Politics Super Thread - keep it all in here

[Yossarian]

And now we are fronting up about $ 8 billion dollars to the IMF as they are requesting about $600 Billion Don't see the Americans fronting up their 17.5% as has been requested

Why are we fronting up the dosh if others aren't

Can someone explain to Gillard and Swan this isn't a popularity contest :brick:

I didn't give Labor permission to spend my money to bail out the IMF

Because having a stong global economy ultimately benefits us. If the IMF can't do its job, more countries go under and our economy loses a lot more than our contribution to the IMF. The USA don't pay its UN dues either. I'm not across their failure to cough up to the IMF. 17.5% is a big ask though. These things are tied to voting rights so it will be problematic for them if they refuse.

 

[hammertime]

The spending you are talking about was the desired effect of the payments - to encourage spending. Spending keeps people in jobs, people in jobs means more tax revenue/less social security and more money to keep spending. You guys keep talking it down but most global observors praise the policy and it did keep unemployment down and the economy out of recession.

Yes, but the debt! It is so big with so many zeroes. Somehow we all have to pay that debt - our economy is stuffed! Don't you know the mantra…."deficit bad, surplus good, deficit bad, surplus good..."

:laughing: I sense (well I hope I do!) some sarcasm there! People get far too excited by surplus and deficit. The ratings agencies obviously feel we're a good risk.

You guys are seriously still ok with debt mantra even when its bringing the world to its knees? So what if we are low in comparison, its still bad if it hasn't been spent with viable business cases… or maybe just simply producing a business case at all.

Yoss - i agree about hawke and keating. But can we agree that swan has done nothing but thrown away cash on unproductive means? School halls, celing batts. Really?

 

[Yossarian]

School halls isn't as bad as was made out. Ceiling bats is a good example of an idea that sounds good in theory but nobody considered the unintended consequences. This is a failing of pretty much every government policy across all parties.

Anyway the idea in both was to inject money into the economy whilst getting some benefit (school's got upgraded facilities, houses got energy saving bats). You can keep talking down the BER but if you ask most schools they'd say it was one of the best policies. Plenty of them got the first decent infrastructure increase for decades. Did some schools get dudded? Yep no doubt about it and those things should be investigated. But there was a significant time aspect involved.

Debt has brought other countries to its knees because of the proportion of debt to GDP and the issues with borrowing this has created. Australia is nowhere near that level. Nobody is saying continuous debts are bad but the idea that any debt is bad is just wrong. You are bound to have some deficits if you face something like the GFC. Running a balanced budget (or trying to) by cutting spending/services would have increased unemployment, slowed the economy, cut tax income, led to more cuts, more job losses, less money and so on. Doesn't work.

Every major credit agency has Australia at AAA+ and aren't suggesting any change.

 

[happy_tiger]

School halls isn't as bad as was made out. Ceiling bats is a good example of an idea that sounds good in theory but nobody considered the unintended consequences. This is a failing of pretty much every government policy across all parties.

Anyway the idea in both was to inject money into the economy whilst getting some benefit (school's got upgraded facilities, houses got energy saving bats). You can keep talking down the BER but if you ask most schools they'd say it was one of the best policies. Plenty of them got the first decent infrastructure increase for decades. Did some schools get dudded? Yep no doubt about it and those things should be investigated. But there was a significant time aspect involved.

Debt has brought other countries to its knees because of the proportion of debt to GDP and the issues with borrowing this has created. Australia is nowhere near that level. Nobody is saying continuous debts are bad but the idea that any debt is bad is just wrong. You are bound to have some deficits if you face something like the GFC. Running a balanced budget (or trying to) by cutting spending/services would have increased unemployment, slowed the economy, cut tax income, led to more cuts, more job losses, less money and so on. Doesn't work.

Every major credit agency has Australia at AAA+ and aren't suggesting any change.

:master: Thank you Julia and Swannie Maybe we should get a superhero cap and name for them now

I just can't believe that you blame the Liberals for everything that is wrong and Labor for everything that is right

Even I acknowledge the good things that Hawke and Keating did to help Australia economically

I bet the GST was also a bad thing Yoss

 

[Yossarian]

School halls isn't as bad as was made out. Ceiling bats is a good example of an idea that sounds good in theory but nobody considered the unintended consequences. This is a failing of pretty much every government policy across all parties.

