# Communism: It is not dead and buried



## noco (17 February 2014)

Communism is still very much alive but can it sustain resurrection........... 12 Academics are listed to speak at  a Marxism 2014 four day conference over Easter......Quite a coincidence considering communists are also atheists.

We really don't need to cope with this in conjuction with Islam............Maybe they will clash and wipe each other out.....wishful thinking.

Max Lane is now the socialist Alternative which urges "the smashing of the Capitalist State apparatus" including the dismantling of Parliament, Courts, the Armed forcesand the ploce.


http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/op...marxist-politics/story-fni0ffxg-1226828632591


----------



## Caveman (18 February 2014)

Why dont you go there yourself Noco you might learn something or have a Laugh.My Advice to to Uni students is to reject both sides of politics while you learn your profession,worry about politics later.


----------



## rumpole (18 February 2014)

The conference will be held under a bed in a hotel room...


----------



## noco (18 February 2014)

rumpole said:


> The conference will be held under a bed in a hotel room...




That would not surprise me......It would also not surprise me if the media were banned.


----------



## noco (18 February 2014)

Caveman said:


> Why dont you go there yourself Noco you might learn something or have a Laugh.My Advice to to Uni students is to reject both sides of politics while you learn your profession,worry about politics later.




Go where Caveman?????

To University to learn about communism......I know enough about it already having lived through it for more 80 years.....What would you like me to tell you about it?


----------



## noco (18 February 2014)

When you read about what happens in North Korea and the crimes committed against humanity, who would want to live under such conditions......Who would want to live in China, Cuba or even Russia?......And we have people whinging and complaining about conditions here in Australia.

The Labor Party are already up in arms about the slight increase in unemployment....something they predicted prior to the 7th September.

Let us not forget Gillard who was  member of the Communist Fabian society, and who most likely still is, was heading us in the direction of her beliefs and ideology.

Thank God she has been disposed and to be replaced with some sanity.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...against-humanity/story-e6frg6so-1226830079925


----------



## sydboy007 (18 February 2014)

noco said:


> Communism is still very much alive but can it sustain resurrection........... 12 Academics are listed to speak at  a Marxism 2014 four day conference over Easter......Quite a coincidence considering communists are also atheists.
> 
> We really don't need to cope with this in conjuction with Islam............Maybe they will clash and wipe each other out.....wishful thinking.
> 
> ...




Capitalism allowed CBA financial planners to go in an change information on loan applications, allowed ANZ to collude with Storm Financial.

Capitalism gave us Enron / Alco finance / ABC Learning / wonderful USD loans to farmers in the 80s that wiped out many of them.

Capitalism allowed US mortgage companies to design loans for NINJAs based on the belief when they defaulted they could take possession of the property and resell it.

Capitalism gave us Bhopal, Dioxin Toxic cloud over Medea Italy, the toxic storage dump (21,000 tonnes) of the love canal near Niagara Falls, Minamata disease, Fukushima, the Pacific Gyre Garbage Patch, the Sidoarjo Mud Flow, Asbestos, Big Tobacco lobbying Govts, Deep water horizon (BP) oil spill.

What do all the above have in common?  Putting profit ahead of society.

You seem to imply that since Communists are atheists they're bad people?  Maybe you should pop into one of the  hearings of the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse.

Considering the pathetic level of state and federal Governance we've had for the last decade plus, I can understand some people's frustration.  Do I think communism is the answer.  Definitely not.  Do I think the way capitalism is currently working in most of the world a sustainable process.  Definitely not.


----------



## sydboy007 (18 February 2014)

noco said:


> When you read about what happens in North Korea and the crimes committed against humanity, who would want to live under such conditions......Who would want to live in China, Cuba or even Russia?......And we have people whinging and complaining about conditions here in Australia.
> 
> The Labor Party are already up in arms about the slight increase in unemployment....something they predicted prior to the 7th September.
> 
> ...




Dare we mention Salvadore Allende and what the Americans did to a democratically elected Government?

Dare we mention Augusto Pinochet who replaced him.

Communist countries definitely don't have the monopoly on treating it's citizens poorly, nor causing strife in other countries for their benefit.


----------



## drsmith (18 February 2014)

Whether it's Labor vs Liberal or communism vs capitalism, the question remains one of relative merit.

At least with Labor vs Liberal, we have a choice.


----------



## noco (18 February 2014)

drsmith said:


> Whether it's Labor vs Liberal or communism vs capitalism, the question remains one of relative merit.
> 
> At least with Labor vs Liberal, we have a choice.




The problem is Doc, many Labor people ARE communist but don't have the guts to be up front with it, because they know they would be ostracized by the public, so they use the Labor Party as a front....They just use the term DEMOCRATIC  SOCIALIST to deceive the public.........Now if we ever have a referendum to change to a Republic, and if it happens to be successful and the West Minster system is thrown out and the Labor Party then wins office, it could develope into dictatorship.

The GREENS are also a front for communism...that is why they are known as the WATER MELON PARTY,,,,,,green outside and red inside. That Lea Rhianan ( I think that is the way it is spelt) is a confessed communist and was indoctrinated in Russia.....her parents, I believe, started the communist party in Australia in 1927.



So yes, our democratic system is safe for now but there is gaurantee in the future.


----------



## noco (18 February 2014)

sydboy007 said:


> Dare we mention Salvadore Allende and what the Americans did to a democratically elected Government?
> 
> Dare we mention Augusto Pinochet who replaced him.
> 
> Communist countries definitely don't have the monopoly on treating it's citizens poorly, nor causing strife in other countries for their benefit.




sydboy, this thread is about communism.....can we keep on the subject please?

If you want to discuss Capitalism, it might be best if you start your own thread.

We all know as well as you and I, human rights are often violated in many countries who are not communistic and that does not exclude Islamic countries who use religion as a front for politics.


----------



## sydboy007 (18 February 2014)

noco said:


> The problem is Doc, many Labor people ARE communist but don't have the guts to be up front with it, because they know they would be ostracized by the public, so they use the Labor Party as a front....They just use the term DEMOCRATIC  SOCIALIST to deceive the public.........Now if we ever have a referendum to change to a Republic, and if it happens to be successful and the West Minster system is thrown out and the Labor Party then wins office, it could develope into dictatorship.
> 
> The GREENS are also a front for communism...that is why they are known as the WATER MELON PARTY,,,,,,green outside and red inside. That Lea Rhianan ( I think that is the way it is spelt) is a confessed communist and was indoctrinated in Russia.....her parents, I believe, started the communist party in Australia in 1927.
> 
> ...




Reds under the beds eh.

You'll find Adam Smith had more in common with communism than the capitalism of today.


----------



## rumpole (18 February 2014)

noco said:


> The problem is Doc, many Labor people ARE communist but don't have the guts to be up front with it, because they know they would be ostracized by the public, so they use the Labor Party as a front....They just use the term DEMOCRATIC  SOCIALIST to deceive the public.........Now if we ever have a referendum to change to a Republic, and if it happens to be successful and the West Minster system is thrown out and the Labor Party then wins office, it could develope into dictatorship.
> 
> The GREENS are also a front for communism...that is why they are known as the WATER MELON PARTY,,,,,,green outside and red inside. That Lea Rhianan ( I think that is the way it is spelt) is a confessed communist and was indoctrinated in Russia.....her parents, I believe, started the communist party in Australia in 1927.
> 
> ...




By the same token, some Liberals could be Facists, wanting to impose their own weird view of the world on the rest of us. Did someone mention Cory Bernadi ? Photo-shop him as a Nazi on the front page of the Telegraph and no-one would see anything amiss.


----------



## drsmith (18 February 2014)

noco said:


> So yes, our democratic system is safe for now but there is gaurantee in the future.



My comment was really directed at Syd. 

I was curious to know between the two systems which he prefers.


----------



## noco (18 February 2014)

noco said:


> The problem is Doc, many Labor people ARE communist but don't have the guts to be up front with it, because they know they would be ostracized by the public, so they use the Labor Party as a front....They just use the term DEMOCRATIC  SOCIALIST to deceive the public.........Now if we ever have a referendum to change to a Republic, and if it happens to be successful and the West Minster system is thrown out and the Labor Party then wins office, it could develope into dictatorship.
> 
> The GREENS are also a front for communism...that is why they are known as the WATER MELON PARTY,,,,,,green outside and red inside. That Lea Rhianan ( I think that is the way it is spelt) is a confessed communist and was indoctrinated in Russia.....her parents, I believe, started the communist party in Australia in 1927.
> 
> ...




Please allow me to make a correction to that last sentence........Our democratic system is safe for now but there is *NO gaurantee in the future.*


----------



## noco (18 February 2014)

rumpole said:


> By the same token, some Liberals could be Facists, wanting to impose their own weird view of the world on the rest of us. Did someone mention Cory Bernadi ? Photo-shop him as a Nazi on the front page of the Telegraph and no-one would see anything amiss.




Once again rumpole, the thread ia about communism which has nothing to do with Nazis or Facist.

If you want to talk about Nazis and Facist, please start your own thread.


----------



## rumpole (18 February 2014)

noco said:


> The problem is Doc, many Labor people ARE communist but don't have the guts to be up front with it, because they know they would be ostracized by the public, .




You must be joking, Labor is just another Conservative Party, only slightly less conservative than the Libs. What was it Rudd said about being "John Howard light" ? They are more deluded free market ideologues . The real commies are in the Greens, Lee Rianhon  and her lot.

- - - Updated - - -



noco said:


> Once again rumpole, the thread ia about communism which has nothing to do with Nazis or Facist.
> 
> If you wnat to talk about Nazis and Facist, please start your own thread.




Thanks for your advice, but I'll say what I want where I want. It's a free country right Rupert ?


----------



## drsmith (18 February 2014)

rumpole said:


> You must be joking, Labor is just another Conservative Party, only slightly less conservative than the Libs. What was it Rudd said about being "John Howard light" ?



That was to fool the electorate and it worked.


----------



## trainspotter (18 February 2014)

Margaret Thatcher ”” 'The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.' 



> Systematic, widespread and gross human rights violations have been and are being committed by the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, its institutions and officials. In many instances, the violations of human rights found by the commission constitute crimes against humanity. These are not mere excesses of the State; they are essential components of a political system that has moved far from the ideals on which it claims to be founded.




http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-02-...n-may-face-charges-over-human-rights-/5265900

Animal Farm anyone?


----------



## rumpole (18 February 2014)

I don't think anyone here is unaware of the evils of communist states or in any way supports them.

This thread is a not too subtle attempt by a cold war warrior to associate the Labor party with evil regimes and therefore besmirch that party when in reality the Labor party is as far from communism as the Libs are from Hitler (Godwin's Law invoked).

Threads like this add nothing to rational debate and should be ignored or treated with the contempt they deserve.


----------



## overhang (18 February 2014)

rumpole said:


> I don't think anyone here is unaware of the evils of communist states or in any way supports them.
> 
> This thread is a not too subtle attempt by a cold war warrior to associate the Labor party with evil regimes and therefore besmirch that party when in reality the Labor party is as far from communism as the Libs are from Hitler (Godwin's Law invoked).
> 
> Threads like this add nothing to rational debate and should be ignored or treated with the contempt they deserve.




Pretty much what I was thinking, the obvious implication that the ALP have a hidden communist agenda doesn't really warrant a coherent reply.  The nerve to discredit atheists, especially given the current royal commission into child abuse by religious institutions makes me wonder if this was a genuine thread or just a troll one, I'm surprised the mods have let this pass.


----------



## wayneL (18 February 2014)

Overhang, the mods at ASF are moderators, not censors


----------



## overhang (18 February 2014)

wayneL said:


> Overhang, the mods at ASF are moderators, not censors




I understand that but thought troll threads that are construed to provoke may be moderated, given I've seen comments moderated in that way I just thought the same would apply to threads.


----------



## DB008 (18 February 2014)

I have posted this already, but will do so again....

Saw this in 2012 at UTS and Ultimo TAFE.





My parents lived under the rule of Eastern European Communism. You mail was opened, phone tapped. Sounds like what the NSA is doing at the moment....bugger that.


