Politics Super Thread - keep it all in here

Status
Not open for further replies.
@Kaiser said:
[Abbott should be saying he wants work choices (HE DOES!)
Gillard should be saying she wants to tax the crap out of the minners… (SHE DOES)

Then we will have a vote on REAL policy cub... until then, it's all BS.

With that... if Abbott gets in... I'm moving to New Zealand...

This election is dull at the moment. Both sides are floundering. There are a couple of policies on average being put out daily at the moment but most of them are so inoquous and boring that half of them arent even being reported. Time to lay your cards on the table!!

BTW Kaiser I said the same thing about Rudd. Never happened…...
 
@stryker said:
@citizen cub said:
4.Reckless Spending, they've turned a 20 billion dollar surplus into an 80 billion dollar deficit and are still borrowing millions everyday, future generations will have to pay off all this debt.

$100 000 000 per day to be exact.

They are far too reckless with our money.

I wouldn't say they have been reckless.

Sure they have handed out a lot of money, but when you look at it, the hand outs prevented recession and it created/maintained jobs at a difficult time, the Govt managed to keep the economy flowing because of these handouts, without them, businesses would of gone broke and there would be a lot more unemployed people right now.

Also, with the Govt helping first home buyers, that is helping the future. Most people know that one of the best forms of investment is through property. With an aging population, and more strain being placed on the pension, property investment becomes an effective form of superannuation. With property, the earlier you invest, the better off you are in the long run. With people being less reliant on the pension, more money can be spent elsewhere.

The Howard Govt also wasn't faced with a Global financial crisis, in fact the last 2 Global recessions have been when Labor was in power which obviously gives some people (Im not saying its you guys) the ammo to say Labor can't handle the economy and they always put us into debt. Its very difficult to maintain surplus and keep unemployment down in a recession.
The Howard Govt wasn't faced with these issues, add to that they introduced GST which helped bring them to surplus but at the same time it effectively put prices on everything up, and therefore the price of living went up.
Also by introducing tax cuts towards the end of their term, that caused an increase in inflation which caused interest rates to rise when the Labor Govt first came into power.

The main reason why I will go with Gillard is I dont see any policy at all from Liberal. All Liberal seem intent on is blocking Labor policies and then throwing it back at them by saying they haven't introduced anything.
 
So, what are the main points in this election?

Immigration
Climate change
Industrial relations
The economy/cost of living

Weren't these the topics of the last several elections? And neither party in power did anything about them?

They're both as bad as each other. As a first time voter this election, I feel ripped off.
 
@Kaiser said:
The National Broadband network is a massive job and MUST have… Howard sat on his hands and did NOTHING to improve the telecommunications network in Australia and this is why we find outselves in this situation... instead of investing in such things like this Howard dished out tax breaks to the mindless Australian to win votes...

Would you be surprised to find out that Wollongong cannot supply everyone with ADSL2+... IN FACT count yourself lucky if you manage to get it. Wollongong is one of the largest cities in Australia...

Our Internet speeds and network is terrible compared with the rest of the world...

An improved telecommunications network is a lot more than faster Internet speeds too, i wouldn't be so naive and perhaps do a little research instead of listening to the old hacks on am radio.

Kaiser - I can guarantee to you that the Howard government didn't sit on their hands with this. They costed and threw around numerous options, it's just that they couldn't get the figures to stack up to decent business case and threw out numerous tenders to try to get private investment (same reason why private business didn't invest either..)

It's far from a must have. Don't you think with the pace of wireless technology that the technology will soon be matched, or at least close? (just look at the trials in Perth - funded by private business). Don't you think wireless tech will be more cost effective to implement and upgrade with our remote landscape?

Yes, there are benefits. I liked one on the 7:30 report for a remote video connection into rural health. They had a labor crony complaining on there they had maxed out their bandwidth and they desperately needed the NBN. But you should have seen the resolution on this thing!! No wonder they maxed it out… $40 billion is not worth building something that simply allows for more pixels.

It will come in time, that's what had the Liberals waiting. $40 billion is a waste to throw into a quick depreciating asset with a weak business case and little net economic gains.

Unless you can give us just 1 good example of how the benefits outweigh the costs?
 