Anyway the idea in both was to inject money into the economy whilst getting some benefit (school's got upgraded facilities, houses got energy saving bats). You can keep talking down the BER but if you ask most schools they'd say it was one of the best policies. Plenty of them got the first decent infrastructure increase for decades. Did some schools get dudded? Yep no doubt about it and those things should be investigated. But there was a significant time aspect involved.

Debt has brought other countries to its knees because of the proportion of debt to GDP and the issues with borrowing this has created. Australia is nowhere near that level. Nobody is saying continuous debts are bad but the idea that any debt is bad is just wrong. You are bound to have some deficits if you face something like the GFC. Running a balanced budget (or trying to) by cutting spending/services would have increased unemployment, slowed the economy, cut tax income, led to more cuts, more job losses, less money and so on. Doesn't work.

Every major credit agency has Australia at AAA+ and aren't suggesting any change.

:master: Thank you Julia and Swannie Maybe we should get a superhero cap and name for them now

I just can't believe that you blame the Liberals for everything that is wrong and Labor for everything that is right

Even I acknowledge the good things that Hawke and Keating did to help Australia economically

I bet the GST was also a bad thing Yoss

:laughing: I don't really but when the opposite is continuously present - ALP evil, LNP great - it brings out a reaction. The present government gets zero credit around here, just relentless bagging no matter what they do. I have a lot of respect for Howard - he was an extremely smart operator and I thought did a good job in speaking plainly. By that I mean he would often cut to the chase and highlight the reason things were done and dismiss pointless questions from the press trying to create a story from nothing. Certainly I disagree with a lot of what he did - that's because it is against my beliefs. Much the same as your beliefs diverge from that of the ALP.

I have no feelings one way or another on the GST. I'm certainly not calling for its removal. Some sort of consumption tax was always inevitable.

 

[Gary_Bakerloo]

School halls isn't as bad as was made out. Ceiling bats is a good example of an idea that sounds good in theory but nobody considered the unintended consequences. This is a failing of pretty much every government policy across all parties.

Anyway the idea in both was to inject money into the economy whilst getting some benefit (school's got upgraded facilities, houses got energy saving bats). You can keep talking down the BER but if you ask most schools they'd say it was one of the best policies. Plenty of them got the first decent infrastructure increase for decades. Did some schools get dudded? Yep no doubt about it and those things should be investigated. But there was a significant time aspect involved.

Debt has brought other countries to its knees because of the proportion of debt to GDP and the issues with borrowing this has created. Australia is nowhere near that level. Nobody is saying continuous debts are bad but the idea that any debt is bad is just wrong. You are bound to have some deficits if you face something like the GFC. Running a balanced budget (or trying to) by cutting spending/services would have increased unemployment, slowed the economy, cut tax income, led to more cuts, more job losses, less money and so on. Doesn't work.

Every major credit agency has Australia at AAA+ and aren't suggesting any change.

:master: Thank you Julia and Swannie Maybe we should get a superhero cap and name for them now

I just can't believe that you blame the Liberals for everything that is wrong and Labor for everything that is right

Even I acknowledge the good things that Hawke and Keating did to help Australia economically

I bet the GST was also a bad thing Yoss

I think he was quite balanced.

The GST was probably the best thing Howard did for the country.

 

[stryker]

BER was a massive shambles Yoss, there is half completed contracts everywhere and those that were done cost us 3 or 4 times what they were worth.

Blind freddy could have seen what was going to happen with the batts…It was an open invitation to every shonk to earn some easy money.

The point is that whilst they were both good policies in theory, they were run by some of the most incompetent people ever to grace the arena. Labour is good at coming up with ideas but they could not organise a root in a brothel and that is mainly due to the beauracratic nature of most of its ministers. Not many of them have worked in the real world, yet insisted on pretending to know what they were doing...the end result? extreme overspending, damage to property and death. The three main culprits were Rudd, Gillard and Swan who pushed and drove both fiascos.

 

[Yossarian]

Oh yeah blame the deaths on the government. Very classy. And it's Labor not Labour…

 

[stryker]

Oh yeah blame the deaths on the government. Very classy. And it's Labor not Labour…

It was their - especially that moron Garretts - mismanagement that led to this very unfortunate scenario. IT 100% could have been prevented Yoss. With proper regulation of materials used and complete safety training for installers this should have been a very easy policy to implement. The short cuts taken through inexperienced management cost lives…simple as that.

