Politics Super Thread - keep it all in here

[guyofthetiger]

Deep breath

I am voting Labour for the 1st time today in 27 years of voting

Why does it feel like I've just come out of the closet

Err does that mean you voted for Jo in the '88 election Happy?

It was my first vote that October, before heading off to the Livid Festival.

TISM announced the end of Jo to a very happy crowd…

 

[happy_tiger]

Deep breath

I am voting Labour for the 1st time today in 27 years of voting

Why does it feel like I've just come out of the closet

Err does that mean you voted for Jo in the '88 election Happy?

It was my first vote that October, before heading off to the Livid Festival.

TISM announced the end of Jo to a very happy crowd…

Think I voted for an independent , long bloody time ago

 

[guyofthetiger]

Hard to tell with Bishop. She has manufactured a competent image in her current role. But she always seemed to have a petty, nasty underbelly, not too dissimilar to Abbott really. And who knows what she believes policy-wise.

On the other hand, the inventor of the Internet has lost a lot of credibility, limply backing Abbott's lies. Many labour voters might have swung his way months ago, but perhaps not as many now.

If Labour had to go because it lost credibility, when it had at least managed numerous significant policy and legislative achievements, then this bunch of halfwits, who don't look like ever doing anything positive for the country, definitely need to be moved on - the lot of them.

Have you checked out our countries debt?

When I read comments like yours ( you have your opinions and you are entitled to them and I respect that ) my head feels like it is going to explode.

Labour was kicked out big time for a reason and nothing seems to have changed with them. No return for the foreseeable future unless you want to end up like Greece.

Debt's always something that needs to be kept in check, to be sure, but this country's debt is one of the lowest of the OECDs, in the wake of the GFC, and has been lauded worldwide as exemplary, as was Labour's management of the GFC. Labour just couldn't sell their successes and let the Murdoch mantra dominate the headlines.

If we're to be worried about debt, it's how we'll fare with debt in the future given the mining boom coming to an end. That would require investment in the future: education, R & D, supportable emerging industries such as the renewable energy industry. The LNP have proven themselves completely incapable of this, and the recent budget was the perfect embodiment of that complete lack of vision.

 

[magpiecol]

Hard to tell with Bishop. She has manufactured a competent image in her current role. But she always seemed to have a petty, nasty underbelly, not too dissimilar to Abbott really. And who knows what she believes policy-wise.

On the other hand, the inventor of the Internet has lost a lot of credibility, limply backing Abbott's lies. Many labour voters might have swung his way months ago, but perhaps not as many now.

If Labour had to go because it lost credibility, when it had at least managed numerous significant policy and legislative achievements, then this bunch of halfwits, who don't look like ever doing anything positive for the country, definitely need to be moved on - the lot of them.

Have you checked out our countries debt?

When I read comments like yours ( you have your opinions and you are entitled to them and I respect that ) my head feels like it is going to explode.

Labour was kicked out big time for a reason and nothing seems to have changed with them. No return for the foreseeable future unless you want to end up like Greece.

Debt's always something that needs to be kept in check, to be sure, but this country's debt is one of the lowest of the OECDs, in the wake of the GFC, and has been lauded worldwide as exemplary, as was Labour's management of the GFC. Labour just couldn't sell their successes and let the Murdoch mantra dominate the headlines.

If we're to be worried about debt, it's how we'll fare with debt in the future given the mining boom coming to an end. That would require investment in the future: education, R & D, supportable emerging industries such as the renewable energy industry. The LNP have proven themselves completely incapable of this, and the recent budget was the perfect embodiment of that complete lack of vision.

Investment in the future? With what may I ask? We are broke.

That means that we have no money. The welfare mentality is alive and well.

 

[westTAHger]

I don't what is worse at the moment.
The Government or the self imploding of the NSW Police hiearchy.

 

[AmericanHistoryX]

can it get any worse?

 

[guyofthetiger]

Hard to tell with Bishop. She has manufactured a competent image in her current role. But she always seemed to have a petty, nasty underbelly, not too dissimilar to Abbott really. And who knows what she believes policy-wise.

