Religious jokes (2)

Maria, a devout Catholic, got married and had 15 children. After her first husband died, she remarried and had 15 more children. A few weeks after her second husband died, Maria also passed away. At Maria’s funeral, the priest looked skyward and said, “At last, they’re finally together.” Her sister sitting in the front row said, “Excuse me, Father, but do you mean she and her first husband, or she and her second husband?” The priest replied, “I mean her legs.”

 

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

 

Jesus, Moses and an old man go golfing. The first one to tee off is Moses. He smashes the ball and it is heading right for the water hazard before the green. Moses raises his club, the water parts, and the ball makes it to the green. Jesus gets up to swing, cranks it out, and it is headed for the water hazard. Jesus closes his eyes and prays. The ball skips across the water and lands on the green two feet from the hole. The old man’s turn comes and he drives the ball. The ball looks like it is going to drop directly into the water. A fish jumps from the water hazard swallowing the ball, as an eagle drops from the sky, grabbing the fish. As the eagle flies over the green, a bolt of lightning strikes the eagle, making it drop the fish. As the fish hits the green, it spits out the ball and the ball falls into the hole, making a hole in one. Jesus looks at Moses and says, “I really think I’m leaving Dad at home next time!”

 

Advertisement

Funny political one-liners

My favorite mythical creature? The honest politician.

Politicians and diapers have one thing in common. They should both be changed regularly, and for the same reason.

America is a country which produces citizens who will cross the ocean to fight for democracy but won’t cross the street to vote.

I asked my North Korean friend how it was there, he said he couldn’t complain.

A fine is a tax for doing wrong. A tax is a fine for doing well.

I don’t approve of political jokes…I’ve seen too many of them get elected.

 

(From the Internet – ‘One line fun’)

Religious jokes

A man gets on a bus, and ends up sitting next to a very attractive nun. Enamored with her, he asks if he can have sex with her. Naturally, she says no, and gets off the bus. The man goes to the bus driver and asks him if he knows of a way for him to have sex with the nun. “Well,” says the bus driver, “every night at 8 o’clock, she goes to the cemetery to pray. If you dress up as God, I’m sure you could convince her to have sex with you.”

The man decides to try it, and dresses up in his best God costume. At eight, he sees the nun and appears before her. “Oh, God!” she exclaims. “Take me with you!” The man tells the nun that she must first have sex with him to prove her loyalty. The nun says yes, but tells him she prefers anal sex. Before you know it, they’re getting down to it, having nasty, grunty, loud sex. After it’s over, the man pulls off his God disguise. “Ha, ha!” he says, “I’m the man from the bus!” “Ha, ha!” says the nun, removing her costume, “I’m the bus driver!”

 

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

 

On their way to get married, a young Catholic couple is involved in a fatal car accident. The couple found themselves sitting outside the Pearly Gates waiting for St. Peter to process them into Heaven. While waiting, they began to wonder: Could they possibly get married in Heaven? When St. Peter showed up, they asked him. St. Peter said, “I don’t know. This is the first time anyone has asked. Let me go find out,'” and he left. The couple sat and waited, and waited. Two months passed and the couple were still waiting.

While waiting, they began to wonder what would happen if it didn’t work out; could you get a divorce in heaven? After yet another month, St. Peter finally returned, looking somewhat bedraggled. “Yes,” he informed the couple, “You can get married in Heaven.”

“Great!” said the couple, “But we were just wondering, what if things don’t work out? Could we also get a divorce in Heaven?” St. Peter, red-faced with anger, slammed his clipboard onto the ground. “What’s wrong?” asked the frightened couple. “OH, COME ON!,” St. Peter shouted, “It took me three months to find a priest up here! Do you have any idea how long it’ll take me to find a lawyer?”

 

Funny one-liners

How did I escape Iraq? Iran.

I’d tell you a chemistry joke but I know I wouldn’t get a reaction.

I can’t believe I got fired from the calendar factory. All I did was take a day off.

I’m reading a book about anti-gravity. It’s impossible to put down.

I’m glad I know sign language, it’s pretty handy.

When I get naked in the bathroom, the shower usually gets turned on.

 

(From the Internet: ‘Funny puns one-liners’)

 

Presidential truths

If I were two-faced, would I be wearing this one?

Abraham Lincoln

If you could kick the person in the pants responsible for most of your trouble, you wouldn’t sit for 
a month.

Theodore Roosevelt

Give me a one-handed economist! 
All my 
economists say, “On the one hand …
on the other.”

Harry Truman

I have left orders to be awakened at any time in case of a national emergency—even if I’m in a Cabinet meeting.