 

[hammertime]

Oh yeah blame the deaths on the government. Very classy. And it's Labor not Labour…

It was their - especially that moron Garretts - mismanagement that led to this very unfortunate scenario. IT 100% could have been prevented Yoss. With proper regulation of materials used and complete safety training for installers this should have been a very easy policy to implement. The short cuts taken through inexperienced management cost lives…simple as that.

X2\. Maybe they should have actually talked to someone in the industry about the risk factors?

Just like they couldn't be arsed to do a business case for the NBN

 

[Rambo2714]

What about all the Australians whose murders John Howard was complicit in , we are still losing Australian lives today as a direct consequence of Howard's foreign policy .

The thing about this govt is no matter what they do , they do it better then the liberal & LNP coalition could or would
\
\
Posted using RoarFEED

 

[Rambo2714]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gAAf9nSd3ig

As has been demonstarted in the past , and Tony Abbott continues to demonstrated , the liberal party is not capable of implementing (or proposing) policies which make a difference to or benefit the lives of Australians . Paul Keating Sums it well in the Vid .

The More some things change the more some things stay the same ….............

Australia would be a scarey place if Abbott were PM , Turnbull or Hockey are the only reasonable PMs the liberals could offer

 

[Cultured_Bogan]

Oh yeah blame the deaths on the government. Very classy. And it's Labor not Labour…

It was their - especially that moron Garretts - mismanagement that led to this very unfortunate scenario. IT 100% could have been prevented Yoss. With proper regulation of materials used and complete safety training for installers this should have been a very easy policy to implement. The short cuts taken through inexperienced management cost lives…simple as that.

X2\. Maybe they should have actually talked to someone in the industry about the risk factors?

Just like they couldn't be arsed to do a business case for the NBN

Both ideas were great on paper. They were poorly implemented. I'm not going to get up them for having a go, they were trying to be proactive and in all likelihood they did save jobs.

The one beef I had with both policies was that they were open to widespread rorting, especially the BER scheme, where the real winners weren't kids or schools, but the fat cat builders who lined their pockets with taxpayer dollars by charging up to three times as much for buildings. I know there was a small timescale in order to get these projects going and they couldn't sit on their hands for too long, but surely someone could have ran their eyes over the costs before signing the cheques?

The insulation scheme was well intentioned but only succeeded in allowing installers to inflate their pricing to rip the consumer off and allowing people with little, or no, training to create fire hazards and exploit young workers, resulting in deaths. I agree with Yoss that claiming their blood is on the Government's hands is over the top, but the policy created circumstances for it to happen.

 

[Yossarian]

Oh yeah blame the deaths on the government. Very classy. And it's Labor not Labour…

It was their - especially that moron Garretts - mismanagement that led to this very unfortunate scenario. IT 100% could have been prevented Yoss. With proper regulation of materials used and complete safety training for installers this should have been a very easy policy to implement. The short cuts taken through inexperienced management cost lives…simple as that.

X2\. Maybe they should have actually talked to someone in the industry about the risk factors?

Just like they couldn't be arsed to do a business case for the NBN

Well the Navy has certainly said that Abbott's turn back the boats policy will cost lives. That doesn't seem to worry him. Anyway I'm not going to debate whose policies kill more people. It's an extremely low gutter debate. You and Happy have always been prepared to talk policy rather than resorting to Daily Telegraph extremism.

 

[Yossarian]

Oh yeah blame the deaths on the government. Very classy. And it's Labor not Labour…

It was their - especially that moron Garretts - mismanagement that led to this very unfortunate scenario. IT 100% could have been prevented Yoss. With proper regulation of materials used and complete safety training for installers this should have been a very easy policy to implement. The short cuts taken through inexperienced management cost lives…simple as that.

X2\. Maybe they should have actually talked to someone in the industry about the risk factors?

Just like they couldn't be arsed to do a business case for the NBN

Both ideas were great on paper. They were poorly implemented. I'm not going to get up them for having a go, they were trying to be proactive and in all likelihood they did save jobs.

The one beef I had with both policies was that they were open to widespread rorting, especially the BER scheme, where the real winners weren't kids or schools, but the fat cat builders who lined their pockets with taxpayer dollars by charging up to three times as much for buildings. I know there was a small timescale in order to get these projects going and they couldn't sit on their hands for too long, but surely someone could have ran their eyes over the costs before signing the cheques?