On the other hand, the inventor of the Internet has lost a lot of credibility, limply backing Abbott's lies. Many labour voters might have swung his way months ago, but perhaps not as many now.

If Labour had to go because it lost credibility, when it had at least managed numerous significant policy and legislative achievements, then this bunch of halfwits, who don't look like ever doing anything positive for the country, definitely need to be moved on - the lot of them.

Have you checked out our countries debt?

When I read comments like yours ( you have your opinions and you are entitled to them and I respect that ) my head feels like it is going to explode.

Labour was kicked out big time for a reason and nothing seems to have changed with them. No return for the foreseeable future unless you want to end up like Greece.

Debt's always something that needs to be kept in check, to be sure, but this country's debt is one of the lowest of the OECDs, in the wake of the GFC, and has been lauded worldwide as exemplary, as was Labour's management of the GFC. Labour just couldn't sell their successes and let the Murdoch mantra dominate the headlines.

If we're to be worried about debt, it's how we'll fare with debt in the future given the mining boom coming to an end. That would require investment in the future: education, R & D, supportable emerging industries such as the renewable energy industry. The LNP have proven themselves completely incapable of this, and the recent budget was the perfect embodiment of that complete lack of vision.

Investment in the future? With what may I ask? We are broke.

That means that we have no money. The welfare mentality is alive and well.

We're now facing what happens when you don't invest in emerging industries.
We missed the IT boom. We missed the biotech boom.
Abbott has all but destroyed the renewable energies industry in a mere 12 months.
Howard/Costello started stripping investment in R & D years back.
Sure it meant they saved cash but they were banking on the mining boom alone.
No thought for the future at all.
Both governments have stripped education.
And next the housing market will cool significantly and then we'll be in big trouble.
We have not been a very smart country.
And you're right, the welfare mentality just makes it worse, with the massive shift to middle class welfare, and pouring millions into the pockets of the wealthiest, through rorts like the diesel fuel excise, where taxpayers foot $850 per dumpster of coal etc etc
Meanwhile we have no infrastructure (we can't even get a train between Sydney and Melbourne) and attempts at creating platforms for the future like the NBN get kneecapped by halfwits who think their Communications Minister invented the internet; who have no more vision for the future than when we rode the sheep's back, contrary to nations like South Korea who see such platforms as central to future innovation.
Something tells me our luck may be running out. Just look at how many kids do maths/science these days. They'd much rather be on My Kitchen Rules crying about their infantile dreams.

 

[AmericanHistoryX]

kids in a playhouse

 

[mremedy]

Hard to tell with Bishop. She has manufactured a competent image in her current role. But she always seemed to have a petty, nasty underbelly, not too dissimilar to Abbott really. And who knows what she believes policy-wise.

On the other hand, the inventor of the Internet has lost a lot of credibility, limply backing Abbott's lies. Many labour voters might have swung his way months ago, but perhaps not as many now.

If Labour had to go because it lost credibility, when it had at least managed numerous significant policy and legislative achievements, then this bunch of halfwits, who don't look like ever doing anything positive for the country, definitely need to be moved on - the lot of them.

Have you checked out our countries debt?

When I read comments like yours ( you have your opinions and you are entitled to them and I respect that ) my head feels like it is going to explode.

Labour was kicked out big time for a reason and nothing seems to have changed with them. No return for the foreseeable future unless you want to end up like Greece.

Alan Jones returned from leave has he Col? This government has lurched from crisis to crisis. Attacked healthcare, education and the ABC after promising not to (remember, this was the guy who promised transparency and harped to the masses about the lies that the Gillard government rolled out in regard to the carbon tax,) **instituted corporate welfare by scrapping the mining and carbon taxes** and then expects low and middle class Australia to make up the deficit. He is an embarrassment as a leader and he and his party lack any vision to dream up effective policy, and are too gutless to stand by their policies that are on the nose with the electorate.

If you seriously think this government has done anything other than redistribute wealth to the corporate world at the expense of the average taxpayer and the institutions (i.e. public healthcare and regulated higher education,) that make this country what it is, to paraphrase yourself, you're dipping into the kool-aid.

