KhunHeineken

I hope you don't spend money on upgrades and a HDD and a few weeks later the screen or mobo dies. You would have wasted money that could have been put towards a new device or even a decent secondhand one. You are putting that device on life support. How long do you expect it to live?

When in doubt, delete. Then, delete from your deleted folder as well. If they persist, put it in your blocked list.

I know you are after an AIO, but with laptops now having 17 inch and 19 inch screens, with everything you need onboard, and can run off a battery for even more portability, they are possibly more AIO than an actual AIO these days.

Bumped for the benefit of an OP on another thread.

You can set up a VPN to your router, but I suggested a set of these to another member recently. They work great, and are plug and play straight out of the box. https://www.homingsystems.com I won't go into all the tech side of them and answer questions again. I'll just bump the other thread and you can read about them there.

Strange you both didn't lose access at the same time. Have you updated the app on your phone / device? Maybe try uninstalling and reinstalling the app, or, maybe even installing a previous version of the app. Have you paid the bill? (you mentioned you are in the UK) Are you streaming the cameras all day/night on a monitor in the UK, if so, that could be a lot of TB's a month, and may breach TRUE's fair use policy, if they have one. TRUE may have changed your static IP Address. This happened to me once and I hit the roof with the ISP. No warning given of the change, I lost contact with everything. If no one is living in your home when you are away, get your neighbor to flick the main switch to your house, wait a couple of minutes, and then turn it back on. This will reset your whole network, including your NVR / DVR, if you haven't connected it to a UPS.

No, just the facts.

No, I don't know, that's why I am asking for a credible link. ozfarang seemed to suggest the information about this could be obtained, you are saying it doesn't exits. You are suggesting it's "office policy" but how can someone low down on the managerial ladder in a Centrelink office override the data base that knows you are overseas during the qualifying period? Should one be cut off and their qualifying period put back to Day 1, is there an appeal mechanism? Serious questions. Queue all the trolls and personal attacks for dare asking for some details.

Incorrect. There was a debate at the time. Comments such as, "but I don't earn a pension" and "It's not earnings" and "I didn't work for it so it's not income." Scroll back and have a look. Links were then supplied by me, and others, that the government deems a pension to be an "income" which was followed by trolling and personal attacks against me because the reality started to hit home that pensions, therefore pensioners living overseas, may not be a protected species in the future, and their fear of change, particularly in relation to money / tax caused them to shoot the messenger. I have outlined this in the past. Rather than discussing solutions, strategies, tax minimization etc for the benefit of all members, many thought if they just personally attack me, they won't have to worry about the information being posted because of the herd mentality. It was funny. He didn't give an answer. He put it forward as information and I am seeking confirmation on that information by way of a credible link. It's not uncommon to ask for a link. You will find such requests across the whole website. I never said he was lying. No, I don't have a link, why do you think I am asking for it? Another member said the information was there and easy to find. I looked for myself and posted links to what I had found, and quoted relevant parts, There was no mention that it was fine to travel overseas during the qualifying period. You seem so confident on the accuracy of his post, how about you post a link or two? It's actually you, and some others, that post nothing but troll and personal attacks against me, and it usually happens when I do back up my comments with a link, and it's members like you that ruin the information flow for others with post after post of not addressing the link I have posted that backs up my posts. :Like I said, I have never reported any post from anyone, ever, but it's you and others that need to knock it off, or post a link/s that disprove what I have posted. For people with strong personal attacks, that should be easy, shouldn't it?

I encourage you to take it a step further and put me on your ignore list. That way, you won't get upset, and it lessens the trolling and personal attacks against me, which are just a waste of time.

Did you see the word "coincidentally?" There was a debate about whether a pension was an "income" and therefore taxable at non resident rates, if / when the proposed changes came in. That was just another link confirming a pension is deemed an income. Hopefully scorecard, or any other member, can provide a link confirming the information he posted. It's very important, because no one would want their 2 years to start again because they went on a 1 month holiday to Thailand during their qualifying period.

Do you have link showing the length of time and frequency one is allowed to travel overseas during their 2 year qualifying period? No, well no surprise there.

Not exactly the lifestyle I would expect of someone who was in the highest tax bracket for 40 years, but that's not my business. I was under the impression you could easily afford to return to Australia to do the 2 years and qualify, but you just didn't want to.

scorecard's the forum's Centrelink expert. I thought he may have a link on hand to confirm to members his information. Anyway, I had a quick look and found this. https://www.servicesaustralia.gov.au/travel-outside-australia-rules-for-age-pension?context=22526 "Your payment may stop if all of the following apply. You: come back to Australia to live start getting Age Pension after you return travel outside Australia during the next 2 years after you returned. Your payment may be able to continue if you travel to a country we have a social security agreement with." Thailand was not on the list Australia has an agreement with. Also found this information on a Super website. https://www.ngssuper.com.au/articles/news/age-pension-travelling-overseas "First, you need to apply for the age pension when you’re living in Australia — not while overseas. Once you start receiving the age pension, you normally need to stay in Australia for at least 2 years before you can go overseas — otherwise, your pension payments may stop while you’re travelling. It’s best to confirm your conditions with Services Australia before you make any plans." I was just after a link confirming you could travel overseas during the 2 year period, as scorecard claims, and for how long, or how many times, without it effecting anything. Coincidentally, that Super site also confirmed this, which is related to the proposed changes to non resident tax. Is the age pension taxable? Yes — the age pension is counted as taxable income. You can ask Services Australia to deduct tax from your payment so you don’t need to pay it when you lodge your tax return.

Do you have a link for this?