----------



## rumpole (18 February 2014)

DB008 said:


> I have posted this already, but will do so again....
> 
> Saw this in 2012 at UTS and Ultimo TAFE.
> 
> ...




Would be interesting to know how many people actually turned up.


----------



## Smurf1976 (18 February 2014)

sydboy007 said:


> Capitalism gave us Bhopal, Dioxin Toxic cloud over Medea Italy, the toxic storage dump (21,000 tonnes) of the love canal near Niagara Falls, Minamata disease, Fukushima, the Pacific Gyre Garbage Patch, the Sidoarjo Mud Flow, Asbestos, Big Tobacco lobbying Govts, Deep water horizon (BP) oil spill.




It could be argued that profit-driven shortcuts were taken at Fukushima and that might be true, but nuclear power as such has been more associated with socialism (not communism, but socialism) than capitalism throughout its' history in most countries.

Can't argue with the rest though, although to be fair communism has also produced its' fair share of environmental disasters over the years.


----------



## sydboy007 (18 February 2014)

drsmith said:


> My comment was really directed at Syd.
> 
> I was curious to know between the two systems which he prefers.




Churchill's famous dictum: "Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time." (from a House of Commons speech on Nov. 11, 1947)

We have the thread initiator condeming a group of people who:

* have not broken any laws

* Do not seem to be calling for violence or any activism

* Are condemned for (probably) begin atheists and having their meeting over Easter

I thought one of the great things about living in a democracy that was we all have the right to think and do as we please so long as it's not impacting on others from doing the same.  This thread reminds me of the cold war days where reality wasn't important, scaring the masses for control was.

_I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it. Voltaire_

Some of what good old Scary Karl had to say

_Social progress can be measured by the social position of the female sex_. (bet the blue tie brigade hates that one)

_For the bureaucrat, the world is a mere object to be manipulated by him.

The production of too many useful things results in too many useless people._ (sums up modern society quite nicely)

_Capital is reckless of the health or length of life of the laborer, unless under compulsion from society._ (look to the third world to see how true this is)

_Capitalist production, therefore, develops technology, and the combining together of various processes into a social whole, only by sapping the original sources of all wealth - the soil and the labourer._

_Capital is money, capital is commodities. By virtue of it being value, it has acquired the occult ability to add value to itself. It brings forth living offspring, or, at the least, lays golden eggs._ (sounds like the financial wizardy that brought us the GFC with CDos squared and cubed)

_The more the division of labor and the application of machinery extend, the more does competition extend among the workers, the more do their wages shrink together._ (very much what is decimating the US middle class and seems to be headed to our shores shortly)


----------



## Julia (18 February 2014)

> I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it. Voltaire




It is commonly attributed to Voltaire but was actually made by his biographer:


> Evelyn Beatrice Hall (1868 – 1956),[1][2] who wrote under the pseudonym S.G. Tallentyre, was an English writer best known for her biography of Voltaire entitled The Friends of Voltaire, which she completed in 1906.
> 
> In her biography on Voltaire, Hall wrote the phrase: "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" (which is often misattributed to Voltaire himself) as an illustration of Voltaire's beliefs.[3] Hall's quotation is often cited to describe the principle of freedom of speech.




If we subscribe to the principle, then surely noco has the right to express what he believes to be correct?

(I'm not taking any position on communism or capitalism, just hoping to draw attention to a bit of a double standard happening here in terms of 'say what you like as long as I don't disagree with it.')


----------



## sydboy007 (18 February 2014)

Julia said:


> It is commonly attributed to Voltaire but was actually made by his biographer:
> 
> 
> If we subscribe to the principle, then surely noco has the right to express what he believes to be correct?
> ...




He put his thoughts on the web.  They've been challenged.  I've not attacked the person, just the ideas.

Considering his _We really don't need to cope with this in conjuction with Islam............Maybe they will clash and wipe each other out.....wishful thinking._ I've been quite restrained compared to religious and political genocide.

His attack on Gillard for being a member of the Fabian Socialists, a group that's done less harm to the country than plenty of capitalist backed ones.  

Just for interest sake Beatrice Webb was an early member of the Fabian Society and she co-founded the London School of Economics and Political Science.  The early Fabians were also totally at odds with Karl Marx and his quest for revolution.


----------



## noco (19 February 2014)

overhang said:


> Pretty much what I was thinking, the obvious implication that the ALP have a hidden communist agenda doesn't really warrant a coherent reply.  The nerve to discredit atheists, especially given the current royal commission into child abuse by religious institutions makes me wonder if this was a genuine thread or just a troll one, I'm surprised the mods have let this pass.





Perhaps after you read this link you may have to change your thinkiing that the Labor Party and the unions are not associated with the CPA (the Comuunist Party of Australia).

Also read the sub links and Gillards comments.

You may have been too young at the time to have known, but two Labor members of Parliament in the 50's and 
60's , Dr Evatt and Arthur Caldwell were self confessed Communist.

http://churlsgonewild.wordpress.com/tag/bernie-taft/


----------



## Calliope (19 February 2014)

Overhang says;
"the obvious implication that the ALP have a hidden communist agenda doesn't really warrant a coherent reply". 

The "obvious implication" is that it warrants incoherent replies. It has certainly flushed a few closet "if the cap fits, wear it" types from under their beds.

Noco need have few worries about a few harmless "commos" who have found a home among the Greens. Their threat of subversion is minuscule compared to the link between Labor parliamentarians and union thuggery and skullduggery. The Royal Commission will, hopefully, root out the guilty ones, who like Bill Shorten, Gillard etc should be extremely worried.

"Thou art weighed in the balances and art found wanting".


----------



## rumpole (19 February 2014)

noco said:


> You may have been too young at the time to have known, but two Labor members of Parliament in the 50's and
> 60's , Dr Evatt and Arthur Caldwell were self confessed Communist.




I believe they are now deceased, so unless you believe in ghosts there is nothing to worry about.

Maybe you would like to name some current Labor party members who are "self confessed communists" ?


----------



## noco (19 February 2014)

rumpole said:


> I believe they are now deceased, so unless you believe in ghosts there is nothing to worry about.
> 
> Maybe you would like to name some current Labor party members who are "self confessed communists" ?




Rap it up rumpole......these modern communist in the Labor Party would not have the guts to self confess.......they use the terms Social Democrats....just another way of avoiding being recognised as Communists or social reformers like Gillard and Kate Lundy with communistic idelogy.

If they were to reveal they were communists they would not last too long......Just as the Greens profess to be environmentalists and underneath they are commos.


----------



## rumpole (19 February 2014)

noco said:


> Rap it up rumpole......these modern communist in the Labor Party would not have the guts to self confess.......they use the terms Social Democrats....just another way of avoiding being recognised as Communists or social reformers like Gillard and Kate Lundy with communistic idelogy.
> 
> If they were to reveal they were communists they would not last too long......Just as the Greens profess to be environmentalists and underneath they are commos.




People in the Liberal party might not confess to being closet Nazis, but the law of averages say some of them must be


----------



## noco (19 February 2014)

rumpole said:


> People in the Liberal party might not confess to being closet Nazis, but the law of averages say some of them must be




Do you have a link or some proof of your statement?


----------



## rumpole (19 February 2014)

noco said:


> Do you have a link or some proof of your statement?




I asked you to point out communists in the Labor party, and you declined, so do I.


----------



## noco (19 February 2014)

rumpole said:


> I asked you to point out communists in the Labor party, and you declined, so do I.




I did not decline because I have already given you the link....you obviously have not been astute enough to read it and the sublinks that came with it.

You obviously had a thought bubble just like your new thread on "CORRUPTION IN THE LIBERAL PARTY"....you don't seem to be getting any support....Plenty of viewers though.


----------



## rumpole (19 February 2014)

noco said:


> I did not decline because I have already given you the link....you obviously have not been astute enough to read it and the sublinks that came with it.




So Julia Gillard was a member of the Fabian Society. Big Deal. She's no longer in government you know.



> You obviously had a thought bubble just like your new thread on "CORRUPTION IN THE LIBERAL PARTY"....you don't seem to be getting any support....Plenty of viewers though.




I lot of people running for cover it seems


I hope you would condemn corruption in the Liberal party as you would in the Labor party


----------



## sydboy007 (19 February 2014)

noco said:


> Rap it up rumpole......these modern communist in the Labor Party would not have the guts to self confess.......they use the terms Social Democrats....just another way of avoiding being recognised as Communists or social reformers like Gillard and Kate Lundy with communistic idelogy.
> 
> If they were to reveal they were communists they would not last too long......Just as the Greens profess to be environmentalists and underneath they are commos.




So Tony's PPL and Cory Bernardi's rants in no way show they want to be "social reformers"


----------



## rumpole (19 February 2014)

sydboy007 said:


> So Tony's PPL and Cory Bernardi's rants in no way show they want to be "social reformers"




I would have thought that State prescribed Paid Parental Leave was a form of communism wouldn't you ?


----------



## drsmith (19 February 2014)

sydboy007 said:


> Churchill's famous dictum: "Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time." (from a House of Commons speech on Nov. 11, 1947)
> 
> We have the thread initiator condeming a group of people who:
> 
> ...



I'm more interested in knowing which of the two systems you prefer than a discussion about a discussion.


----------



## IFocus (19 February 2014)

Cannot believe this thread has gone to 3 pages but I'll give you all the inside word.

I rang all the old brothers and sisters to see if we were going to raise again and take over the world but no one wanted to talk they were all to busy sipping cappuccino's and lattes while flicking through the net on their Ipads.


----------



## Smurf1976 (19 February 2014)

Just a point, but a key aspect of both capitalism and communist / socialist / labour movement systems is that neither places any inherent value on natural resources or the environment.

Take a river. Capitalists will work out whether or not a dam is profitable. Those on the other side will contemplate how many people the building of such a dam would employ. Neither will see any inherent value in the river "as is".

Same goes for any natural resource. Without constraints, both sides will end up logging, damming and mining the lot as fast as they can. Neither side has a good track record there.

The emergence of environmentalism as a political movement is thus an entirely logical development once the other two sides had managed to cut enough trees, dam enough rivers, put enough holes in the ground and create enough toxic dumps to draw attention to this reality.

If you wanted balance, then you'd need to place real value on all three - capital, labour and the natural environment. So long as any of those is taken to have low or no value, the outcome will inevitably be unsustainable in some way be it with financial, human or natural resources. 

Which do I prefer? We need a balance with all three otherwise whatever we do runs into the proverbial brick wall at some point.


----------



## Calliope (19 February 2014)

IFocus said:


> Cannot believe this thread has gone to 3 pages but I'll give you all the inside word.
> 
> I rang all the old brothers and sisters to see if we were going to raise again and take over the world but no one wanted to talk they were all to busy sipping cappuccino's and lattes while flicking through the net on their Ipads.




Obviously your old Comrades have adopted the variation to The Red Flag;



> The working class. Can kiss my ar$e. I've got the foreman's job at last. I'm out Of work. And on the dole. You can stuff the red flag Up your hole.


----------



## Caveman (21 February 2014)

noco said:


> Go where Caveman?????
> 
> To University to learn about communism......I know enough about it already having lived through it for more 80 years.....What would you like me to tell you about it?




I dont know your the one that started the thread.
I wouldnt bother going either,but ahh were you at Stalingrad or something?


----------



## chiff (21 February 2014)

I assumed that Noco lived on a communist commune for most of his life.


----------



## sydboy007 (21 February 2014)

drsmith said:


> I'm more interested in knowing which of the two systems you prefer than a discussion about a discussion.




I'll take a market based economy because sadly it's so far the most efficient way of allocation resources to benefit the majority.

Saying that, I'm not blinded by ideology to not stop and listen to what people with other ideas have to say and acknowledge that some of the basic tenants of socialism and less so communism, do actually have some relevance today.  I see the ultra right wing conservatives to be as bad as the far left communists.  Neither has ideas that would really work for the benefit of the majority.

No one can deny the socialism of the Scandinavian countries seems to work very well.  Much better GINI coefficient that Australia, better health care and education results too.  They have globally competitive tradeable sectors, something sadly lacking in Austraia.

Communism is great in theory, but like religion turns into a system to control people.