—Ronald Reagan

Being president is like 
running a cemetery: You’ve got a lot of people under you, and nobody’s listening.

Bill Clinton

 

 

Names for groups you never knew

A pride of lions, a gaggle of geese … and here’s how we might classify these groups:

• A brat of boys
• A giggle of girls
• A stagger of drunks
• A tedium of accountants
• A stitch of doctors
• A whine of losers
• A jerk of politicians

 

The relationship between the material and ethereal realms

Here is a commentary to a presentation on the RN ABC Radio program titled ‘The Posthuman,’ of 4 Dec. 2016

 “Nearly Normal Frederick :

07 Dec 2016 2:07:58pm

Modern quantum physics tells us that everything is light, that all of reality – every person, every object, every iota of space and time – is nothing but waves in an ocean of light.
But what quantum science does not tell us is that this light is not merely an impersonal force or a mass of energy but that it is Conscious, that it is alive. That everything is a modification of Conscious Light.

So called “matter” is therefore a stepped down modification of infinitely radiant Conscious Light. The “material” universe is thus a present expression of light. Matter is light; matter, or the total realm of nature, emanates presently from the Matrix of Light.

The physical universe is actually a speck floating in an indefinable Realm of Light-Energy.

Then what does this imply about our understanding and application of biochemistry, biophysics, human anatomy, human life, human culture?
What will we do when we take the discovery of the relationship between matter and energy (or light) seriously?

How do we make medicine out of the understanding that the human body is a complex system of energy? How do we practice ordinary diet, sexuality, and social relations on that basis. How do we bring this higher knowledge of quantum physics into the daily practice of ordinary people?”

My understanding of  Paramahansa Yogananda’s concept of the Cosmos is that is all light. Then there is the prevailing concept that all material existence in the Cosmos emanates from an ‘Ocean’ of Consciousness’; and that Consciousness is ever-existing, and permeates everything, both created and uncreated. Is quantum physics confirming Hinduism’s explanatory framework?

While human beings may or may not have any meaning (from vermin to modified chimp on its way to a higher level of Man with a spiritually-directed brain), the Cosmos seems a place worth investigating with our ‘third eyes.’

 

 

 

 

 

From the sheep’s back to whose back?

“Our growth comes from extremely high immigration rates – some of the highest in the developed world per capita.”  “All the major parties, including the Greens, spruik perpetual growth. It is easy to see why Pauline Hanson’s policy to reduce immigration from 200,000 per year to a more sustainable 70,000 is gaining more support.” (Comment: Hanson is a rare independent fearless politician who speaks for those ignored by the major political parties.)

“Houses are already two times less affordable than the 1960s.”  (Comment: Homes in Sydney, and possibly in other major cities, are already beyond the capacity of young first-home buyers.)  “With modern robotics and automation, there are going to be less jobs than ever.”  “Our Sydney roads are already gridlocked and it gets worse every day.”  “… eight out of ten Australians I talk to don’t want a big Australia of never ending growth.”

The above extracts are from an advert. addressed to the chief planner of the City of Sydney in the 15 Dec. 2016 issue of the Sydney Morning Herald by Dick Smith (one of Australia’s outstanding businessmen).

I add the following thoughts: 

• Relying upon an increasing population, through an expanding intake of immigrants and UNHCR-accepted refugees, to add to the nation’s income reflects a shopkeeper mentality: the more customers the better.
• But, what is the source of the spending money of the new arrivals? Welfare? If funded by the taxpayer, for how long?
• The tax subsidy provided by the ‘negative gearing’ of house purchases results in (a) other taxpayers meeting the shortfall in revenue caused by the subsidy; (b) additional competition faced by first-home buyers.
• The so-called ‘mums and dads’ in federal parliament, particularly in the Coalition parties, are some of the beneficiaries of negative gearing. This benefits those with spare capital. What does it do for the nation?
• Australia has no long-term plans for the economy. Once upon a time, it relied on the sheep for export income. Now it is education and tourism – both likely to be impermanent.
• It has no population planning, no development plans, and apparently no capacity for investment in necessary infrastructure (to cope with the additional demands created by a fast-growing population).
• In federal parliament, each side of politics apparently stymies the other side’s proposals. Petty politics seem to rule. Where goes the economy?

Mr. Smith has Buckley’s hope of a more realistic immigration policy – unless State Premiers back him. Individuals and community groups can, and will, be ignored, until voters jack up at supporting political laissez-faire.

Corporate taxation in Oz: Is morality relevant?

“New research has revealed 76 of Australia’s biggest multinationals pay an average effective tax rate of just 16.2% – half the corporate tax rate.

