>future government.

That article makes clear that Labour will have difficulties because of >>>>>this, but I would think this highlights how racist TMP is and that any >>>>>government that included TMP would be wildly unpopular from day 1.

While a vote for TMP is a voter for a Labour-led government, a vote >>>>>for Labour is a vote for TMP included in a government.

That gives me the horrors. We would see thousands going overseas and a large
percentage of those would be of Maori descent.

Many Maori have found that they do not get the racist discrimination
they experience here from any National-led government; and having ACT
and NZ First as part of government makes that worse. Also once they
get a job in Australia they find that health services are better . . . >>>and that difference is increasing as the current government neglects >>>public health in its desire to push us towards a USA largely private >>>system.

The first line should have said: Many Maori that have gone to
Australia have found that they do not get the racist discrimination
they experience here from any . . .

Once more you digress - quite deliberately.

No evidence that your statement is anything but an attempt to dismiss
an issue that you know nothing about . . .

Maori that I know dislike TPM, almost with a passion. Why? Because the Maori I
see every day are not greedy and they did not want co-governance and they did >>not oppose the bill. That is why they will move if TPM become a real factor, >>nothing to do with your fantasy.
You need to get out and meet some real people.
We are not moving to a largely private health system, that is another one of >>your fantasies.

No evidence to support your wild assertions.

I am off on holiday for a week or so and may not respond to posts for
a while - see if you can work out the difference between TMP and TPM .
. .

Do you need help working out TMP vs TPM? Hint one is in English.


--
Crash McBash

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Wed, 16 Apr 2025 07:15:14 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:

Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Wed, 16 Apr 2025 03:49:58 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:

Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> wrote:

There is a pay walled article in the Herald today in which a policy of >>>>>the Maory Party to allow Maori to receive NZ Super at age 55-57 is >>>>>discussed in the context of Labour needing the Maory Party to form a >>>>>future government.

That article makes clear that Labour will have difficulties because of >>>>>this, but I would think this highlights how racist TMP is and that any >>>>>government that included TMP would be wildly unpopular from day 1.

While a vote for TMP is a voter for a Labour-led government, a vote >>>>>for Labour is a vote for TMP included in a government.

That gives me the horrors. We would see thousands going overseas and a >>>>large
percentage of those would be of Maori descent.

Many Maori have found that they do not get the racist discrimination
they experience here from any National-led government; and having ACT
and NZ First as part of government makes that worse. Also once they
get a job in Australia they find that health services are better . . . >>>and that difference is increasing as the current government neglects >>>public health in its desire to push us towards a USA largely private >>>system.

The first line should have said: Many Maori that have gone to
Australia have found that they do not get the racist discrimination
they experience here from any . . .

Once more you digress - quite deliberately.

No evidence that your statement is anything but an attempt to dismiss
an issue that you know nothing about . . .

Maori that I know dislike TPM, almost with a passion. Why? Because the Maori >>I
see every day are not greedy and they did not want co-governance and they did >>not oppose the bill. That is why they will move if TPM become a real factor, >>nothing to do with your fantasy.
You need to get out and meet some real people.
We are not moving to a largely private health system, that is another one of >>your fantasies.

No evidence to support your wild assertions.

Who cares/

I am off on holiday for a week
or so and may not respond to posts for
a while - see if you can work out the difference between TMP and TPM .

The difference is virtually non-existent, they are the same organisation and both sets of initials are equally valid.
There, I hope that helped.

. .

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 2025-04-16, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Wed, 16 Apr 2025 03:49:58 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:

Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> wrote:

There is a pay walled article in the Herald today in which a policy of >>>the Maory Party to allow Maori to receive NZ Super at age 55-57 is >>>discussed in the context of Labour needing the Maory Party to form a >>>future government.

That article makes clear that Labour will have difficulties because of >>>this, but I would think this highlights how racist TMP is and that any >>>government that included TMP would be wildly unpopular from day 1.

While a vote for TMP is a voter for a Labour-led government, a vote
for Labour is a vote for TMP included in a government.

That gives me the horrors. We would see thousands going overseas and a large >>percentage of those would be of Maori descent.