----------



## IFocus (21 February 2014)

sydboy007 said:


> I'll take a market based economy because sadly it's so far the most efficient way of allocation resources to benefit the majority.
> 
> Saying that, I'm not blinded by ideology to not stop and listen to what people with other ideas have to say and acknowledge that some of the basic tenants of socialism and less so communism, do actually have some relevance today.  I see the ultra right wing conservatives to be as bad as the far left communists.  Neither has ideas that would really work for the benefit of the majority.
> 
> ...





Good answer Syd really like your balance


----------



## rumpole (21 February 2014)

Socialism / communism is an extreme, but there is also extreme capitalism that cares for nothing but profits for the few.

I'd like to think that there is room for ethical capitalism, that takes into account the effect of its operations, not only on its shareholders but on  its employees, customers, suppliers,  the environment, society in general and the sustainability of its operations and does not intentionally act to the detriment of any of these.


----------



## noco (21 February 2014)

chiff said:


> I assumed that Noco lived on a communist commune for most of his life.




The word "ASSUME" makes an ass out of you and me.


----------



## Smurf1976 (21 February 2014)

sydboy007 said:


> I'll take a market based economy because sadly it's so far the most efficient way of allocation resources to benefit the majority.




I'd choose both.

Government to run things of broad, non-economic benefit to society or which underpin the entire economy. Eg hospitals, public transport, power, water, education etc are things government can do reasonably well and generally cheaper than the private sector. 

That they are all either total or substantial natural monopolies has a lot to do with this situation. Public transport, power, water etc are simply inefficient if competition is forced where it does not naturally exist - the huge rise in utility prices is an example of this. 

Things like primary schools and hospitals can theoretically compete, but not on a basis that is effective in the market given the difficulty of assessing what's on offer versus price. They also perform a necessary role in society irrespective of someone's ability to pay. We don't actually need every single activity to make a profit, some things have a much broader function. I have no objection to private hospitals and schools for those who want them, but decent public ones should also be available.

Leave the private sector, market based economy to do the other 80 - 90%.


----------



## sydboy007 (21 February 2014)

Smurf1976 said:


> I'd choose both.
> 
> Government to run things of broad, non-economic benefit to society or which underpin the entire economy. Eg hospitals, public transport, power, water, education etc are things government can do reasonably well and generally cheaper than the private sector.
> .....
> ...




Sounds good to me.  Alas the bankers and lawyers love nothing better than the sale of a natural monopoly, or to be provided the rights to a monopoly.

It still riles me that the Greiner Govt gave the airport rail line undertakings to not increase bus services - just 1 route allowed to stop at the Sydney airport, as was done with many of the toll roads built.  Limiting the ability to provide essential services while pretending to improve public infrastructure is not the way forward.


----------



## noco (22 February 2014)

Here is a typical example of how the communistic influence of the GREENS conned Gillard into this stupid Carbon Dioxide tax (whoops carbon pricing), and is helping to ruin the economy of Australia for no gain whatsoever.....only loses in jobs.....jobs....and more jobs....And the Labor Party and the Unions are blaming the Abbott Government....How absurd can they get?

I remember Swan, Combet and Emerson stating no one will feel the difference with the Carbon tax.....Two days after the introduction of the carbon tax, Swan was swinging from tree to tree calling out there has been no increase in the price of your breakfast weeties. That galah Emerson was trying to sing in the grounds of Parliament like he was at an Aboriginal corroboree, something about "WHYALLA...WHYALLA"....Maybe the town of Whyalla could be next on the list of closures thanks to the carbon tax.

Then we will have Shorten screaming from the roof tops " Abbott does not care about the workers"....Did Labor care about the workers when they brought in the Carbon tax?...But of course, what would expect from dead beat ex union leaders in Parliament? They would have had no idea of the affect down the track and they still won't believe it.

The workers are sure feeling the affects of the carbon tax now....

BTW...don't forget 10% of the carbon tax goes to the UN Climate change committee of which Rudd is stiill a member and little does everyone know that Banki Ki Moon is a GREENNIE through    and through.




http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/op...s-that-dont-work/story-fni0ffxg-1226831877783


----------



## sydboy007 (22 February 2014)

noco said:


> Here is a typical example of how the communistic influence of the GREENS conned Gillard into this stupid Carbon Dioxide tax (whoops carbon pricing), and is helping to ruin the economy of Australia for no gain whatsoever.....only loses in jobs.....jobs....and more jobs....And the Labor Party and the Unions are blaming the Abbott Government....How absurd can they get?




* Where's your evidence?  Please point me to one company that has come out and claimed the carbon tax was the sole or main reason for them closing.

* Current inflation adjusted WHOLESALE electricity prices in NSW have fallen from 10 years ago, that's INCLUDING the RET

* In Victoria the current inflation adjusted wholesale electricity prices including the RET are some 40% LOWER than a decade ago.

* Queensland is a different story, but then the state Government has made a conscious decision to allow the electricity generators to make abnormally large profits - recently 4 days of above $100 per MWh.

* Trade exposed energy intensive industries received a 90% exemption to the RET for above 9500GWh ie the higher targets from the Gillard Govt have little impact on them.

* Trade exposed industries received most of their carbon tax credits for free.  Alcoa sold their excess credits and walked away with over $50M in profit.  Not a bad deal.

What has caused the huge increases in electricity prices is the poles and wires, something that state Govts are responsible for.  Lack of investing for many years, along with no incentive to reduce profits of the electricity generators or retailers (they provide lots of dividends to most states) has meant little to no demand management, further exacerbating the yearly increase in peak demand.

I'm fairly confident in saying for a lot of businesses rent increases have done more damage than the carbon tax.  Most shopping centers have annual CPI+ leasing terms with tenants.

I'd also say the expensive housing we own and are building is also a major drain on the country.  Lots of foreign source debt not earning any export income bleeding the country dry, forcing up wages so people can afford to pay the rent / mortgage.  Affordable housing and child care are probably the first 2 issues the Government should tackle.  it makes all other changes far easier when a key need and business input is cheaper, and increased participation is something we desperately need to help with the aging population and less workers paying taxes to support an ever increasing number of people on the aged pension.

We have the current resource minister say he wants to extract every molecule of gas, yet there's no plans for a gas reservation policy, so the rest of us will be faced with paying what the Japanese and Koreans are willing to pay - up to $20 a GJ this month and for March delivery.  Talk about shortsightedness.  My $50 of qtrly gas consumption could quite easily be $150-200 in a few years if there's no urgent action taken.  I hate to think what families with teenagers or young kids and lots of showers and washing will be faced with when their gas bill is $400 a qtr.  AGL has asked for a 20% increase in gas prices in NSW.


----------



## McLovin (22 February 2014)

sydboy007 said:


> No one can deny the socialism of the Scandinavian countries seems to work very well.  Much better GINI coefficient that Australia, better health care and education results too.  They have globally competitive tradeable sectors, something sadly lacking in Austraia.




I deny that the Scandinavians are socialist, you only have to look at their company tax rate to know they are not socialists. In fact, I'd say they're far more capitalist than they're often given credit for, compared to say France who live on tariffs, high taxes and strikes. Having said that, I'm not interested in their punitive taxation system (a marginal tax rate of 50% that kicks in at ~$70k, not to mention the 25% VAT), so that the unemployed can live as comfortably as the employed. There needs to be an incentive to not sit around living off someone else. And it appears that more and more Scandos are resenting the cradle to grave welfare system they have.


----------



## noco (22 February 2014)

sydboy007 said:


> * Where's your evidence?  Please point me to one company that has come out and claimed the carbon tax was the sole or main reason for them closing.
> 
> Firstly, I did not state the carbon tax was the sole cause of various closures only that has contrbuted to the ruinisation of the economy of Australia.
> 
> ...




Firstly, I did not state the carbon tax was the sole cause of various closures only that has contrbuted to the ruinisation of the economy of Australia.

Due to competition from various retailers of Electricity in Queensland, their margins have been reduced by some 61% and following the abolition of the Carbon tax prices will be reduced again.

But Alcoa still paid $137,000,000 in carbon taxes.

Well we did have a Labor government in Queensland for some 20 years and poles and wires were sadly neglected....now it is catch up time for the Newman government to make things good.

With the labour costs, regulations and red tape put out by the Labor Party, is it any wonder building costs have risen resulting in higher rentals.....I should imagin if you owned a rental property you would want fair return on your investment. 

Some of the above statement does not make sense.....firstly, affordable housing has been the cry for the last 60 years that I can remember....In those days, I had a house built in 1953....you had to have a third deposit to start with.....To be able to get into the house on what we could afford, we sleep on the floor for 6 months....we had no floor coverings for months....we had no hot water system for months and carted buckets of hot water from the gas copper in the laundry up to the bath.....the internal walls were not painted....the only thing in the kitchen was the sink the cupboards were built by yours truly, these are the things we did with out.......now young people want to be spoon fed and have evrything laid out for them....they borrow to the kilts and wrap a mortgage around their necks for up to 40 years......The cost of housing has gone through the roof with all the red tape and building regualtions created by Governments of both persuasions and the unions have added their contribution also.

The increase in the number of people on aged pensions has increased due to modern medical science and stem cell research allowing people to live longer, hence governments do have to look at increasing the age of retirement....Kids born today will be living to 150 years of age.

Perhaps they may have to go back to the good old days and burn wood in the stove with a hot water tank on the side of the stove....LOL


----------



## chiff (22 February 2014)

I recognise the times that you go back to Noco,but it is very simplistic to beat the drum about unions relentlessly.
There was not a lot of money around in those times and usually only one person worked in a family.When a woman got pregnant she had to leave the public service and so on.Then ,deliberately or not,came a plan to have husband and wife both working-more money to spend and a larger more dynamic economy.Where do you think young people get these ambitions to have as many worldly goods as quick as possible.Advertising was not as pervasive then and goals were more simple.A house and a car and you had made it.
Do you think that you were happier when you were struggling back in the good old days?Those days have a simple allure for me.
If you saw someone sitting down for a meal at the bakery or fish and chip shop I thought that they must have some money to spoil themselves like that.Now there is money sloshing around everywhere,but are we any happier?
I wonder what happened to my Super Elliott bike?
And I reckon that I am at least fifteen years younger that you Noco...our copper was wood fired.We were brought up on tales about the depression.We are socialised in different ways now.


----------



## sydboy007 (22 February 2014)

noco said:


> Firstly, I did not state the carbon tax was the sole cause of various closures only that has contrbuted to the ruinisation of the economy of Australia.




Where's your evidence?  It was a $9B cost.  Abbotts PPL will cost $5.5B  Is that a ruinous level of spending?



noco said:


> Well we did have a Labor government in Queensland for some 20 years and poles and wires were sadly neglected....now it is catch up time for the Newman government to make things good.




They didn't do any worse that Sir Joh over his 20 years of corruption.  I've not hear you rushing out with your pitch fork over the latest corruption scandal in NSW involving Liberal party members.  Does your sense of right(eousness) only deal with unions and Labor party members?



noco said:


> With the labour costs, regulations and red tape put out by the Labor Party, is it any wonder building costs have risen resulting in higher rentals.....I should imagin if you owned a rental property you would want fair return on your investment.




The actual cost to build a residential premise in Australia has remained pretty much the same, after you adjust for inflation.  Land inflation has been some 200-400% depending on the location.  The majority of low density developments would have more land content than actual housing content in the price.

Also considering the rental property market hasn't made a profit in aggregate since 1999 it seems the majority of landlords are not interested in making a fair return / yield on their investment.



noco said:


> Some of the above statement does not make sense.....firstly, affordable housing has been the cry for the last 60 years that I can remember....In those days, I had a house built in 1953....you had to have a third deposit to start with.....




We've moved on Noco.  I'm glad we don't generally have to struggle like the depression era families.  Still FHBs today struggle to get their foot in the door.  Little 1880s style workers cottages next to me regularly go for around the $800K mark, mostly due to the $500k worth of land they sit on.  I doubt they cost any less when compared to incomes that what they did when they were first built.  55 sqm apartments sell today for what a house was 15 years ago.

