Yarra Ranges is Stuffed for Motorbikes
in [Aussie Motorcycles]
|
Prev: ROT IN HELL GREEK FUCKWIT....
Next: Garage Night new video: Suspension overhaul starts with Dremelon a lathe
From: CrazyCam on 14 Feb 2010 21:36 atec 77 wrote: > CrazyCam wrote: <snip> >>> Applebox ? >> >> Are you suggesting Zebee should have a bit on the side? > stop projecting <puzzled look> Am I the only one here who has seen motorcycles, with sidecar arrangements being used as fruit transport? It used to be a common thing in various parts of Europe, the sidecar being a simple platform, and, at the right season, loaded down with apple boxes. regards, CrazyCam
From: theo on 15 Feb 2010 01:27 On Feb 15, 10:36 am, CrazyCam <Crazy...(a)optusnet.com.au> wrote: > Am I the only one here who has seen motorcycles, with sidecar > arrangements being used as fruit transport? > > It used to be a common thing in various parts of Europe, the sidecar > being a simple platform, and, at the right season, loaded down with > apple boxes. Yes. I remember seeing tradies in Perth riding outfits with a platform or a box with all their tools and gear. But that was some time ago. Theo
From: Marts on 15 Feb 2010 03:04 Zebee Johnstone wrote... > I think the Bellagio would make a good platform for a special. A mate has one. We're heading up to Merimbula on the weekend. His is an 800, I believe. Will see what it has to offer in this respect.
From: G-S on 15 Feb 2010 03:13 CrazyCam wrote: > > The V7 Cafe looks nice straight out of the box, which I can't say for > the Bellagio. > The standard V7 is a good liking bike, the V7 cafe is one of the nicest retro styling excersises of the last several years. The Bellagio err... nice personality, shame about the face :) G-S
From: hippo on 15 Feb 2010 17:34
Kevin Gleeson wrote: > > On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 07:03:14 +1100, G-S <geoff(a)castbus.com.au> wrote: > > >theo wrote: > >> On Feb 10, 7:01 pm, "Nev.." <id...(a)mindless.com> wrote: > >>> G-S wrote: > >> > >>>> I am in favour of proportional representation when it's used without > >>>> preferences (which I mentioned earlier :) [1] > >>> So you only a system which gives unfair advantage to the election of > >>> candidates from the major political parties, and in which some votes are > >>> never counted towards the election of a candidate. Some people (ok, > >>> maybe just Theo) complain that the current system of voting already > >>> gives the major parties an unfair advantage. Yours would only make it > >>> worse. > >> > >> How? Proportional voting, as practiced in some European countries, has > >> no preferences. Your party, or independent, gets 1% of the primary > >> vote in a 100 seat parliament, you get one seat. You get 20% of the > >> vote, you get 20 seats. You get no votes, you get to go home.What is > >> so difficult or unfair about that? Sure, it is more likely that one > >> party will not have an absolute majority, so they would have to learn > >> to work together, just like they were taught in Kindy, but have long > >> since forgotten. Would that be a bad thing? And yes, they regularly > >> elect independents. > >> > >> Theo > > > >Sound much fairer to me :) > > > >G-S > > Tas had a situation like that about a decade ago. The Hare-Clarke > system spreads it out a bit and you can end up with a party not having > a clear majority. The Europeans (especially the Swedes I believe) seem > quite happy to handle that. Australian pollies just can't get their > heads around it for some reason. Too power-hungry? Dunno. But that > particular parliament was a debacle. > > I'm not a fan of the 2 party system. > > I'd like to see a no-party system in fact. You get voted in and you > act for your electorate and on your principles that you got voted in > for. I also believe in Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny. > > You could head a National Unity Government tomorrow. It seems that you're a cross between Barnaby Joyce and Kevin Rudd :) -- Posted at www.usenet.com.au |