The insulation scheme was well intentioned but only succeeded in allowing installers to inflate their pricing to rip the consumer off and allowing people with little, or no, training to create fire hazards and exploit young workers, resulting in deaths. I agree with Yoss that claiming their blood is on the Government's hands is over the top, but the policy created circumstances for it to happen.

I agree with that 100%. The balance between speed and oversight on BER could have been better but when I drive around my area I see a lot of schools with great looking buildings that weren't there before.

The insulation scheme more showed that give people a chance to make a buck and any scumbag will risk people's lives to do it. It was not well implemented - few government policies over the last 30 years have been. It's just unfortunate the eventual outcomes were so tragic. To blame the government for the actions of rogue elements is cheap and nasty though.

 

[happy_tiger]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gAAf9nSd3ig

As has been demonstarted in the past , and Tony Abbott continues to demonstrated , the liberal party is not capable of implementing (or proposing) policies which make a difference to or benefit the lives of Australians . Paul Keating Sums it well in the Vid .

The More some things change the more some things stay the same ….............

Australia would be a scarey place if Abbott were PM , Turnbull or Hockey are the only reasonable PMs the liberals could offer

Hey Rambo at least the Coalition has 2 reasonable candidates for PM

As Labor is proving they have none

Just a whole lot of people who are prepared to stab each other in the back at a moments notice

It must be pretty hard to have both eyes on the future when one is looking behind you

Remember the Ides Julia

 

[Gary_Bakerloo]

Hey Rambo at least the Coalition has 2 reasonable candidates for PM

That would be Turnbull and….?

Just a whole lot of people who are prepared to stab each other in the back at a moments notice

So you reckon no one in the Coalition has Abbott in its cross hairs?

His political gamble of rejecting everything proposed by the ALP/Greens/Independents has not paid off - this supposedly dysfunctional government has managed to survive and pass legislation.

He now needs Plan B and that means this government serving its term and going to an election at its preferred timing. That means Abbott needs policies. I am interested to see what policies he comes up with and how he sells them.

 

[happy_tiger]

Hey Rambo at least the Coalition has 2 reasonable candidates for PM

That would be Turnbull and….?

Just a whole lot of people who are prepared to stab each other in the back at a moments notice

So you reckon no one in the Coalition has Abbott in its cross hairs?

His political gamble of rejecting everything proposed by the ALP/Greens/Independents has not paid off - this supposedly dysfunctional government has managed to survive and pass legislation.

He now needs Plan B and that means this government serving its term and going to an election at its preferred timing. That means Abbott needs policies. I am interested to see what policies he comes up with and how he sells them.

Gary as I have said previously , what is the use of the Coalition to drop any great policy ideas they do have at this time We are still a while away from an election and you don't win an election 12 months out

You may be right with Abbott as the current leader I still believe that Turnbull is the man for the job as opposition leader or PM He is the best leader on either side of politics with dust running behind him in 2nd place

 

[Cultured_Bogan]

Hey Rambo at least the Coalition has 2 reasonable candidates for PM

That would be Turnbull and….?

Just a whole lot of people who are prepared to stab each other in the back at a moments notice

So you reckon no one in the Coalition has Abbott in its cross hairs?

His political gamble of rejecting everything proposed by the ALP/Greens/Independents has not paid off - this supposedly dysfunctional government has managed to survive and pass legislation.

He now needs Plan B and that means this government serving its term and going to an election at its preferred timing. That means Abbott needs policies. I am interested to see what policies he comes up with and how he sells them.

Being realistic, Turnbull would be the only leader I'd want for the Libs. Abbott's only redeeming quality is that he says what he thinks (which 99% of the time is stupid or ill thought out,) and apparently there's a reason why Hockey is nicknamed "sloppy Joe."

From what I see, Abbott is not a very good policy maker either. It would appear that his policy is to reject and refute anything that the government proposes. Abbott is poison for the Libs and probably won't win an election while he is at the helm. The last election was really "unloseable" for the coalition, and Abbott found a way to lose it, where I believe Turnbull (or even Hockey,) would have romped it home.

For mine, that demonstrates that despite how little faith the electorate had in a Gillard-led Labor government, he was not a viable alternative and therefore never will be.

 

[Gary_Bakerloo]

Gary as I have said previously , what is the use of the Coalition to drop any great policy ideas they do have at this time We are still a while away from an election and you don't win an election 12 months out

I agree, but the snippets we have seen on occasions has been very ordinary. I can see him punted before the next election.