Cultured Bogan, I'm interested to know what you define as welfare? I have a soft definition of welfare as a transfer payment from productive to non-productive pursuits. In your statement above you seem to define welfare as a reduction in tax. Does this mean that any government that reduces taxes is instituting welfare?

Your post also seems to indicate that you are in favour of welfare to individuals but not in favour to welfare to corporations. Why is that?

 

[AmericanHistoryX]

cause the corporations are taking from us

 

[Saturnalia]


 

[AmericanHistoryX]

its got a bit of Charlie Hebdo in it - satire
lest we forget

 

[goldcoast_tiger]

Hard to tell with Bishop. She has manufactured a competent image in her current role. But she always seemed to have a petty, nasty underbelly, not too dissimilar to Abbott really. And who knows what she believes policy-wise.

On the other hand, the inventor of the Internet has lost a lot of credibility, limply backing Abbott's lies. Many labour voters might have swung his way months ago, but perhaps not as many now.

If Labour had to go because it lost credibility, when it had at least managed numerous significant policy and legislative achievements, then this bunch of halfwits, who don't look like ever doing anything positive for the country, definitely need to be moved on - the lot of them.

Have you checked out our countries debt?

When I read comments like yours ( you have your opinions and you are entitled to them and I respect that ) my head feels like it is going to explode.

Labour was kicked out big time for a reason and nothing seems to have changed with them. No return for the foreseeable future unless you want to end up like Greece.

Alan Jones returned from leave has he Col? This government has lurched from crisis to crisis. Attacked healthcare, education and the ABC after promising not to (remember, this was the guy who promised transparency and harped to the masses about the lies that the Gillard government rolled out in regard to the carbon tax,) **instituted corporate welfare by scrapping the mining and carbon taxes** and then expects low and middle class Australia to make up the deficit. He is an embarrassment as a leader and he and his party lack any vision to dream up effective policy, and are too gutless to stand by their policies that are on the nose with the electorate.

If you seriously think this government has done anything other than redistribute wealth to the corporate world at the expense of the average taxpayer and the institutions (i.e. public healthcare and regulated higher education,) that make this country what it is, to paraphrase yourself, you're dipping into the kool-aid.

Cultured Bogan, I'm interested to know what you define as welfare? I have a soft definition of welfare as a transfer payment from productive to non-productive pursuits. In your statement above you seem to define welfare as a reduction in tax. Does this mean that any government that reduces taxes is instituting welfare?

As it has been common knowledge for years , ( and now even the Lnp govt doesn't deny it any more), that most big companies do NOT pay their fair share ot Taxin australia. So yes any more tax cuts that those companies receive is Corporate welfare .

This govt will seldom pursue those corporate entities ,yet they will spare no expense to hound anyPAYG taxpayer , who they think Has understated their income.
I wonder how much better off the country would be if the government really did have a blitz on their Corporate sponsors.
Abbott is keen to delve into a Royal Commission into Unions. Why won't he have a Royal Commission into Corporate Tax Evasion as well. I wonder…..

Your post also seems to indicate that you are in favour of welfare to individuals but not in favour to welfare to corporations. Why is that?

 

[guyofthetiger]

Hard to tell with Bishop. She has manufactured a competent image in her current role. But she always seemed to have a petty, nasty underbelly, not too dissimilar to Abbott really. And who knows what she believes policy-wise.

On the other hand, the inventor of the Internet has lost a lot of credibility, limply backing Abbott's lies. Many labour voters might have swung his way months ago, but perhaps not as many now.

If Labour had to go because it lost credibility, when it had at least managed numerous significant policy and legislative achievements, then this bunch of halfwits, who don't look like ever doing anything positive for the country, definitely need to be moved on - the lot of them.

Have you checked out our countries debt?

When I read comments like yours ( you have your opinions and you are entitled to them and I respect that ) my head feels like it is going to explode.

Labour was kicked out big time for a reason and nothing seems to have changed with them. No return for the foreseeable future unless you want to end up like Greece.