_"The counts of the indictment are luxury, bad manners, contempt for authority, disrespect to elders, and a love for chatter in place of exercise. …

Children began to be the tyrants, not the slaves, of their households. They no longer rose from their seats when an elder entered the room; they contradicted their parents, chattered before company, gobbled up the dainties at table, and committed various offences against Hellenic tastes, such as crossing their legs. They tyrannised over the paidagogoi and schoolmasters."_  That was written by Kenneth John Freeman in 1907



noco said:


> The increase in the number of people on aged pensions has increased due to modern medical science and stem cell research allowing people to live longer, hence governments do have to look at increasing the age of retirement....Kids born today will be living to 150 years of age.




A little hyperbole there on your part.  A child born today probably has a good chance of hitting 90 if male and 95 if female, but that is predicated on things remaining at least as good as they are.  Stem cell research so far has had little application on extending human life spans.  It may in the future, but it's still a decade or two away from wide spread use.  Antibiotics and immunisation are the main reasons there's so many potential pensioners.  You should remember the penicillin bandages from WWII that saved many a soldiers life.

I sadly feel gen y and those that come after them will be mostly have a poorer lifestyle than what we currently have.  Most of the easy to extract resources have been used up, we've over used the available water supplies, desertification is destroying more and more arable land, and there's too many workers and not enough jobs to go around, especially as IT advances will automate more and more jobs.



noco said:


> Perhaps they may have to go back to the good old days and burn wood in the stove with a hot water tank on the side of the stove....LOL




Yes, the good old days where coal smoke hung foetidly in the air and black lung was rife.  In modern life gas has been a cheaper option but our dear leaders have decided it's best chilled fresh and shipped off to the households and factories of Asia.  We might just have to put on an extra jumper, some woolly socks and be a little Elizabethan with our washing habits.


----------



## sptrawler (22 February 2014)

I think you're right Syd and I don't think it matters who is in government.
The fall is inevitable, the last Government just set the stage.

Of course there is always the option you could downsize, capitalise on your gains and help a needy relative get into the housing market.


----------



## noco (22 February 2014)

sptrawler said:


> I think you're right Syd and I don't think it matters who is in government.
> The fall is inevitable, the last Government just set the stage.
> 
> Of course there is always the option you could downsize, capitalise on your gains and help a needy relative get into the housing market.




How right you are....The last government set the stage to economic ruin......But once again that is the ideology of communistic socialism.


----------



## Calliope (22 February 2014)

sydboy007 said:


> Antibiotics and immunisation are the main reasons there's so many potential pensioners.  You should remember the penicillin bandages from WWII that saved many a soldiers life.




Penicillin bandages? No mate it was injections. Penicillin did a great job on curing the clap, and this increased fertility...not a good result.


----------



## noco (23 February 2014)

Will communism make a come back?

This question was asked of 14 or 15 people around the world and it is interesting to learn their views.

For my own personal view, I believe it will struggle to gain a footing in the Western world.....Chinese communism is different to Russian communism.....Perhaps China is one of the reason why we had  the GFC and I am sure China wants to keep the pressure on the Western world as long as they can....Although they are certainly weakiening a lot of Western World countries including Australia, I would find it difficult to believe that communism would take a hold of Australia.

It was interesting to note by one comment that Hilary Clinton is a communist but trying to pass herself as a "MODERATE LIBERAL".


http://au.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20070130230847AAccfpc


----------



## rumpole (23 February 2014)

noco said:


> Will communism make a come back?
> 
> This question was asked of 14 or 15 people around the world and it is interesting to learn their views.
> 
> ...




14 or 15 people around the world ? 

You are kidding aren't you ? 

Are you calling this a scientific survey or a statement of religious belief ?

As for Hilary Clinton being a communist , well I'm just ROFL


----------



## sydboy007 (23 February 2014)

noco said:


> How right you are....The last government set the stage to economic ruin......But once again that is the ideology of communistic socialism.




Most economists agree we don't have a spending problem per se, but a hollowing out of budget from far too many tax cuts provided by the temporary increase in taxes from the mining boom.

Howard set the stage and Rudd helped him complete it by agreeing to the proposed tax cuts during the 2007 election.

If economic ruin is to be one of the few rich countries to still have real income growth for its citizens, well I'll that that ruin to say Greece or Italy, even the USA.


----------



## sydboy007 (23 February 2014)

Calliope said:


> Penicillin bandages? No mate it was injections. Penicillin did a great job on curing the clap, and this increased fertility...not a good result.




WWI was the first major battle where most countries saw more battle deaths than deaths from wounds.  WWII increased this yet again.  The use of penicillin in bandages helped to stop wounds from being infected and stopped so many limbs requiring amputation.  The death rate from pneumonia of US WWII troops dropped to 1%.


----------



## sydboy007 (23 February 2014)

noco said:


> Will communism make a come back?
> 
> This question was asked of 14 or 15 people around the world and it is interesting to learn their views.
> 
> ...




China's mercantlist trading did help sow the seeds to the GFC, but then so did Germany and the majority of the large surplus countries by suppressing domestic demand so they could earn excessive amounts of export income.  To stop their currencies rising too much they had to recycle that export income out of the country into foreign denominated assets, quite often US T-Bills, but pretty much all deficit countries benefited.  That meant interest rates in a lot of countries were lower than they should have been.  Low interests rates and too easy access to credit (covenant lite loans), along with a banking system akin to the fox in charge of the hen house were the major causes of the GFC.  

Some conspiracy theorists might attribute it to a cunning plan by China to weaken the west, but that view would definitely be in the very fringe minority.  They're easily distracted with moon landing talk or Elvis sightings.

China - via FOREX losses - and Germany (via the European banking system) are quickly learning what a bad deal it has been for them.  All their foreign reserves are locked up in poorly performing assets, and they can't sell them because that would cause the remaining asset value to plunge, which would mean their central banks would hold more locally denominated debt - China - or unrecoverable debt - Germany - than they do with the remaining foreign currency denominated assets.

As an example, if China stops the growth in FOREX reserves that will mean the RMB goes up in relative value, which means they will take a massive (accounting) hit against the RMB value of the FOREX reserves.  They already have over the last few years.  It will also make things tricky for them because the PBOC sells RMB loans to soak up the excess credit in the system due to selling RMB at an artificially low rate.  This will mean as the RMB increases in value they will have less in FOREX reserves to pay back the RMB debt.  This issue caused huge problems during the Asian Economic Crisis in 97-98


----------



## Smurf1976 (23 February 2014)

sydboy007 said:


> What has caused the huge increases in electricity prices is the poles and wires, something that state Govts are responsible for.  Lack of investing for many years, along with no incentive to reduce profits of the electricity generators or retailers (they provide lots of dividends to most states) has meant little to no demand management, further exacerbating the yearly increase in peak demand.




So far as electricity is concerned, the crux of it is that the figures reveal the truth. The state-run monopolies, which were somewhat socialist in every way in terms of their outlook and operation, provided energy to the public and business at a substantially lower price than is the case today with "competition" and a capitalist outlook. 

Disaggregation, not who owns what, is the ultimate cause of that since it introduces multiple levels of inefficiency by its' very nature. We've essentially gone down the track of getting competitive bids (theoretically more efficient) to supply a lower load factor demand (inherently less efficient) with the former a direct cause of the latter. We had a highly efficient industry and now we don't - simple as that.

The reason it fails relates partly to business strategy (a privately owned company in competition with others has no incentive to do anything which lowers costs across the entire industry) and partly due to scale. 

If you put the whole of Qld, NSW, ACT, Vic and SA together then they're really only big enough for two power companies between the whole lot to operate efficiently. And yet there are multiple operators in each state which is hugely inefficient. As for the rest, WA, NT and Tas are far too small and limited by technical factors to even consider competition as being efficient. They are natural monopolies.

In the context of the thread, it's basically technical efficiency versus market efficiency. In the specific case of electricity, technical efficiency makes more difference to price hence swinging the balance in favour of the socialist approach in that industry. In other industries the reverse applies, noting that electricity is the absolute extreme in terms of scale of economy and technical influence - always has been that way and probably always will be.


----------



## McLovin (23 February 2014)

I think the word "Paranoia" should replace "Communism" in the thread title.

Communism/socialism is the purvey of students and inner city lefties. They've never actually been in the real world. It's the reason so many university communists are calling for lower taxes once they get a real job (Rupert Murdoch anyone??). 

The ones who are left after university are just basket weavers running hemp clothing stores in Newtown and Fitzroy. They want to work less than the grueling 10 hours/week they are already doing so they can start an inner city community collective farm and grow organic vegetables. Of course that should be paid for by the poor saps doing 70 hour weeks to make ends meet. These aren't hardcore let's overthrow the government types.

Get the picture.


----------



## sptrawler (23 February 2014)

sydboy007 said:


> Most economists agree we don't have a spending problem per se, but a hollowing out of budget from far too many tax cuts provided by the temporary increase in taxes from the mining boom.
> 
> Howard set the stage and Rudd helped him complete it by agreeing to the proposed tax cuts during the 2007 election.
> 
> If economic ruin is to be one of the few rich countries to still have real income growth for its citizens, well I'll that that ruin to say Greece or Italy, even the USA.




I agree with what you are saying, however it must be kept in context. We were running a deficit when Howard came into office.
That deficit was paid down, gst was introduced and across the board tax cuts were enacted.
If that hadn't been done, the general population would have been peeved, why should taxing be so high if we are running a surplus?
In Howards last year of office $80million was put aside to cover superannuation obligations and a carry over surplus of $20million was carried forward.

Then came Labor and the GFC, the new government copped the gfc soon after attaining office, it was a bad hand.
However, they played it terribly. 
They threw money away to save jobs, when within 6 months they were screaming for workers and giving away 457 visas.
Wages exploded, due to lack of workers, to support the mining sector. 
Then when the budget is in a tailspin, they throw in new taxes, to fill the deficit hole they have dug.

These new taxes cause a negative business sentiment, that reduces investment in new projects.

End result a train wreck, that has caused the loss of some great talent from the Labor Party.
It would have ended better, if Labor had been eased into office, without the turmoil of the gfc.

I feel the gfc, would have been a non event in Australia, if a mature goverment had been in office.
Be it Labor or Liberal.

It's all about timing.


----------



## Smurf1976 (24 February 2014)

sptrawler said:


> I feel the gfc, would have been a non event in Australia, if a mature goverment had been in office. Be it Labor or Liberal.



+1

Without entering a Labor versus Liberal debate, it's hard to deny that from an economic perspective Labor was pretty much elected and thrown straight into the fire. I'm not saying they did a good job of handling it, but then I doubt that any other newly elected government would have done much better.

That said, the notion that ANY government needed to act in view of the GFC is essentially an acknowledgement that the "free" market requires intervention amidst a crisis. In other words, capitalism works just fine as long as there's a bit of socialism along with it. That's what history says and it seems about right to me. Neither works well by itself, what we need is a degree of both.


----------



## sptrawler (24 February 2014)

Smurf1976 said:


> +1
> 
> Without entering a Labor versus Liberal debate, it's hard to deny that from an economic perspective Labor was pretty much elected and thrown straight into the fire. I'm not saying they did a good job of handling it, but then I doubt that any other newly elected government would have done much better.
> 
> That said, the notion that ANY government needed to act in view of the GFC is essentially an acknowledgement that the "free" market requires intervention amidst a crisis. In other words, capitalism works just fine as long as there's a bit of socialism along with it. That's what history says and it seems about right to me. Neither works well by itself, what we need is a degree of both.




I say to my kids "you need Labor to bring about change, new ideas and social reform". 
Then you need Liberal to "find the funds to pay for it".

I don't try and influence them in any way, regarding religion or politics.
i figure no matter which way you play it, it would come back to bite you.lol


----------



## sydboy007 (24 February 2014)

sptrawler said:


> I agree with what you are saying, however it must be kept in context. We were running a deficit when Howard came into office.




Fair enough, though the hawke / Keatign Govts were bequethed a deficit too.



sptrawler said:


> That deficit was paid down, gst was introduced and across the board tax cuts were enacted.