What are you living on now, and I don't mean the dollar figure? I don't disagree with you. By the time you buy / rent a place, furnish it, and then contend with the high cost of living, you would want to hope you live a long life to get back what you put in to the 2 year prison sentence. I know a guy that did his 2 year sentence with his Thai wife in a mobile home, traveling around Australia. When the 2 years were up, he sold the vehicle and went straight back to Thailand.

The member stated there would be no transportation of nuclear material in the construction of the subs. If that were to be true, and the nuclear material wasn't coming to the sub, then the sub had to go to the nuclear material. Perhaps they could have surface towed it, or fitted a diesel engine that would be stripped out at the destination. I suppose they could have also bolted a mast on it and sailed it to the nuclear power plant for installation. The member later recanted.

Does it really matter what the nuclear material will be used for? Would the exposed people care? I have already given a recent example in Australia. Imagine if a kid found that missing capsule and took it to school to show his mate. Google will show you many other accidents from around the world, include train accidents that were transporting nuclear material. As for nuclear subs themselves, their record is not so great, either. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-09-17/nuclear-submarines-prompt-environmental-and-conflict-concern/100470362

There have been some accidents whilst transporting nuclear material over the years, but It's not just the transport and construction that is an issue. The port in Perth, where these subs will be based on rotation, will have a very big target on it if / when we go to war, and I would think bombing a nuclear sub whilst in port would not be good for all living things in the area, should the reactor come apart.

Let's hope none of that nuclear stuff falls off the back of a truck on the way to ship building yard.

So the nuclear reactor, built elsewhere, has to be transported to Adelaide for installation. How does a nuclear reactor work without any nuclear material? How's the nuclear material going to get onboard the sub during the build if it will not be transported to where they are building the sub?

A funny clip, but the stats are real. Granted it's back in 2017, but I would think the numbers to be even worse now. Here's an article with the numbers. https://www.news.com.au/finance/work/at-work/government-denies-suburb-shaming-in-revealing-welfare-cheat-hot-spots/news-story/a2ca94271c0c75d43dd63ef0645b8673 "Queensland’s Caboolture had the highest concentration of people with five or more failures, 387. " These numbers are on top of guys like in the clip in a previous post, who is on a disability pension, so, add guys like him in and the Caboolture figure would look worse. Here's some stats on Caboolture. Granted, the stats are a little old, but around the same time as the clip. https://www.abs.gov.au/census/find-census-data/quickstats/2016/31302 Scroll down to the Employment area of the page. Remember, you only have to work 1 hour a week to be deemed as employed. You can cast your eyes to the right side of the page to see the stats for Australia. As I said, where this post, and the previous, are very much on topic is because these people are being allowed to take money away from genuine recipients and are robbing tax payers.

I have said many are abusing Australia's generous welfare system. I posted the dollars, and it's not a pretty picture. This guys seems to be doing quite well. I post this as an example of an abuser, not because of the drug testing, which would be a separate debate. Is the above clip enough data for you to see the point I am making? I rarely agreed with Scott Morrison, but this comment was spot on, "Welfare has to be fair to those who receive it, but it also has to be fair for those that pay for it." In my opinion, tax payers are not getting a fair deal with the current welfare system and the abuse of it. Look at the money and rent assistance he was getting in 2020, he would be getting even more now. Sadly, it's the people like him that see genuine people, like the other guy in the clip, receive less, or nothing at all. There are so many like this guy it has become a drag on the economy. How long would he last in Thailand, for example?

Your post went into things like tax incentives, covid, and voting at elections. Totally way off the point I am making. I did post data. Did you open the link? The height of the blue columns stood out as soon as you look at the graph. It shows Australia's expenditure by function was $170 billion on social security and welfare, and everything else to run the country totals around $300 billion in 2018 - 2019, which was pre covid, for accuracy. That's a welfare bill of around 36% of total expenditure. Is this enough data for you? Are you saying my calculations are incorrect? If so, show me where. Is the website wrong? It's an Australian government website. As I said in other posts, I am not suggesting Australia should become a country of zero to little welfare. I am saying Australia's generous welfare system is being abused, and has become a drag on the economy. Same question to you also, keeping the above data in mind, do you agree or disagree with this comment? You either missed the part about the single month getting a house, and a pension, and then the boyfriend, who is on the dole, moves in, or, you chose to ignore it. They have a tribe of kids because, hey, the more kids you have the more money and the bigger house you get. Then, nature v nurture kicks in and the kids, who have never seen mum or dad work, ever, will grow up to be the same. As for the boyfriend, he does a bit of crime, sells a bit of drugs etc. A great supplement to his welfare. It can sometimes lead to a short stint in gaol, but that is viewed as an occupational hazard and no more than that. Once again, you focus more on the genuine cases where I am focusing on the abusers. I have addressed taxing the big companies. Should they pay tax, of course, but there is a risk they pack up and leave. I have no doubt the ATO will go after easier targets. Again, for the record, you paint a picture of the majority of welfare recipients being genuine. I would contest that in 2023, that is no longer the case. Able body people are playing the system in greater numbers.

Obviously, being disabled is a genuine reason for not working. I am not suggesting Australia should become a country that has zero or very little welfare, like Thailand. I am simply stating it appears Australia's generous welfare system is being abused, and over decades, has now become a big drag on the economy. Do you agree or disagree with this comment? As for the largest 300 companies paying tax, they hold the government to ransom by basically saying, "If you tax us, we will move our operation to another country." The government know that whilst the company isn't paying tax, the company's employees are, so to call their bluff could mean a loss, not gain. We saw something similar with manufacturing. As wages rose, factories moved to countries like China. Like wages, tax is just another cost. Raise it, and the company could leave.