9 Signs Buzzfeed Doesn't Even Have To Try Anymore

Or...
9 Things Buzzfeed Writers Can Do That Ordinary People Cannot 

It used to be that you had to be interesting to get attention, but as the world approaches Peak Buzzfeed, these days you just have to be something no-one else can believe anyone ever saw a need for.
Such as these, which were found at the bottom of just ONE Buzzfeed listicle:

The Definitive Ranking Of Oreos
Because we've all had enough of those non-definitive rankings of Oreos. Amateurs!

How Sweaty Are You?
How did anyone figure this out before Buzzfeed quizzes?

21 Emma Watson Fans You Won’t Believe Exist
Hey, if this listicle exists, then I can believe anything exists

19 Things Celebrities Do On Social Media That Normal People Cannot
Spoiler: Anyone can do these things. Millions do. It's just that you don't notice.
Seriously.
And how do you like it when someone re-purposes your posts, Tabatha?

The 21 Most Important Celebrity Bulges Of All Time
This is clearly a definition of "Important" that I wasn't previously aware of.
And no, I won't.

Who Should You Support In State Of Origin?
If you thought quizzes couldn't get any more redundant than "How Sweaty Are You?" then you'd be wrong.
I'll make it really simple for you:
If you're from Queensland, then Queensland.
If you're from New South Wales, then New South Wales.
No-one else on Earth gives a shit.

Which Hollywood Emma Are You?
What does this even mean??

Jennifer Aniston’s Fiancé Justin Theroux Spotted Out With Terry Richardson
Did you ever, in your wildest dreams, imagine you would one day read that? I know, right?

Rihanna Walks Through An Outdoor Mall Completely Unnoticed
Well obviously, she didn't.
Unless, by excepting photographers, Buzzfeed are implying that paparazzi don't count as 'people,' in which case, well played!

You might also like...

What Twitter Bio Are You?

 

What Stupid Buzzfeed List Are You?

The 10 Best Gigs Of 2013

Hitting Yourself With A Hammer

The problem with the 99%

...is that around 49 or 50% of the 99% think that if they support the 1%, then eventually they will get to be part of the 1%.

It's Stockholm Syndrome on a global scale.

If the 2014 budget teaches us anything (and it probably won't), it's that if you vote aspirationally, you're gonna get screwed.
  
 

Don’t call it a “Gillard moment”

After a seemingly interminable mantra from Tony Abbott about no new taxes, no broken promises, no surprises and no excuses, he now looks set to break his promise about no new taxes and is in the process of making excuses about it. Surprised? You shouldn’t be.

Reports suggest that unnamed people in the Abbott government have warned him of a “Gillard moment,” if he breaks the promise on taxes. Headline writers have jumped on the expression. The only problem is that the two circumstances have nothing in common.

The “moment” referred to is the Gillard government’s implementation of a carbon tax after Ms Gillard said during the 2010 election campaign, “The will be no carbon tax under the government I lead.” The second half of that sentence is important.

As I wrote at the time, the reality was that Julia Gillard did not lead that government as prime ministers normally do. She led the senior partner in a coalition government that came about from a hung parliament. The cross-bench MPs had certain demands in order to secure their support. There’s nothing wrong with this. In fact, it’s how things are supposed to work. The parliament is the government and government policy is whatever can pass the parliament. For better or worse, it wasn’t Julia Gillard’s idea to introduce a carbon price. Remember those “Bob Browns (sic) bitch” signs? What did you think that was about?

Tony Abbott is not hamstrung in this way. He asked the electorate to give him a clear majority and they did, so what’s his excuse?

Well, he has a few. One is that the mooted tax increase on high income earners is a levy, not a tax. That didn’t fly though because he previously described the Queensland flood levy as, “another new tax.” Oops!

Then he suggested that it’s not a broken promise because it’s not a permanent increase, even though no end date has been suggested, and the carbon tax was also intended to be a temporary measure, adding that he never said “charges” wouldn’t rise.

The government has also claimed that because it’s simply an increase of an existing tax, it doesn’t break the promise of no new taxes, which we can probably file under “keeping the promises we really made, not the ones some people thought we made.” It’s all looking very shaky.

I’m not saying it’s bad policy. A temporary wealth tax to reduce the deficit is one of the least irresponsible economic policies the government has come up with. However, after three years of absolutism from Abbott over election promises, he deserves to reap all the ugliness he has sown. Calling it a “Gillard moment” implies that Abbott has the ability to negotiate acceptable policy.

Julia Gillard had many flaws as a prime minister and as a party leader but she deserves better than to become a byword for broken promises.

If we need a catchy expression for screaming about a budget crisis, claiming you can fix it by removing two taxes without replacing the revenue or cutting benefits, and figuring out after the election that it’s impossible, might I suggest calling it an Abbott Moment?

  

 

Breaking News....

We now cross live to a press conference being held by the prime minister Mr Abbott to eplain the reduction in the threshhold of his paid parental leave policy.

Good morning.

You might remember that when I first announced this policy as opposition leader it... um, came as, ah... a bit of a surprise to some of my party colleagues. Haha. Um, I did say at the time... ah... that, ah... sometimes it's better to ask forgiveness... than permission. I am pleased to say, ah... that they, um... they did forgive me, hehe... and more importantly than that, the Australian people embraced us and... gave us the mandate to enact real change.

I always said that that Paid Parental Leave scheme would be a... um, a signature policy of my government. Now, that has not changed. It has. Not. Changed.

I think everybody knows... and, um... understands that a, um, "signature" is something that... ah... can sometimes be... um... very hard to read. Ah... it doesn't always say... um... what you might think it says... It can sometimes look... completely different... to what it actually says. That is in the very nature... if I may say so... of signatures... and therefore... signature policies.

So, um, inconclusion, it's not a broken promise. Thank you, no more questions.
  
 

Wordless (sort of) Wednesday

Picture credit: Geeksrulz

Picture credit: Chris Murphy

Crunching the numbers

For a party that was so good about message discipline in opposition, you’d really think the government would be able to get its story straight on a day to day basis. But after several weeks of the treasurer preparing the country for financial pain because we have a budget crisis or something, today began with the news that we are going to be spending twelve billion dollars on fighter jets. We also know that the budget for the fighters may well blow out and that there is some debate as to whether they’re even any good. Then the day ended with the treasurer warning that Australia has a serious spending problem. The satire writes itself.

In fairness, this purchase has been in the pipeline since the Howard government but there’s no reason why the current government should consider that commitment sacred when they do so for few others.

It goes without saying that $12,000,000,000 is a lot of money but it might be informative to look at this spending in terms of spending the government wants to cut.

12 billion dollars is:

• 480 SPC assistance packages
• 602,530 aged pension payments for a year
• 88 Medicare co-payments for every person in Australia*
• 16 years of funding for the CSIRO without any budget cuts**
• 9.8 years of funding for the ABC***
• 531,396 first class return Qantas flights from Sydney to New York for a spoilt foreign minister

Now I’m not saying that national defence isn’t important too. But if there really is a budget crisis beyond a pretext for an ideological reluctance to help people, it leads one to wonder why such a purchase is a priority in these tough times. Talk of ‘maintaining superiority,’ only makes me wonder over whom and why? 

Still, if our prime minister keeps insulting our neighbours the way he has been recently, perhaps military spending is going to have to take precedence over welfare, health care and research after all.

* Based on 2012 census data.
** I accept that over that time, inflation may require funding to be increased. Adjust that figure accordingly as you see fit.
*** Ditto.