Asset sales are not really paying down debt.  We've privatised so many monopolies and now have some of the highest airport charges in the world, along with some of the highest Telco charges too.  The sale of a vertically integrated Telstra certainly scooped more money, but it's been a tax on the entire economy as well.  Some Commonwealth buildings were sold on lease back where the new owners were in front within a matter of years.  Once again a long term tax on the rest of us.



sptrawler said:


> If that hadn't been done, the general population would have been peeved, why should taxing be so high if we are running a surplus?
> In Howards last year of office $80million was put aside to cover superannuation obligations and a carry over surplus of $20million was carried forward.






sptrawler said:


> Then came Labor and the GFC, the new government copped the gfc soon after attaining office, it was a bad hand.




The norwegian Govt was able to hold a mature conversation with it's citizens back in the 60s to create a SWF that would store the resource wealth of the country for future generations.  Howard could have the done the same.  It would certainly have lowered the AUD and helped protect the hollowing out of industry, as well as stopped the massive increase in private debt - it DOUBLED through the Howard years.  That's what people seem to forget.  For the public sector to save the private sector has to increase debt.  To have both sectors increase savings at the same time leads to recession or depression.  So Howard saved maybe $80B, after asset sales, but that was mainly achieved by household debt increasing at least 5 times, probably closer to 7 times, so in effect the Australian economy had a massive blow out in it's debt.



sptrawler said:


> However, they played it terribly.
> They threw money away to save jobs, when within 6 months they were screaming for workers and giving away 457 visas.




Treasury and the RBA said go fast, go consummer, and they followed the advice and we didn't have a technical recession.  The "capitalist" way woul dhave seen major redundancies and small busines failures.



sptrawler said:


> Wages exploded, due to lack of workers, to support the mining sector.
> 
> Then when the budget is in a tailspin, they throw in new taxes, to fill the deficit hole they have dug.
> 
> These new taxes cause a negative business sentiment, that reduces investment in new projects.




Labor tried to bring in the MRRT which would have slowed some of the resource expansion and lowered the wages explosion in the mining sector.  State Gobvts also have to wear some blame.  QLD allowed 3 seperate LNG trains to be built at the same time.  Talk about CRAZY.



sptrawler said:


> End result a train wreck, that has caused the loss of some great talent from the Labor Party.
> It would have ended better, if Labor had been eased into office, without the turmoil of the gfc.
> 
> I feel the gfc, would have been a non event in Australia, if a mature goverment had been in office.
> ...




How could it have been a non event.  Are you saying there was no mature Govt anywhere in the world?  Besides Canada, what other developed country got through as well as Australia did?  Do you believe Chris Pyne when he says the Coalition would have kept on producing surpluses?

The national savings rate went from negative under the Howard Govt back to 10% within a year of the Rudd Govt.  How do you manage such a contraction in spending if the public sector doesn't increase spending?  How much lower would GDP be now?  I'm pretty confident in saying it would be more than the Govt debt accumulated to support the economy.  Tt's also helped to limit the destruction of long term unemployment causes.

Now the Abbott Govt has to face a resource boom capex fall that knocks off 2% of GDP every year till the next election.  They're also facing rising unemployment, a falling AUD which will make inflation an issue and with the hollowing out of Australian tradeable industries will take a long time to have a positive effect on the economy.  Does a mature Govt say welfare spending is on an unsustainable trajectory, yet says no changes will be made to the biggest and fastest growing welfare payment (aged pension)?  Does a mature Govt say it's OK to claim personal car expenses against your tax when it also says there's a budget crisis, but only if you use a novated lease?


----------



## Smurf1976 (24 February 2014)

sydboy007 said:


> Asset sales are not really paying down debt.  We've privatised so many monopolies and now have some of the highest airport charges in the world, along with some of the highest Telco charges too.  The sale of a vertically integrated Telstra certainly scooped more money, but it's been a tax on the entire economy as well.  Some Commonwealth buildings were sold on lease back where the new owners were in front within a matter of years.  Once again a long term tax on the rest of us.



Indeed. The whole process has essentially been to reap some short term cash at the expense of embedding higher costs across the entire economy.

Nobody really talks about it these days, but in the 80's and 90's there was a huge amount of focus on "microeconomic reform", a term that was in very widespread political usage, and the supposed need to reduce costs and make Australia more competitive. I don't know whether to laugh or cry now that it's clear that the real outcome has been higher costs and reducing Australia's competitiveness. 

The only bit I'm not sure of is whether someone actually thought it was going to work, or if the ultimate outcome was known all along and the public were simply lied to.


----------



## sptrawler (24 February 2014)

sydboy007 said:


> How could it have been a non event.  Are you saying there was no mature Govt anywhere in the world?  Besides Canada, what other developed country got through as well as Australia did?  Do you believe Chris Pyne when he says the Coalition would have kept on producing surpluses?
> 
> ?




You answered your own question, Canada, which has a commodities based economy similar to Australia.
Also has a Westminster based government and welfare sytem similar to Australia.
Came through fine.

You can wax on as much as you like, but it doesn't change the fact the stimulus splurge was a disaster, in all ways.


----------



## sptrawler (24 February 2014)

sydboy007 said:


> Now the Abbott Govt has to face a resource boom capex fall that knocks off 2% of GDP every year till the next election.  They're also facing rising unemployment, a falling AUD which will make inflation an issue and with the hollowing out of Australian tradeable industries will take a long time to have a positive effect on the economy.  Does a mature Govt say welfare spending is on an unsustainable trajectory, yet says no changes will be made to the biggest and fastest growing welfare payment (aged pension)?  Does a mature Govt say it's OK to claim personal car expenses against your tax when it also says there's a budget crisis, but only if you use a novated lease?




Well the first thing Abbott has to face, is the cost of the blow out in asylum seeker costs.
They then have to face the interest payment cost, on the government deficit.

Then they have to face the problems facing the ongoing economy, that you are talking about.
Personal car expenses(novated leases) really have you looked into them?
You can save the difference between your marginal tax rate and the novated tax rate, but you have to do a ridiculous amount of Klm to get it. From memory you have to do 25,000klms/year to qualify for the 11% tax rate.
So in two years your car has done 50,000klms, if you novate it over four years it has done 100,000klms.
It was mainly implemented to mitigate losses for people who do a lot of Klm in their work.
I personaly think there is nothing in it, the capital loss from new, on a high klm car far outweighs the gains.
It's not a perk, it's a game for losers.

Your pet hate the pension, in your opinion it should be only available to people that have saved nothing, never worked and lived with their hands out.lol  Maybe a bit of journalistic license there.

However, when you want to quote other countries, you seem to be selective on the topics you want to quote.

Germany, you quote "they are a highly paid workforce, yet are competitive".
You don't say, in Germany you only recieve a pension comensurate to the years you have worked?

Yet here you want the pension comensurate to how little you've saved.

Even in the U.K (which our system was based on and Canada's still is) everyone who works recieves a pension comensurate to the years of service and paying taxes.

All the *Recent *arrivals, after five years in Australia, qualify for citizenship and therefore  by default a full pension.

Yet someone, who has worked and paid Australian taxes all their lives and also has saved money for a better retirement. In your eyes is the bad guy.lol

Maybe you should be demanding the government ensure, people work and pay taxes also those who come to Australia in later life have enough to cover their costs.

Would seem like a better idea, than making a yolk for your own back.


----------



## IFocus (25 February 2014)

sptrawler said:


> You can wax on as much as you like, but it doesn't change the fact the stimulus splurge was a disaster, in all ways.




Politically it was a disaster and the spending went on to long but to dismiss it is as not saving the Australian economy is folly IMHO.

Mining shed 19% of its work force, if retail did the same god knows where we would have ended up.


----------



## sydboy007 (25 February 2014)

sptrawler said:


> You answered your own question, Canada, which has a commodities based economy similar to Australia.
> Also has a Westminster based government and welfare sytem similar to Australia.
> Came through fine.
> 
> You can wax on as much as you like, but it doesn't change the fact the stimulus splurge was a disaster, in all ways.




Canadian debt is $1.8 trillion.  66% gross federal Govt debt.  If they came through fine, we've come through mighty fine.

The home insulation program was not a disaster.  It will cut energy consumption for the households who received it for a decade, maybe two.  If the Govt is to be held accountable for the deaths that occurred, does that mean that Howard is responsible for all the deaths from the second Iraq war that was based on false evidence?  Howard is responsible for all the soldiers that came back with PTSD?

I doubt the schools that got funding would say it was a disaster, especially the public schools.

Definitely things could have been done cheaper, but only if you look back with 20 20 vision and accept that unemployment would have been / still be higher because the spending would have occurred slower and the negative feedback of job loses and reduced private sector spending on the economy would have seen the economy slow even more than it did.  

Did you know China was going to spend nearly a years GDP in debt growth and cause iron and coal consumption to recover as quickly as it did?  I don't remember anyone picking it till well after the fact.  Labor did the best it could with the information and advice it had at the time.  I doubt a Coalition Govt would have spent less or got much better bang for buck.

Here's the economic logic of the current Govt

Ron Boswell believes that increasing support for E10 fuel is good for the environment and the budget.  He'd like to see 10% of all fuel in Australia be ethanol.  He's all for CO2 abatement of $750 a tonne.  Rural jobs subsidised at a cost of $585K to $640k a job - now if that's not agrarian socialism at its wasteful finest I'm not sure what is.  He is against the RET that provides the same CO2 abatement 4 to 6 times cheaper.  Boswell has a decent amount of clout within the Govt, so he can't be dismissed out of hand.



sptrawler said:


> Well the first thing Abbott has to face, is the cost of the blow out in asylum seeker costs.
> They then have to face the interest payment cost, on the government deficit.
> 
> Then they have to face the problems facing the ongoing economy, that you are talking about.
> ...




So you believe that there should have been $0 in Govt debt after the GFC?  Not 1 single country in the world achieved that.  Any country that had a better GDP performance than Australia had far higher levels of debt accumulation.  Tax revenues are still not back to where they were pre GFC as a % of GDP, and nowhere near the levels of the private sector debt binging Howard years.

How many years of grace will you give the Abbott Govt to get a surplus?  They're facing no more significant challenges than Labor did.  Should they move the capitalist way and cut $50B of spending in the coming budget to balance things out, though providing as much industry assistance as their BCA sponsors deem necessary?  The argument has been it's all due to wasteful spending.

The change to novated leases was budgeted to save around $1.6B  Not small change to my way of thinking, and it just sums up the age of entitlement that supposedly the coalition Govt is against??  If it wasn't such an issue then why did the Abbott lead opposition fight so hard against it?

We have a pension system that is based nearly totally on age.  We have a superannuation system that provides the greatest amount of support to the rich, and now provides nearly no help to the poor to save for their retirement.  The LISC has been removed so the poor will find it even harder to save for retirement.

Superannuation already costs more than the defence budget, and it's only going to increase exponentially over the next decade.  Depending on who's figures you believe superannuation may already cost more than the pension in lost tax.  It would probably have been cheaper to have had a pension tax applied to everyone that was put into a SWF and invested off shore to help keep the AUD at a manageable rate.  Factor in the $20B+ that super costs to run and it seems to have turned into a bad deal for us.

How do we fund tax free super and a doubling of pensioners over the next decade?  Why is the tax you pay based sometimes on age?  Why is the primary residence allowed to be exempt from pretty much every asset test for welfare?  Why does a renter get penalised for welfare compared to a home owner?  Does the tax shelter provided by the family home encourage over investment in housing?  I think it does.  All the stats seem to show our housing is quite expensive for what we get.

As for germany, isn't their pension system rather similar to ours?  The more years you work, the more super you have?  Ones run by Govt, ones run by the private sector.  I'd say our system is more expnesive to run than the Germans.

Last month Howard said “_Australia needs a high level of immigration. I’m a high immigration man. I practiced that in Government.”_

So if you have a beef with people gaining access to the pension after being a resident for 5 years, ask Howard why he was such a high immigration man.  Maybe he can show us one time while in office he ever stated he was for high immigration.  Certainly not when he was courting the 1 nation vote.


----------



## noco (12 March 2014)

Memoirs of the communist dominated unions during World War 11 and how they disrupted shipping of arms and supplies.


As the Abbott government begins to take on union power and corruption, a timely new book reveals the union movement’s role in one of the most shameful periods of Australian history.
What the wharfies did to Australian troops””and their nation’s war effort””between 1939 and 1945 is nothing short of an abomination. 