Many Maori have found that they do not get the racist discrimination
they experience here from any National-led government;

That is what Tony has said?

and having ACT
and NZ First as part of government makes that worse. Also once they
get a job in Australia they find that health services are better . . .
and that difference is increasing as the current government neglects
public health in its desire to push us towards a USA largely private
system.

That is for the people to inform the want to be MPs that we need a good
public health system and we are ready to pay for it.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 2025-04-16, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Wed, 16 Apr 2025 15:34:09 +1200, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid>
wrote:

There is a pay walled article in the Herald today in which a policy of
the Maory Party to allow Maori to receive NZ Super at age 55-57 is >>discussed in the context of Labour needing the Maory Party to form a
future government.

That article makes clear that Labour will have difficulties because of >>this, but I would think this highlights how racist TMP is and that any >>government that included TMP would be wildly unpopular from day 1.

While a vote for TMP is a voter for a Labour-led government, a vote
for Labour is a vote for TMP included in a government.

Small parties do have to push policies for their constituents - both
ACT and NZ First have had some horror policies (both ones that got implemented and some thankfully not). I have not read the article, but
this is similar to the argument that men should get NZ Super at an
earlier age than women, because they die earlier - the difference has
been between 2 and 3 years for a long time. There is a significant
difference between mortality and morbidity between Pakeha and Maori -
I recall an argument about private companies having higher premiums
for Maori for Health and for Life insurance - the government of the
day said that there should not be that distinction in rates, although companies could increase premiums for some health conditions. At that
time there was a difference of about 2 years between age at death
between male and female, and about another 2 to 3 years between pakeha
and Maori. Since then, the gap has widened to about 5 to 7 years -
pakeha die on average 5 to 7 years later than Maori. That is
considered to have resulted from poorer health outcomes, being a
mixture of poorer diet, more manual work, but the increase over the
years through. Maori tend to eat less well (they cannot afford better
food), go to doctors less (they cannot afford the appointments, and
probably live in an area with lower coverage), and cannot afford
private hospitals for severe and urgent conditions (and as we know
waiting lists have increased markedly for public health services, and
as hospitals use private hospitals more it is getting worse.

So it is fair enough for the suggestion to be raised- essentially they
are cheaper than pakeha - what does equality mean?

I disagree with the policy, and I suspect Labour would as well. The
answer is to address the problem directly, by bringing back having a
good level of public health care, but also by addressing some policies directly to groups that are more susceptible. We have had programmes
that look out for diseases that are inherited from a parent; some
diseases are linked to race, and there is nothing wrong with
programmes directly identifying and treating those most at risk.

So yes TPM may well support Labour because they are likely to address
the health problems that have led to the suggestion. How bad does the difference in life expectancy have to get before the current racist government realise there is a problem?

Credit where credit is due. Rich has replied without the ususal diversions
and political "ranting". Well done.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 2025-04-16, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Wed, 16 Apr 2025 07:15:14 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:

Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Wed, 16 Apr 2025 03:49:58 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:

Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> wrote:

There is a pay walled article in the Herald today in which a policy of >>>>>the Maory Party to allow Maori to receive NZ Super at age 55-57 is >>>>>discussed in the context of Labour needing the Maory Party to form a >>>>>future government.

That article makes clear that Labour will have difficulties because of >>>>>this, but I would think this highlights how racist TMP is and that any >>>>>government that included TMP would be wildly unpopular from day 1.

While a vote for TMP is a voter for a Labour-led government, a vote >>>>>for Labour is a vote for TMP included in a government.

That gives me the horrors. We would see thousands going overseas and a large
percentage of those would be of Maori descent.

Many Maori have found that they do not get the racist discrimination
they experience here from any National-led government; and having ACT
and NZ First as part of government makes that worse. Also once they
get a job in Australia they find that health services are better . . . >>>and that difference is increasing as the current government neglects >>>public health in its desire to push us towards a USA largely private >>>system.

The first line should have said: Many Maori that have gone to
Australia have found that they do not get the racist discrimination
they experience here from any . . .

Once more you digress - quite deliberately.

No evidence that your statement is anything but an attempt to dismiss
an issue that you know nothing about . . .

Maori that I know dislike TPM, almost with a passion. Why? Because the Maori I
see every day are not greedy and they did not want co-governance and they did >>not oppose the bill. That is why they will move if TPM become a real factor, >>nothing to do with your fantasy.
You need to get out and meet some real people.
We are not moving to a largely private health system, that is another one of >>your fantasies.