@Jazza said:
I wouldn't say they have been reckless.

The Howard Govt also wasn't faced with a Global financial crisis,.

Hey Jazza,

1) The recklessness that everyone refers too, isn't around that we needed stimulus. It's the mismanagement of it that saw a lot of dodgy builders and contractors get VERY rich off our backs. Not to mention the people it killed.

2). I think the Asian Financial Crisis partially qualifies.
 
@Jazza said:
The main reason why I will go with Gillard is I dont see any policy at all from Liberal. All Liberal seem intent on is blocking Labor policies and then throwing it back at them by saying they haven't introduced anything.

Oh… and here is a page detailing the numerous policies. But I'm sure you might just see it as blank..

Happy reading.

http://www.liberal.org.au/Latest-News.aspx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
 
@alien said:
With the federal election coming up Beau Ryan should do Beau Knows Politics. That would be interesting. :slight_smile:

It is almost a good thing, I am sure he will do a Beau Knows Politics…
 
@Yossarian said:
@stryker said:
I wonder who the Labor party leaker is?….gotta be kevy-o-sevy doesnt it?

If I was betting I'd say Lindsay Tanner.

Really? yeah I suppose I could see that….Geeze they'd wanna find whoever it is and knock them over the head quick smart, they're doing Abbotts job for him.

Just on Rudd, I still think he has a role to play in the outcome of this election...He still refuses to call Gillard by name and we all know how domineering, egotistical and controlling he was. He seems the type to get square.
 
@stryker said:
@Yossarian said:
@stryker said:
I wonder who the Labor party leaker is?….gotta be kevy-o-sevy doesnt it?

If I was betting I'd say Lindsay Tanner.

Really? yeah I suppose I could see that….Geeze they'd wanna find whoever it is and knock them over the head quick smart, they're doing Abbotts job for him.

Just on Rudd, I still think he has a role to play in the outcome of this election...He still refuses to call Gillard by name and we all know how domineering, egotistical and controlling he was. He seems the type to get square.

Tanner seemed a bit disillusioned about the whole leadership change thing and maybe as a Vic lefty he thinks Gillard sold out. Who knows? I'm sure Oakes will out the leaker when it suits him.

As for Rudd it's really only of interest to the journos and political junkies. Joe Blogs couldn't care about it anymore than they'd care about Turnbull's opinion on Abbott.
 
im over this election! Most important thing happening on the weekend of August 21/22 is the Eels v Tigers at Slippery Park!

For the record…...........Labour will get in again but not on my vote.
 
@citizen cub said:
Abbot. I don't find him particularly appealing as a leader, however I take the view that it's about the policies not the leader. When you look back at Labor's track record in their first term, it would seem very difficult to give them a second chance;

1.Failed home insulation scheme: 1 billion dollars, claimed 9 lives, 250,000 homes wrongly insulated

2.National Broadband Network. 22 Billion to provide faster broadband access, and wireless nation wide, most of us have fast internet access (especially in the big cities) anyway, what's the point? It will just put us in more debt.

3\. K.Rudd's pacific solution. Something like 150 boats in a year for the last 3 years, most of whom aren't genuine refugees and are illegal immigrants? Then Gillard jumps into this East Timor Solution, the East Timorese government don't even want a processing centre, why doesn't she pick up the phone and ring the Naaru Government who are more than happy to re-open the processing centre that was once there?

4.Reckless Spending, they've turned a 20 billion dollar surplus into an 80 billion dollar deficit and are still borrowing millions everyday, future generations will have to pay off all this debt.

5.Carbon tax. all it's designed for is to set up some sort of alliance with the Greens who will then hand over their preferences to them. plus, electricity prices will go up.

6\. Infrastructure. The government had this big plan to have a big Australia, yet we don't have the sufficient hospitals, housing etc. to accomodate all these people. Nor has Sydney received any funding.

As much as people bag Howard, he kept the economy in a stable condition and only let something like 3 boats of asylum seekers a year. Population growth was only at something like 1.4% a year compared to Labors 2.8%.

If I could vote, I certainly wouldn't be voting Labor

:master: :master: :master: :master: :master: :master: :master: :master: :master: :master: :master: :master: :master: :master: :master: :master: :master: :master: :master: :master: :master: :master:

:smiley: Citizen Cub gets my Vote….....start your own party and call it: Why Not Vote for Me Party!!!
 