Perth lawyer Hal Colebatch has done the nation a service with his groundbreaking book, Australia’s Secret War, telling the untold story of union bastardry during World War 2. 

Using diary entries, letters and interviews with key witnesses, he has pieced together with forensic precision the tale of how Australia’s unions sabotaged the war effort; how wharfies vandalised, harassed, and robbed Australian troop ships, and probably cost lives. 

One of the most obscene acts occurred in October, 1945, at the end of the war, after Australian soldiers were released from Japanese prison camps. They were half dead, starving and desperate for home. But when the British aircraft-carrier HMS Speaker brought them into Sydney Harbour, the wharfies went on strike. For 36 hours, the soldiers were forced to remain on-board, tantalisingly close to home. This final act of cruelty from their countrymen was their thanks for all the sacrifice. 

Colebatch coolly recounts outrage after outrage.
There were the radio valves pilfered by waterside workers in Townsville which prevented a new radar station at Green Island from operating. So when American dive bombers returning from a raid on a Japanese base were caught in an electrical storm and lost their bearings, there was no radio station to guide them to safety. Lost, they ran out of fuel and crashed, killing all 32 airmen. 

Colebatch quotes RAAF serviceman James Ahearn, who served at Green Island, where the Australians had to listen impotently to the doomed Americans’ radio calls: “The grief was compounded by the fact that had it not been for the greed and corruption on the Australian waterfront such lives would not have been needlessly lost.” 

Almost every major Australian warship was targeted throughout the war, with little intervention from an enfeebled Prime Minister Curtin.
There was the deliberate destruction by wharfies of vehicles and equipment, theft of food being loaded for soldiers, snap strikes, go-slows, demands for “danger money” for loading biscuits. 

Then there were the coal strikes which pushed down coal production between 1942 and 1945 despite the war emergency. There were a few honourable attempts to resist union leaders, such as the women working in a small arms factory in Orange, NSW, who refused to strike and “pelted union leaders with tomatoes and eggs”. 
This is a tale of the worst of Australia amid the best, the valour and courage of our soldiers in New Guinea providing our last line of defence against Japanese, only to be forced onto starvation rations and to “go easy on the ammo” because strikes by the wharfies back home prevented supplies from reaching them. 
A planned rescue of Australian POWs in Borneo late in the war apparently had to be abandoned, writes Colebatch, because a wharf strike in Brisbane meant the ships had no heavy weapons. 
There was no act too low for the unionists. For instance, in 1941, hundreds of soldiers on board a ship docked in Freemantle entrusted personal letters to wharfies who offered to post them in return for beer money. The letters never arrived. 
At one point in 1942 a US Army colonel became so frustrated at the refusal of Townsville wharfies to load munitions unless paid quadruple time, he ordered his men to throw the unionists into the water and load the guns themselves. 
In Adelaide, American soldiers fired sub-machine guns at wharfies deliberately destroying their aircraft engines by dropping them from great heights.
Australian soldiers had to draw bayonets to stop the same Adelaide wharfies from stealing food meant for troops overseas. 
You will read this book with mounting fury. 
Colebatch offers various explanations for the treasonous behaviour of the unions. Many of the leaders were Communists obsessed with class warfare. Fervent “identity politics” led them to believe they were victims, and that servicemen and women were “puppets of capitalism whose lives were of no consequence”. 
Contrary to popular belief, strikes and sabotage continued to the end of the war, even after the Soviet Union became an ally, writes Colebatch, who contends that the Australian Left may have wanted to undermine the military in preparation for revolution after the war. 
Whatever the reasons for the defective morality of those unionists who sabotaged our war effort, the traitors have never been brought to account.
This story has been largely suppressed for 70 years because Labor and the Left have successfully controlled the narrative of history. But no more, thanks to Colebatch.


----------



## sptrawler (12 March 2014)

IFocus said:


> Politically it was a disaster and the spending went on to long but to dismiss it is as not saving the Australian economy is folly IMHO.
> 
> Mining shed 19% of its work force, if retail did the same god knows where we would have ended up.




First, thanks Noco, for getting this back on page 1. It has been a bit boring.

Now IFocus, mining shed 19% of its workforce, within 10 months the government was harping on about the shortage of skilled labour and pushing through 457's.

There is no way those handouts did anything other than give the retailers a way of getting rid of outdated technology.

The government would be better served, giving them $900 to buy back the power hungry plasma they can't afford to run.
Oh no that's not right, they are on the verge for the junk collection.
Meanwhile, we still have one rail line to Kal and have freight trains, passenger trains and ore trains, jockeying for sidings. Dumb, just pure dumb.


----------



## sptrawler (12 March 2014)

sydboy007 said:


> Canadian debt is $1.8 trillion.  66% gross federal Govt debt.  If they came through fine, we've come through mighty fine.
> 
> The home insulation program was not a disaster.  It will cut energy consumption for the households who received it for a decade, maybe two.  .




The home insulation programme was a disaster, it was a stupid waste of hard earned tax.

Firstly it penalised, responsible people who had installed insulation, at their own cost, they then were taxed to supply it to people who couldn't be bothered.
Its implementation encouraged rorting and that's what happened.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (12 March 2014)

noco said:


> Memoirs of the communist dominated unions during World War 11 and how they disrupted shipping of arms and supplies.
> 
> 
> As the Abbott government begins to take on union power and corruption, a timely new book reveals the union movement’s role in one of the most shameful periods of Australian history.
> ...




Thanks noco, as others have said above for getting this topic back up again.

Many people are surprised by the Liberal voting tendencies in Federal elections  of shipping port cities in Queensland. 

It is all down to the Maritime Workers during WW2 and the Vietnam War.

Treason is probably an understatement, as you detailed in your post, murder and pathological self-interest probably better describe the actions of the dockworkers. They are still treated with suspicion by tradies in Townsville, and scrabble about on obscene high wages tossing their ilgotten gains in to schemes such as Storm Financial. 

As long as we have a Parliament , we will have Commos , and they will have different guises, The Greens fly the flag for left fascism in the present parliament. 

gg


----------



## sptrawler (13 March 2014)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> As long as we have a Parliament , we will have Commos , and they will have different guises, The Greens fly the flag for left fascism in the present parliament.
> 
> gg




But you don't see, even the Greens giving up their tax payer funded privileges. Jeez it is hard to take them seriously.

I have become really disenfranchised, from the do as I say, not as I do mantra.

Maybe politicians should lead by example, as if. lol


----------



## noco (22 March 2014)

This is how communism works in the trade unions in association with the Labor/Green coalition...disrupt the work place by manipulation, intimidation and bullying until the employer gives in for peace on site......

I cannot believe the state governments collect union fees by taking it out of public servants pay and then hand it over to the unions who in turn hand it to the Labor Party....those fees are taken out of the PS pay whether they like it or not.....no choice....take it or leave it. .

UNION membership in Australia might halve overnight if all state governments outlawed payroll deduction of union fees and the federal government outlawed the forcible unionisation of small business by big business.

Unions have always foreseen that such laws might pass. For decades the ACTU has been trying to insure against widespread membership losses by training union officials by the “organising model”, a technique learned from US unionists.

With various degrees of success, Australian unions have been making the transition from the “servicing model” to the organising model.

Unions believe that only those who make this transition will survive D-day, the day government and corporate support evaporates.

The servicing model is where members of unions see themselves as clients who receive services from the union. The problem with the servicing model is that when members are dissatisfied with services they leave the union. This is unsatisfactory for the union hierarchy.

The organising model is where every member is turned from a client into an activist. Members are persuaded they actually are “the union”.

That way, when the union fails them, they have only failed themselves. Hence, resigning union membership doesn’t rectify the failure. The failure is rectified by becoming a better activist and recruiting workmates to participate in the activism and join the union. This is satisfactory for the union hierarchy.

The organising model unionises unionised workplaces via an “organising campaign”.

Drawing from my own training experience and written material from a New York construction union, here is “organising campaign” theory:

There are four basic stages of a campaign.

The first stage is target selection and planning. Businesses are “primary targets” and are discussed: who is growing, who supplies existing union sites, who is bidding for government or business contracts, who has a social connection to a union leader.

Once a target is selected an “organising plan” is drawn up. The plan must include both “bottom-up pressure” and “top-down pressure” to be used against the employer.

Bottom-up pressure is when workers participate in and grow the campaign.

Top-down pressure is when people in high places who have the “ability to alter the behaviour” of the employer apply force. For example, a state government may make it clear a good relationship with unions is needed to get a grant or work contract.

The second stage is to “engage contact”. Any existing members are recruited into the campaign.

If there are no members, a way into the workplace via social means is found. Social media can be used to initiate contact or the workplace is watched to see where people go at lunchtime or after work.

A union official befriends workers on Facebook or bumps into them at a pub or coffee shop with the intent of striking up an acquaintance and securing a social meeting, to be held outside the workplace.

The goal of the first meeting is to identify any discontent with work and harvest information about the workplace so it can be “mapped”.

Chit-chat leads to talk about the workplace, how it runs, what the people are like and who the influencers are. Questioning leads to one crucial point: is there anything at all, no matter how small, the person doesn’t like about their work?

This topic is explored gently; how does it make them feel and may other workers feel the same way? If so, would they be agreeable to invite someone else from work to the next social meeting, just to talk?

The next meeting sees the process repeated. More and more meetings occur, always outside the workplace.

The group grows over many months. The emotion attached to individual grievances about work is used as fire-starter material.

Eventually a collective fire of discontent rages against the boss: energy is harnessed, fear is abandoned and bold action is agreed on. When the emotional heat reaches its peak the third stage is achieved.

Bottom-up and top-down tactics are “deployed simultaneously”.

The union official enters the workplace, informs the employer that unionisation has occurred and tables a list of demands. At the same time, key people in high places inform the employer of their expectation to keep the union happy.

The final stage is reached when the union achieves “surrender by the employer that is being pressured”.

In my opinion, the evangelical organising technique is manipulative and verges on stalking.

Many union people feel the same way. Nevertheless, the leadership has determined the troops learn organising just in case the legislative change they fear ever occurs.

After all, without the support of the Governments and corporations the unions would not survive


http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...ns-manipulate-us/story-fnkdypbm-1226861597895


----------



## noco (22 March 2014)

Can one believe this communist inspired Adam Brant wants to destroy Qantas.


http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...orkers_hell_make_sure_their_business_suffers/


----------



## explod (22 March 2014)

Communism is created and nurtured by poverty. The so called common people at the bottom of the wrung.

People on low income can barely afford a holiday let alone a flight on a plane. So Quantas, do they give a fig. 

The marginalised are moving away from the major parties who no longer care for a fair go.

Ignore the growing social disquiet at your peril. Call em commo,s if you like but it will not make it go away. :-D


----------



## orr (22 March 2014)

From the Highly observant, respected and agile  Legal mind  of a Brandeis, in this case Louis(1846 to 1941);

'We must make our choice. We may have democracy, or we may have wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can't have both'

What a difference an 'e' makes when it comes to those named Brandeis. If it was only as simple as moving one from say, George, where it wouldn't be missed and moving by deed poll to where it could add about 100 or more  IQ points.


----------



## DB008 (22 March 2014)

McLovin said:


> I think the word "Paranoia" should replace "Communism" in the thread title.
> 
> Communism/socialism is the purvey of students and inner city lefties. They've never actually been in the real world. It's the reason so many university communists are calling for lower taxes once they get a real job (Rupert Murdoch anyone??).
> 
> ...




LOL!

SPOT. ON.

I guess for those that don't get the above quote, you'd have to meet some of these people in real life (inner city wankers who know everything, but haven't done a hard days work) to get the picture Mclovin described.


----------



## explod (22 March 2014)

It is easy to armchair sling.

In my families next generation there are six who are at or have recently completed university. They have all done well and have held part or full time jobs to help make thier way. Two are serving policemembers and one still at uni is full
 time with telstra. The buffoons who squader thier time and make believe they are radicals are those from the wealthier families so do not have to work.  

The majority of my family lean strongly to the greens ethics of proper education and good work for all.