It has also discovered the commonwealth government lost $5.4bn in potential tax revenue in 2013 and 2014 from those same companies, as they shifted billions of dollars in profits offshore.

Corporate tax experts from the University of Technology, Sydney, have worked with the activist group GetUp! to examine the financial records of the top 100 multinational corporations with operations in Australia.

They say large pharmaceutical corporations are paying the lowest effective tax rate at just 5.7%, compared with 7.5% for hi-tech corporations and 20% for energy corporations.

Australia’s official corporate tax rate is 30%.

A new report, Closing the Caribbean Connection: Solving Aggressive Tax Avoidance by Top Foreign Multinationals Operating in Australia, shows their findings.

It says the largest corporations with operations in Australia favour two tax minimisation techniques over any others.

The first technique, called “debt loading,” is favoured by energy companies. It finds foreign multinationals lending capital to their Australian operations at unusually high interest rates, with any profit made in Australia used to repay the foreign subsidiary. For the purposes of company tax records in Australia, the profits are then recorded as a loss in the form of an interest payment on the loan.

The second technique is called “profit alienation” and is preferred by pharmaceutical and hi-tech firms. It finds corporations holding intellectual property rights in low or zero tax jurisdictions. Any profits made in Australia are then used to pay the parent company for the use of its intellectual property.” … …

“The report’s authors say the Turnbull government needs to follow Hong Kong’s example in tackling debt loading abuse, by eliminating interest deductions and other financial payments on loans from foreign subsidiaries located in low or no tax jurisdictions.

It also says the government should introduce a diverted profits tax, set at 30% to reflect the current statutory tax rate for companies, as in the United Kingdom.

“Everyday Australians are paying tax at a higher rate than billionaire corporations like Chevron, Apple and Google,” Getup! campaigner Daney Faddoul said. “These foreign multinationals are inflating their losses and shifting their profits to rob Australia of crucial investment in our local hospitals and schools.”

(The above paragraphs are extracts from  Guardian Australia’s tax report of 20 April 2016.)

Representative government, anyone? One lot believes that, in the exciting times we live in, reducing company tax will result in instantaneous wealth creation (for whose benefit?). The other lot tells us what it might do one day. Will they work together for the benefit of the populace? What we have are legal loopholes benefiting from moral loopholes.     

 

 

 

It is a weird nation- or what?

Let me say at the outset that I am quite proud of my adopted nation. After more than 65 years’ residence (as an adult) I can claim that I know (and understand) Australia and its peoples as well as anyone else. After all, there are not too many people of my vintage around; the others would have moved on to a happier place by now.

What is fascinating about Australia, in spite of coming across as somewhat weird in many aspects of significance, is that there is an aura of a people who are likeable, tolerant of change (incredibly vast changes in the last 40 years), somewhat laidback, increasingly colour-blind, and with a sense of human dignity (aided by high wages and plentiful welfare). Relative to the rest of the world, we are well fed and well watered.

On the flip side, there are many ‘takers,’ to be found at all levels of society. ‘Other peoples’ money is sought, and availed of, assiduously. I knew a few ‘disability pensioners’ who were fit, both physically and mentally. It does not seem difficult to be as a ‘carer’ to look after someone who is fit. A tradesman can retire early before age 60, and be paid as a carer to continue to look after his mother – who has lived with him and his wife for years.

As well, the ready availability of welfare payments can be enough to dissuade a young couple with children from seeking employment. Moving into a coastal village with no employment prospects is availed of by middle-aged couples; one can guess the source of their income. Then, a couple on the age pension is allowed to have assets (other than their home) of up to $1.2 million! Who is paying for such largesse?

Unlike the ‘olden days,’ when itinerant rural workers were available, now backpackers from overseas are needed. The use of labour hire contractors protects the farm producer from any deficiencies in the payment process. Deficiencies in the efficacy of oversight by relevant bureaucracies abound in key areas. For example, a number of young men were electrocuted under a new policy; but were any bureaucrats held responsible? Other examples are: a solid chunk of money intended for educational facilities was reportedly paid to a contractor as ‘middleman’; a US-style tertiary education innovation has been said to have cost the government vast amounts of money; a seemingly loosely-administered temporary entry visa scheme apparently brings in skilled workers because no such workers are available in Australia! How gullible are we? Where are the skilled workers laid off in large numbers in recent years?

Australia does come off as a bumbling nation, with its reported corruption comparable to petty theft against the grand larceny seemingly prevalent in some countries. But, we are a middle power, right? What is our record in backing the USA in its chosen wars? However, we did better in the invasion of Iraq by the Coalition of the Chilling (or was it Willing?)

Thus, the people are generally OK, but what can one say about the ‘takers’ and our rulers?