Alan Jones returned from leave has he Col? This government has lurched from crisis to crisis. Attacked healthcare, education and the ABC after promising not to (remember, this was the guy who promised transparency and harped to the masses about the lies that the Gillard government rolled out in regard to the carbon tax,) **instituted corporate welfare by scrapping the mining and carbon taxes** and then expects low and middle class Australia to make up the deficit. He is an embarrassment as a leader and he and his party lack any vision to dream up effective policy, and are too gutless to stand by their policies that are on the nose with the electorate.

If you seriously think this government has done anything other than redistribute wealth to the corporate world at the expense of the average taxpayer and the institutions (i.e. public healthcare and regulated higher education,) that make this country what it is, to paraphrase yourself, you're dipping into the kool-aid.

Cultured Bogan, I'm interested to know what you define as welfare? I have a soft definition of welfare as a transfer payment from productive to non-productive pursuits. In your statement above you seem to define welfare as a reduction in tax. Does this mean that any government that reduces taxes is instituting welfare?

Your post also seems to indicate that you are in favour of welfare to individuals but not in favour to welfare to corporations. Why is that?

A good question…

One is an object of the state - or the globe in the case of multinationals - while individuals are subjects of the state,.

As such, individuals benefit from the social contract implicit to citizenship. In exchange for foregoing certain freedoms (e.g., murder, theft etc), they receive protections from the state, such as a welfare safety net in the case of social democratic nations like ours.

This safety net may justify welfare to corporations where it protects citizens from hardships deemed unacceptable by general consensus, such as homelessness or unemployment (e.g., financial support to motor industry, or farmers facing drought). On this basis, it does not justify fuel subsidies to mining magnates, adding to their megaprofits, for which they pay minimal tax, as much as they might threaten to take their business elsewhere (unlikely because of the protections they receive from the state here compared to developing nations).

Neoliberal free market ideology has attempted to convince the planet that corporations are also subjects, deserving of the same rights as citizens, as if they are capable of self regulation (e.g., empathy, having a moral compass, and being capable of putting ethics and community welfare before profits), while also demanding less rules and regulations to govern their behaviour.

They like to decry the nanny state, as they attempt to undermine the social contract, and citizens' protections.

Social democratic states recognise limits to the free market, such that government regulations are required to embody the self regulation corporations are generally not capable of.

Australia, as with most US allies, is at a crossroads in terms of holding on to this latter form of democracy that protects citizens from the type of corporate sociopaths that have run riot this past 30 years, culminating in the GFC.

Corporations are not people and have even less ties and obligations to the local community, apart from financial need, so why should they be even less regulated than the general population?

Might as well let coal barons do whatever they please to the barrier reef.

Oh yeah right we did that already.

 

[Cultured_Bogan]

Hard to tell with Bishop. She has manufactured a competent image in her current role. But she always seemed to have a petty, nasty underbelly, not too dissimilar to Abbott really. And who knows what she believes policy-wise.

On the other hand, the inventor of the Internet has lost a lot of credibility, limply backing Abbott's lies. Many labour voters might have swung his way months ago, but perhaps not as many now.

If Labour had to go because it lost credibility, when it had at least managed numerous significant policy and legislative achievements, then this bunch of halfwits, who don't look like ever doing anything positive for the country, definitely need to be moved on - the lot of them.

Have you checked out our countries debt?

When I read comments like yours ( you have your opinions and you are entitled to them and I respect that ) my head feels like it is going to explode.

Labour was kicked out big time for a reason and nothing seems to have changed with them. No return for the foreseeable future unless you want to end up like Greece.

Alan Jones returned from leave has he Col? This government has lurched from crisis to crisis. Attacked healthcare, education and the ABC after promising not to (remember, this was the guy who promised transparency and harped to the masses about the lies that the Gillard government rolled out in regard to the carbon tax,) **instituted corporate welfare by scrapping the mining and carbon taxes** and then expects low and middle class Australia to make up the deficit. He is an embarrassment as a leader and he and his party lack any vision to dream up effective policy, and are too gutless to stand by their policies that are on the nose with the electorate.