----------



## Smurf1976 (22 March 2014)

noco said:


> I cannot believe the state governments collect union fees by taking it out of public servants pay and then hand it over to the unions who in turn hand it to the Labor Party....those fees are taken out of the PS pay whether they like it or not.....no choice....take it or leave it.




It wasn't anything like that when I worked in the (Tas) public service. 

Yes you could have union fees deducted from pay, but you could also have your mortgage payments or any other fixed, regular payment made this way too (eg personal loan repayments etc). There was a limit to the number of recipients of your pay, but you could certainly split it up and direct it to more than just your normal bank savings account.

I don't see anything wrong with that at all, they had the systems set up to do it so it wasn't really any hassle to make it happen. As for unions - membership was absolutely optional with no real effort to encourage it beyond a few posters on notice boards etc. Maybe it's different in other states or in the Australian PS, but that was my experience in the Tas state PS - union membership was definitely voluntary.


----------



## Calliope (22 March 2014)

explod said:


> It is easy to armchair sling.
> The buffoons who squader thier time...




What about the buffoons who "squadered" "thier" time at school?


----------



## noco (23 March 2014)

explod said:


> Communism is created and nurtured by poverty. The so called common people at the bottom of the wrung.
> 
> People on low income can barely afford a holiday let alone a flight on a plane. So Quantas, do they give a fig.
> 
> ...





Most of those whom you talk about in poverty, either gamble, smoke and P**s their money against the wall.

I have seen heaps of here in my own home town of Townsville and I am sure Garpal Gumnut will back me up on that one.

They only have themselves to blame and communism thrives on it....look at the rich man...look at the poor man.

From my post #1007 ....ASF Joke Thread

Recently, while I was working in the flower beds in the front yard, my neighbours stopped to chat as they returned home from walking their dog.

During our friendly conversation, I asked their 12 year old daughter what she wanted to be when she grows up. She said she wanted to be Prime Minister some day.

Both of her parents who are Socialist Labour were standing there, so I asked her, "If you were Prime Minister what would be the first thing you would do?"

She replied, "I'd give food and houses to all the homeless people."

Her parents beamed with pride!


"Wow! What a worthy goal!" I said. "But you don't have to wait until you're Prime Minister to do that!" I told her.

"What do you mean?" she replied.

So I told her, "You can come over to my house and mow the lawn, pull weeds, and trim my hedge, and I'll pay you $50. Then you can go over to the grocery store where the homeless guy hangs out, and you can
Give him the $50 to use toward food and a new house."


She thought that over for a few seconds, then she looked me straight in the eye and asked, "Why doesn't the homeless guy come over and do the work, and you can just pay him the $50?"


I said, "Welcome to the Liberal Party."


Her parents aren't speaking to me, anymore.


----------



## rumpole (23 March 2014)

noco said:


> Most of those whom you talk about in poverty, either gamble, smoke and P**s their money against the wall.




Do you have any stats to back that up, or is it just pure prejudice ?


----------



## noco (23 March 2014)

rumpole said:


> Do you have any stats to back that up, or is it just pure prejudice ?





I am quite sure you have enough intelligence to do your own research.....

I am speaking for what I see on the ground in Townsville and I have lived here for 43 years....I don't need statistics to tell me.

I am sure Garpal Gumnut will, in time, support what he also sees here.


----------



## rumpole (23 March 2014)

noco said:


> I am sure Garpal Gumnut will, in time, support what he also sees here.




What are his credentials in the matter ? Is he a social worker ?


----------



## Caveman (23 March 2014)

noco said:


> The goal of the first meeting is to identify any discontent with work and harvest information about the workplace so it can be “mapped”.



They would have a field day at my workplace. LOL


----------



## chiff (23 March 2014)

Manuel from Barcelona-Noco from Townsville!


----------



## noco (24 March 2014)

rumpole said:


> What are his credentials in the matter ? Is he a social worker ?




You should ask Garpal Gumnut...I have never met GG in person but I do know he is a well known and respectful person with a colorful background here in Townsville.......what he does not know about Townsville is not worth knowing.


----------



## noco (12 April 2014)

Professors in many universities are preaching Marxism (communism) in a dichromatic way.......a way without making it too obvious to the fact.

I know of a young medical student in Townsville who has just experienced this notion from one particular Professor.

They are trying to convert the young academics in a very subtle way.


Vhttp://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/marxism_the_creed_of_rude_children/


----------



## noco (5 May 2014)

The NSW Fabian Society is a branch of communism...Julia Gillard was and still is a member also.

And no surprise to learn Chris Bowen, Jenny Macklin and Nick Dyrenfurth are also members of the Fabian Society....they believe in state ownership (out right communism nothing more and nothing less). 


The socialist objective does not adequately describe Labor’s governing traditions or its continuing purpose in politics. It may not lose votes, but it surely doesn’t win any votes. Labor has often ignored it in government. So why keep it?

*Tomorrow, the NSW Fabian Society will kick-start a new *debate about the relevance of the socialist objective with oppos*ition Treasury spokesman Chris Bowen, Labor’s national president Jenny McAllister and Labor historian Nick Dyrenfurth.
*
At a forum in Sydney, Bowen will reiterate what he wrote in his book Hearts and Minds, published last year: “We can’t expect the Australian people to be clear about what modern Labor represents if we are not crystal clear about it ourselves.” He wants the objective replaced with a new statement.

McAllister will say Labor “should always be open to refreshing our philosophy and *approach” but is not proposing change to the objective. “It asserts our core belief that government should ensure the economy works for all of us, not just a narrow few,” she says.

Dyrenfurth, however, believes that the current ideologically dogmatic objective should be “unceremoniously tossed on to the ashtray of history” and a new objective crafted that doesn’t shy away from Labor’s “social-ist” purpose.

In 1994, British Labour leader Tony Blair pushed for the abolition of Clause IV — his party’s commitment to public ownership of the central pillars of the economy. A new statement was developed. Blair saw it as a critical step in defining his vision for *Labour and demonstrating that the party had changed.

Labor members and candid*ates must pledge themselves to support the socialist objective.

But any governing party throughout the world that has tried to implement socialism has either collapsed or fallen into dictatorship and oppression to remain in power. Socialism failed to achieve an economic structure that was dynamic, efficient and equitable.

It was not until Labor split after World War I and lurched leftward that a broad socialism plank was adopted. It never *enjoyed broad support.

John Curtin described the *objective as a “dead tiger” and pledged not to implement it. Gough Whitlam and Hawke have told me it should be abolished. Keating says effective political leadership requires courage and imagination. The socialist objective is a good place to start.

The benefits for Shorten in leading change far outweigh the risks. The process of developing a new mission statement would not only be cathartic for Labor after its election defeat last September, but it would also *invest the party with new meaning and purpose.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...-credo-has-to-go/story-fnbcok0h-1226905028310


----------



## noco (6 May 2014)

This is the modes operand i of  Socialism (communism). Disrupt, humiliate and ridicule those in power who are opposite to their ideology....they do not believe in democracy and expect everything for nothing.....I am sure Tony Jones (QandA)  was fully aware of what was about to unfold because he is one of their kind......It was well and truly orchestrated from the beginning to embarrass Christopher Pyne. 


http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...rove_the_worst_of_the_abc_and_their_politics/


----------



## orr (6 May 2014)

noco said:


> This is the modes operand i of  Socialism (communism). Disrupt, humiliate and ridicule those in power who are opposite to their ideology....they do not believe in democracy and expect everything for nothing.....I am sure Tony Jones (QandA)  was fully aware of what was about to unfold because he is one of their kind......It was well and truly orchestrated from the beginning to embarrass Christopher Pyne.
> 
> 
> http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...rove_the_worst_of_the_abc_and_their_politics/




In your own time noco, can you give me your take on 'Das Kapital', and where it sits in 'our'(current historic) understanding of economic development. And then, again in your own time, your critique of the 'Communist Manifesto'


----------



## noco (6 May 2014)

orr said:


> In your own time noco, can you give me your take on 'Das Kapital', and where it sits in 'our'(current historic) understanding of economic development. And then, again in your own time, your critique of the 'Communist Manifesto'




I must confess, I had never heard of 'Das Kapital until you mentioned it. however I did some research through Google and was surprised to learn so much......There is volumes available on to read......He mainly speaks of Capitalism in the 19th century but very little on Communism. In that era, labour was well and truly exploited which eventually brought about unionism I think round about 1901 and was most likely warranted to counter exploitation of workers.

One of the problems with Communism was very little research and marketing of goods and commodities was carried out resulting in over run of goods.....manufacturing more or some cases less than what was required......Nobody really had any incentive to succeed under Communism and consequently the system failed.

Capitalism has and always will out last Communism given at times there are ups and downs in the Capitalist system.

The link below is some Analysis of Karl Marx.

Marx’s account of the exploitative relationship of capitalist to labor remains powerfully compelling and seems by many to be vindicated in history. Essentially, Marx argues that the mechanism of exploitation built into the capitalist economic system is the source of social antagonisms that will eventually lead to the dismantling of capitalism itself. In the early Hegelian writings, Marx looks to a notion of alienation, the estrangement of the worker from his humanity, to support the same prognosis. With the theory of exploitation and surplus value, he shifts away from philosophical language toward an economic frame of reference, though a common element, the idea that the capitalist social relations of production will lead to a destruction of the capitalist mode of production. The later formulation is more effective than the earlier, as it accompanies an analysis of actual historical events rather than purely speculative thought.

Writing in exile in England, Marx was able to view firsthand the workings of the world’s most advanced industrial economy. Scenes of textile laborers in industrial Manchester living in abject squalor and barely clinging to life, the poet William Blake’s evocative and disturbing images of “dark satanic mills,” all impressed on many the downside of growing production and prosperity that had become evident in England and throughout much of Europe. Marx tried to show that such poverty was a permanent feature of capitalism and in fact would grow worse as capitalism advanced. With no means of defense, the working class’s economic well-being is at the mercy of capitalists. But the capitalist, if he wishes to survive in a competitive market, cannot exercise mercy without endangering his enterprise. Classes grow out of this antagonistic relationship that exposes their bare economic interests. The bourgeoisie unite to defend their monopoly over workers using all the means at their disposal, including the state and even religion. While workers, through common association, gradually manage to unite to push back the capitalist. In England, the Parliament, through growing pressure of workers and their sympathetic advocates among the upper classes, finally decided to intervene in this exploitative relationship.


----------



## chode84 (6 May 2014)

> Can one believe this communist inspired Adam Brant wants to destroy Qantas.
> 
> 
> http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/a...iness_suffers/




Noco, what in gods name are you on about? 6 pages of drivel is all I've heard from you with the above quoted text taking the cake for stupidest forum entry so far. 

How does Adam Bandt tweeting a photo of himself with Qantas workers and taking the position of not wanting Qantas sold to overseas interests equate to communism? 

You're starting to sound like a bit of a nutter, if you didn't already.


----------



## noco (7 May 2014)

chode84 said:


> Noco, what in gods name are you on about? 6 pages of drivel is all I've heard from you with the above quoted text taking the cake for stupidest forum entry so far.
> 
> How does Adam Bandt tweeting a photo of himself with Qantas workers and taking the position of not wanting Qantas sold to overseas interests equate to communism?
> 
> You're starting to sound like a bit of a nutter, if you didn't already.




From your attitude of the above rhetoric, it is one's belief that you may be a young uni student sympathizer of the Green movement similar to the ones who interrupted the Q&A show on Monday night.

Adam Brandt clearly stated he would make Qantas suffer over and above the $100,000,000 Carbon Dioxide tax  imposed upon this company by the comrades of the Greens.

And this from one of  Larry Pickerings later comments.

V
alpinist
7 hours ago

These imbeciles are not real hard studying young Australians. These creatures are the young versions of Jones' and of similar scum currently running their ABC mirroring their Marxist Leninist Totalitarian ideology. I could bet my last dollar that these so called students are engaged in degrees such as Political Science, Humanities, International Law, Environmental Activism and similar absolutely useless BA degrees. In my time at uni we always joked that the BA degree stands for Bugger All. Most of these so called courses do not require much input from their "students" who, as you rightly described, are almost continuously attached to their bongs! What cheeses me off that we, the taxpayer, subsidize this Marxist scum! One should stop supporting useless studies. If they want to study Marxism, well let them do so, but at their expense, not at that of Australian taxpayer!