@Yossarian said:
@stryker said:
@Yossarian said:
If I was betting I'd say Lindsay Tanner.

Really? yeah I suppose I could see that….Geeze they'd wanna find whoever it is and knock them over the head quick smart, they're doing Abbotts job for him.

Just on Rudd, I still think he has a role to play in the outcome of this election...He still refuses to call Gillard by name and we all know how domineering, egotistical and controlling he was. He seems the type to get square.

Tanner seemed a bit disillusioned about the whole leadership change thing and maybe as a Vic lefty he thinks Gillard sold out. Who knows? I'm sure Oakes will out the leaker when it suits him.

As for Rudd it's really only of interest to the journos and political junkies. Joe Blogs couldn't care about it anymore than they'd care about Turnbull's opinion on Abbott.

Tanner is probably the best candidate. He's gone after August so it's not like he's got anything to lose by doing it. He was close to Rudd as well.

I reckon the ALP will implode after the election, regardless of whether they win or lose. Everyone will be scurrying to get their place at the trough, especially with the Finance portfolio up for grabs. Federal Labor is becoming to look more like NSW Labor every passing day.

Wonder if the ALP do continue to hold government will Gillard give Ruddy a place in the front bench?
 
I'm not so sure that it'll be that tame Yossarian.

He was turned on by the factions that drove him to power, by the unions who did the same and by the majority of his caucus whom he seemed to believe still had his back at his last press conference the night before.

For the type of leader he was that has got to sting. He has always harboured a desire to be on the UN and I think one last up yours from him before the election is in order. He could ironically be the difference.
 
@Cultured Bogan said:
Tanner is probably the best candidate. He's gone after August so it's not like he's got anything to lose by doing it. He was close to Rudd as well.

I reckon the ALP will implode after the election, regardless of whether they win or lose. Everyone will be scurrying to get their place at the trough, especially with the Finance portfolio up for grabs. Federal Labor is becoming to look more like NSW Labor every passing day.

Wonder if the ALP do continue to hold government will Gillard give Ruddy a place in the front bench?

Federal Labor and NSW state Labor are totally different. NSW Labor is what happens when none of your advisers have ever lived in the real world or have decent qualifications.

Finance could go to Stephen Smith with Rudd taking foreign affairs if he wants it. If not someone like Chris Bowen will get it. There may be some jostling but nothing too major - happens with all parties. Indeed in nearly all places of work if there is a chance for promotion it can get competitive.
 
@stryker said:
I'm not so sure that it'll be that tame Yossarian.

He was turned on by the factions that drove him to power, by the unions who did the same and by the majority of his caucus whom he seemed to believe still had his back at his last press conference the night before.

For the type of leader he was that has got to sting. He has always harboured a desire to be on the UN and I think one last up yours from him before the election is in order. He could ironically be the difference.

He never really had factional backing - it was more Howard circa 1994-1995 when he got the leadership because they ran out of viable alternatives. Rudd had an undeniable case to be leader and everyone fell in line. He never did manage to get a solid support base though.

Personally I think he has some belief he can make a Howard-like comeback and be PM again. I think its unlikely to happen but I think Rudd believes that. He'll take Foreign Affairs after the election and try to achieve some big win on climate change or the like. Then if Gillard cracks he's ready to roll, tell everyone he's learned from his mistakes and ready to lead.
 
@citizen cub said:
4.Reckless Spending, they've turned a 20 billion dollar surplus into an 80 billion dollar deficit and are still borrowing millions everyday, future generations will have to pay off all this debt.

As much as people bag Howard, he kept the economy in a stable condition and only let something like 3 boats of asylum seekers a year. Population growth was only at something like 1.4% a year compared to Labors 2.8%.

If I could vote, I certainly wouldn't be voting Labor

The "reckless" spending has actually been hailed as the best government stimulus package in the world in response to the GFC by the IMF and other economic researchers. The Government is not there to make money, but to provide support when the private sector is unable to do so. The world's financial system almost melted down and lending practically stopped so governments could not stand by and hold onto surpluses. The Howard government should be commended for saving money for the rainy day and the Rudd/Gillard government should be commended for realising that the rainy day had arrived and acted accordingly.