No evidence to support your wild assertions.

Rich, then what this all about

https://thespinoff.co.nz/the-bulletin/17-04-2025/hospitals-to-be-rebuilt-in-four-stages-under-new-20b-plan

I guess you will say it is so that they can sell it off to private
enterprise.

I am off on holiday for a week or so and may not respond to posts for
a while - see if you can work out the difference between TMP and TPM .
. .

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Wed, 16 Apr 2025 17:12:44 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:

On Wed, 16 Apr 2025 15:34:09 +1200, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid>
wrote:

There is a pay walled article in the Herald today in which a policy of
the Maory Party to allow Maori to receive NZ Super at age 55-57 is >>discussed in the context of Labour needing the Maory Party to form a
future government.

That article makes clear that Labour will have difficulties because of >>this, but I would think this highlights how racist TMP is and that any >>government that included TMP would be wildly unpopular from day 1.

While a vote for TMP is a voter for a Labour-led government, a vote
for Labour is a vote for TMP included in a government.

Small parties do have to push policies for their constituents - both
ACT and NZ First have had some horror policies (both ones that got >implemented and some thankfully not).

All Maori Party policies are horror policies born of core
anti-colonial racism. The Greens are also becoming an extremist
watermelon party and the Green skin is getting very thin. The
founders of both parties would never have gone in the directions both
parties are now going in. Comparatively ACT and NZF are a horror only
to those who dogmatically support the Maori Party or the Greens.

I have not read the article, but
this is similar to the argument that men should get NZ Super at an
earlier age than women, because they die earlier - the difference has
been between 2 and 3 years for a long time. There is a significant
difference between mortality and morbidity between Pakeha and Maori -
I recall an argument about private companies having higher premiums
for Maori for Health and for Life insurance - the government of the
day said that there should not be that distinction in rates, although >companies could increase premiums for some health conditions. At that
time there was a difference of about 2 years between age at death
between male and female, and about another 2 to 3 years between pakeha
and Maori. Since then, the gap has widened to about 5 to 7 years -
pakeha die on average 5 to 7 years later than Maori.

None of which justifies earlier payments for NZ Super for those of
Maori descent vs other races.

That is
considered to have resulted from poorer health outcomes, being a
mixture of poorer diet, more manual work, but the increase over the
years through.

Maori tend to eat less well (they cannot afford better
food)

So Maori are not allowed to get a good education like their Asian
brothers, always have to buy food rather than grow it and are excluded
from living healthy lives. Yeah right.

go to doctors less (they cannot afford the appointments,

Yeah its hard when your parents think it is OK to wag school.

and
probably live in an area with lower coverage), and cannot afford
private hospitals for severe and urgent conditions (and as we know
waiting lists have increased markedly for public health services, and
as hospitals use private hospitals more it is getting worse.

So Maori are prohibited from ACC treatments then? That is the only
time I have ever been in a private hospital and ACC covers those who
are not working.

So it is fair enough for the suggestion to be raised- essentially they
are cheaper than pakeha - what does equality mean?

It means those who make healthy lifestyle and education choices do
better than those who do not, and those who do not should be happy to
be treated equally when it comes to retirement.

I disagree with the policy, and I suspect Labour would as well.

No use if the Maori Party hold the balance of power as NZF currently
do. This will force Labour to swallow dead rat policies such as
racist pro-Maori policy.

The
answer is to address the problem directly, by bringing back having a
good level of public health care, but also by addressing some policies >directly to groups that are more susceptible. We have had programmes
that look out for diseases that are inherited from a parent; some
diseases are linked to race, and there is nothing wrong with
programmes directly identifying and treating those most at risk.

All a work in progress because of the current Government.

So yes TPM may well support Labour because they are likely to address
the health problems that have led to the suggestion. How bad does the >difference in life expectancy have to get before the current racist >government realise there is a problem?

We don't have a current racist Government. The problem of Maori
health is solved by Maori making healthy lifestyle choices such as
their rellies in Australia are forced to make by very restricted
welfare-state access over there.

Its no rocket science.


--
Crash McBash

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)