If you seriously think this government has done anything other than redistribute wealth to the corporate world at the expense of the average taxpayer and the institutions (i.e. public healthcare and regulated higher education,) that make this country what it is, to paraphrase yourself, you're dipping into the kool-aid.

Cultured Bogan, I'm interested to know what you define as welfare? I have a soft definition of welfare as a transfer payment from productive to non-productive pursuits. In your statement above you seem to define welfare as a reduction in tax. **Does this mean that any government that reduces taxes is instituting welfare?**

Your post also seems to indicate that you are in favour of welfare to individuals but not in favour to welfare to corporations. Why is that?

No of course it isn't. It is not welfare in the literal sense, Gina and Clive get their tax relieved on non-renewable resources they pull out of the ground and the government comes looking for lower and middle class Australia to foot the bill. IIRC they already get breaks on diesel fuel. How much more relief do they need? Last I checked they were doing just fine.

The context I use it in is that corporate Australia get looked after by the LNP while the bloke who is struggling to keep a roof over his families head is asked to put his hand in his pocket.

I have a huge issue with "corporate welfare," largely because of the selectiveness and hypocrisy of it. The car industry in this country extracted millions out of the Australian government before eventually decided to shut up shop and most of the jobs were lost anyway. How many hundreds of small businesses could those millions have propped up? Why don't the mum and dad businesses that go to the wall get the same support as Holden or Toyota?

 

[mremedy]

Cultured Bogan I have another question for you regarding corporate welfare.

Let's say a company conducts an analysis of a project and finds that the project has a risk adjusted loss of $10 million. All things being equal, based on those numbers the project is rejected. However, what if this venture was going to employ 20 000 people directly and indirectly provide jobs for another 80 000 in associated industries.

Should the Government provide a $10 million subsidy, an act of corporate welfare?

 

[Tiger_Watto]

I hate paying Tax!

Carry on…

 

[LCA]

Hard to tell with Bishop. She has manufactured a competent image in her current role. But she always seemed to have a petty, nasty underbelly, not too dissimilar to Abbott really. And who knows what she believes policy-wise.

On the other hand, the inventor of the Internet has lost a lot of credibility, limply backing Abbott's lies. Many labour voters might have swung his way months ago, but perhaps not as many now.

If Labour had to go because it lost credibility, when it had at least managed numerous significant policy and legislative achievements, then this bunch of halfwits, who don't look like ever doing anything positive for the country, definitely need to be moved on - the lot of them.

Have you checked out our countries debt?

When I read comments like yours ( you have your opinions and you are entitled to them and I respect that ) my head feels like it is going to explode.

Labour was kicked out big time for a reason and nothing seems to have changed with them. No return for the foreseeable future unless you want to end up like Greece.

Debt's always something that needs to be kept in check, to be sure, but this country's debt is one of the lowest of the OECDs, in the wake of the GFC, and has been lauded worldwide as exemplary, as was Labour's management of the GFC. Labour just couldn't sell their successes and let the Murdoch mantra dominate the headlines.

If we're to be worried about debt, it's how we'll fare with debt in the future given the mining boom coming to an end. That would require investment in the future: education, R & D, supportable emerging industries such as the renewable energy industry. The LNP have proven themselves completely incapable of this, and the recent budget was the perfect embodiment of that complete lack of vision.

Investment in the future? With what may I ask? We are broke.

That means that we have no money. The welfare mentality is alive and well.

Magpie Col, another brilliant piece of ignorant, populist rubbish. At the last count, we are the third most affluent nation per capita on the planet. We are not broke. It's the navel gazing of folk like you that pine for a great return to the dark ages of privilege over compassion that will ruin the whole fabric of our nation. Get on a (hopefully leaky) boat and head to New Zealand if you're not happy here.

 

[Tim Sheens]

Quite happy to pay tax, the more the merrier. If I am paying plenty, it means I have plenty more left In my pockets/portfolio.

 

[happy_tiger]

I hate paying Tax!

Carry on…

I hate paying for anything