I really have no preference for either party, but this "debt-deficit" argument does my head in as someone who has studied economics and works in the industry. The "borrowing $100m per day" is absolute garbage and and is purely a large number to scare people. The facts are that the Australian economy has an economic value of over $800 trillion. With that in perspective, borrowing $100m per day equates to 0.0001% of Australia's economy. Using a house as an example, if your house is valued at $500,000, it would equate to you borrowing $0.63 per day. Would you be concerned borrowing this amount?
 
@Yossarian said:
@Cultured Bogan said:
Tanner is probably the best candidate. He's gone after August so it's not like he's got anything to lose by doing it. He was close to Rudd as well.

I reckon the ALP will implode after the election, regardless of whether they win or lose. Everyone will be scurrying to get their place at the trough, especially with the Finance portfolio up for grabs. Federal Labor is becoming to look more like NSW Labor every passing day.

Wonder if the ALP do continue to hold government will Gillard give Ruddy a place in the front bench?

Federal Labor and NSW state Labor are totally different. NSW Labor is what happens when none of your advisers have ever lived in the real world or have decent qualifications.

Finance could go to Stephen Smith with Rudd taking foreign affairs if he wants it. If not someone like Chris Bowen will get it. There may be some jostling but nothing too major - happens with all parties. Indeed in nearly all places of work if there is a chance for promotion it can get competitive.

NSW Labor is a boys' club, but you would have to think that the federal arm is starting to parallel the NSW ALP a little as well though. i.e: Iemma/Rees and Rudd knifed in the back and replaced with a personable woman in Gillard and Keneally an attempt to boost their election chances.

Thats just my opinion though.
 
Given the team we all support, I am surprised how many vote differently to what you expect supporters of this team to vote.

We do vote for a party rather than the face of the party or leaders, but given who the differing leaders are whether Howard, Turnbull, Nelson, Abbott or Beazley, Rudd, Gillard, each leader has a different summative policy emphasis.

In every case the predecessor is miles ahead than the current leaders who have no substance.
 
@Gary Bakerloo said:
The "reckless" spending has actually been hailed as the best government stimulus package in the world in response to the GFC by the IMF and other economic researchers. The Government is not there to make money, but to provide support when the private sector is unable to do so. The world's financial system almost melted down and lending practically stopped so governments could not stand by and hold onto surpluses. The Howard government should be commended for saving money for the rainy day and the Rudd/Gillard government should be commended for realising that the rainy day had arrived and acted accordingly.

I really have no preference for either party, but this "debt-deficit" argument does my head in as someone who has studied economics and works in the industry. The "borrowing $100m per day" is absolute garbage and and is purely a large number to scare people. The facts are that the Australian economy has an economic value of over $800 trillion. With that in perspective, borrowing $100m per day equates to 0.0001% of Australia's economy. Using a house as an example, if your house is valued at $500,000, it would equate to you borrowing $0.63 per day. Would you be concerned borrowing this amount?

Gary - you make some very valid points. I agree. I think the stimulus was well structured in terms of flows because it was provided across the country and provided some immediate short term stimulus as well as long dated stimulus. So, for the immediate future, it was economically sound (which is all those reviews factor in)… I have to point out though, there is some responsibility on the IMF reports and others to be upbeat.

Most peoples concerns arose around the waste from the bad implementation, structure and maintenance that the proposals had. Anyone can form some basic ideas into broad policy by talking to the right people, but seeing it though is another thing.

I also tend to think the policy was not forward thinking enough. The long term economic benefits could have been much more profound by directing the policy towards small business, transport, health or innovation. We have been left in a debt situation which hasn't helped take the impact of future budgetary pressures. When it so easily could have done so.

I agree that the figures being banded about are rubbish. Just a dodgy sales technique. Abbott is not doing a good job, the public have forced him into this position by understanding the issues and he is resorting to meaningless dot points that only have an impact on mentalities, with little substance. He is having to resorting to the same spin as Labor, because it has worked with the public. But I think most people should have more confidence in the administration and qualifications of the Liberals than Gillards team.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top