BTW. Your insults on me reference being a 'nutter' does not concern me one bit.....That is a typical tactic used by Socialist left wing fanatics who like to intimidate those who are opposed to their  ideology.....Attack the personality of the  man and not what he believes in.


----------



## SirRumpole (7 May 2014)

> And this from one of Larry Pickerings later comments.




I'd just like to say that quoting Larry Pickering is the best thing you can do to convince anyone of your own credibility.

That man is as vile as they come, as that frothy mouthed, vituperous rant you quoted clearly shows.

Associating yourself with that garbage does you no credit whatever.


----------



## noco (7 May 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> I'd just like to say that quoting Larry Pickering is the best thing you can do to convince anyone of your own credibility.
> 
> That man is as vile as they come, as that frothy mouthed, vituperous rant you quoted clearly shows.
> 
> Associating yourself with that garbage does you no credit whatever.




Ah Rumpy, freedom of speech is wonderful in out society.....enjoy it while you can because if we were ever dictated to by Communism or Islam, that once enjoyed freedom of speech may well land you in jail....remember Gillard was working on suppressing what we still enjoy.


----------



## SirRumpole (7 May 2014)

noco said:


> Ah Rumpy, freedom of speech is wonderful in out society.....enjoy it while you can because if we were ever dictated to by Communism or Islam, that once enjoyed freedom of speech may well land you in jail....remember Gillard was working on suppressing what we still enjoy.




And Abbott is working on ways of supressing the ABC, the media outlet trusted most by the majority of Australians, as repeated surveys have shown.


----------



## noco (7 May 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> And Abbott is working on ways of supressing the ABC, the media outlet trusted most by the majority of Australians, as repeated surveys have shown.




What ways are you talking about Abbott suppressing the ABC?

90% of the ABC programs are good value but when it involves such people like Tony Jones, who is as far left as he can possibly be and is blatantly biased towards  the Labor Party, then it is time to remind him of the ABC charter.

Jones goes out of his way to embarrass the Liberal Party when ever he sees an opening just as he did on the Q&A program on Monday.......he has done it so often, it is becoming quite repetitive and very bloody minded and is contrary to the charter set out for the ABC.......The ABC has been loaded by the Labor Party over their term in office with socialist left  people who have their own ideology based on Socialist teachings.

When Jones believes the tide is turning against the Labor Party, he will always break in and gag those who appear to be on top by saying , "OK we have had a enough of the topic, we must move on to the next question".

So it is not a matter of Abbot suppressing the ABC as it is a matter of  seeking unbiased fairness.


----------



## SirRumpole (7 May 2014)

> When Jones believes the tide is turning against the Labor Party, he will always break in and gag those who appear to be on top by saying , "OK we have had a enough of the topic, we must move on to the next question".




Christopher Pyne would ramble on for the whole program if he was allowed to, you have to draw the line somewhere.


----------



## noco (7 May 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> Christopher Pyne would ramble on for the whole program if he was allowed to, you have to draw the line somewhere.




Yeah, but did you noticed how he allowed his comrade like Anna Bourke to ramble on as long as she liked so long as it was derogatory of the Libs.....Anna Bourke is also a Fabian girl and was just as biased as a speaker even worse than Bronwyn Bishop.

Because Pyne was manager of opposition business, Anna Bourke kicked Pyne out of parliament more than any other member.


----------



## Julia (7 May 2014)

noco said:


> Because Pyne was manager of opposition business, Anna Bourke kicked Pyne out of parliament more than any other member.



Have you considered that it might have been because Mr Pyne repeatedly pushed the boundaries of what was acceptable debate?


----------



## noco (8 May 2014)

Julia said:


> Have you considered that it might have been because Mr Pyne repeatedly pushed the boundaries of what was acceptable debate?




Julia, to what extent do you believe he pushed the boundaries?

He was doing his best to explain the policy on Education but the interruptions and the heckling mad it difficult to follow.....He was certainly set up, there is no doubt about that.....Jones set out to embarrass Pyne and the Liberal Party and I am sure he knew about the Uni students but it all seemed to go wrong for Jones......I do not believe he expected those Uni students to go s far as they did and at the end of the day, Jones was the one who lost credibility....Right from the start the first question went to uni student in the audience who continually interrupted Pyne while he was trying to answer his question.

I have a young friend who is studying medicine at JCU and he tells me of certain Professors and Tutors who  are pushing the socialist borrow in a very subtle way and I am not surprised that a large percentage of those uni students who demonstrated on Q&A had been gently brain washed into the socialism. I am told that this practice is rife in one of the Melbourne Universities.


----------



## SirRumpole (8 May 2014)

noco said:


> Julia, to what extent do you believe he pushed the boundaries?
> 
> He was doing his best to explain the policy on Education but the interruptions and the heckling mad it difficult to follow.....He was certainly set up, there is no doubt about that.....Jones set out to embarrass Pyne and the Liberal Party and I am sure he knew about the Uni students but it all seemed to go wrong for Jones......I do not believe he expected those Uni students to go s far as they did and at the end of the day, Jones was the one who lost credibility....Right from the start the first question went to uni student in the audience who continually interrupted Pyne while he was trying to answer his question.




As usual noco, you are barking up the wrong tree . Julia was referring to Pyne's performance in Parliament when in Opposition where he definitely did push the envelope, not his efforts on Q&A this week.

I found Anna Burke a fair Speaker, she often chided Ministers for not being relevant, unlike Bishop, where anything her own side says is fair game, and anything Labor says is cut off at the earliest opportunity. She is a disgrace as a Speaker.


----------



## noco (8 May 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> As usual noco, you are barking up the wrong tree . Julia was referring to Pyne's performance in Parliament when in Opposition where he definitely did push the envelope, not his efforts on Q&A this week.
> 
> I found Anna Burke a fair Speaker, she often chided Ministers for not being relevant, unlike Bishop, where anything her own side says is fair game, and anything Labor says is cut off at the earliest opportunity. She is a disgrace as a Speaker.




Yes my apology to Julia.....Rumpy you are right for once.


----------



## noco (8 May 2014)

Julia said:


> Have you considered that it might have been because Mr Pyne repeatedly pushed the boundaries of what was acceptable debate?




Julia, my apology.....I believed at the time I was on the Q&A discussion...I am not sure how it unfolded on this thread.....probably because each post became intertwined in each other

But to your point,and I realize it is off this thread,  Pyne as Manager of Opposition business was doing his job.

I believe Tony Burke pushed the boundaries  a lot further with Bronwyn Bishop which was a set up for the final day of the last sitting when the  Labor Party tried to move a motion of no- confidence in the speaker...Dreyfos was ejected for the remark he passed on the chair...It came out as 'MADAME SPEAKER AND NOT MADAM SPEAKER which triggered Tony Burke into moving the motion of no-confidence......Tony Burke had a well prepared statement which he read from..Just why they did it when they did not have the numbers is beyond comprehension....It was a set up IMHO.


----------



## SirRumpole (8 May 2014)

noco said:


> Tony Burke had a well prepared statement which he read from..Just why they did it when they did not have the numbers is beyond comprehension....It was a set up IMHO.




Sometimes these things have to be said, even if it doesn't produce a result. The motion was always going to lose, but if it embarrassed Bishop into better conduct then it would be worthwhile.

Both sides could agree to have an independent Speaker, maybe the Clerk of the House could do the job as he has the experience and knowledge of Parliamentary proceedings and gives advice to the pollies on how things should be run, but of course whoever is in government at the time wants to keep the advantage.


----------



## noco (8 May 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> Sometimes these things have to be said, even if it doesn't produce a result. The motion was always going to lose, but if it embarrassed Bishop into better conduct then it would be worthwhile.
> 
> Both sides could agree to have an independent Speaker, maybe the Clerk of the House could do the job as he has the experience and knowledge of Parliamentary proceedings and gives advice to the pollies on how things should be run, but of course whoever is in government at the time wants to keep the advantage.





Yes and I must agree, both parties exploit it to the fullest.......It's a case of what comes naturally.


----------



## sydboy007 (8 May 2014)

Those bloody communists killing off competition in the economy.  Communists and Governments should just stand out of the way and stop getting in the road of capitalism doing it's job of keeping markets efficient and competition strong.

The US banking situation has been similar to Australias' more extreme loss of competition.  St George, Bankwest, RAMS, Aussie home loans, Wizard, Challenger absorbed by the majors.  Adelaide and Bendigo banks merged.

Brilliant video on how destructive communism has been to the economy

http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2014/05/myth-great-moderation.html

If you're disinclined to watch it some screen shots of the pertinent facts.  Australia is heading towards the same kinds of extremes.

Just goes to show how destructive rampant communism within the economy has been


----------



## Julia (8 May 2014)

noco said:


> Julia, my apology.....I believed at the time I was on the Q&A discussion...



No apology necessary, noco.  
I didn't actually say that Mr Pyne had pushed any boundaries, just asked you to consider that the Speaker might, on some occasions, have had valid grounds for criticising his conduct.

I haven't yet watched Monday's Q & A, and I almost never watch parliament.
I actually find Mr Pyne quite sharply amusing at times, but personally value a more thoughtful approach in politicians.  (Yep, good luck with that!)

I did see "Insiders" when he was the guest and he was like a squawking parrot, simply awful.

Agree that the speaker would be much better chosen from someone non-aligned but I suppose such a person  would be hard to find.


----------



## noco (18 May 2014)

This is a very deliberate action by communist inspired students and some of their professors.

Rebel about Government decisions with intimidation and violence.......If they believe in democracy, then they should express their opinion at the ballot box rather than trying to assault the Foreign Minister. 


http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/to...ishop-was-mobbed/story-fni0fiyv-1226921399144


----------



## noco (18 May 2014)

During her time in office, Miss Fabian Society girl clearly kept in touch with her comrades in Russia by way of sending a couple of union officials at tax payers expense.


http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/.../comments/paying_15000_for_gillards_comrades/


----------



## noco (20 May 2014)

And the communist dominated unions are about to ramp up their militant disruptive actions to destroy Big business where ever and when ever they can.....in the interest of the nation of course !!!!!!!!!!


http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...-blogs:mini-blogs|1|heading|homepage|homepage


----------



## noco (21 May 2014)

These young students are being brain washed into intimidation and thuggery by Communist inspired Professors and tutors....."STAND UP FOR YOUR RIGHTS BLAH, BLAH, BLAH".
They have obviously been conned into 'GETUP' with all disregard and respect for democracy that should be shown in an society.
If they were treated and assaulted as they did to our Foreign Minister, there would be a riot.

SHAME...SHAME...SHAME on these young thugs.


http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...-blogs:mini-blogs|1|heading|homepage|homepage


----------



## noco (23 May 2014)

I know I keep harping on this subject but communism is raising its ugly head again in Australia like we have not seen for some years.

Their ideology is to rebel against governments who oppose them, create havoc in the streets, intimidate national leaders and promote drugs and sex to young people.

More mention is being made of GET UP and the Fabian Society who are behind most of the street rioting.......Here we have the likes of Bill Shorten who is a member of GET UP and Bowen, Macklin and Gillard who are well known Fabian Society members.  Both of these organizations are  are a front for communism along with the Greens. 



http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...say-demographers/story-fnihsrf2-1226927576938


----------



## noco (23 May 2014)

noco said:


> I know I keep harping on this subject but communism is raising its ugly head again in Australia like we have not seen for some years.
> 
> Their ideology is to rebel against governments who oppose them, create havoc in the streets, intimidate national leaders and promote drugs and sex to young people.
> 
> ...




It is a shame the media are aiding and abetting these organizations just to sell their papers and TV time....Without the media exposure they would not succeed.


----------



## explod (23 May 2014)

noco said:


> It is a shame the media are aiding and abetting these organizations just to sell their papers and TV time....Without the media exposure they would not succeed.




Rubbish, it is called socialism and is being brought on,by the greed and narrowmindedness of the extreme right.


----------



## SirRumpole (23 May 2014)

noco said:


> I know I keep harping on this subject...




Not that anyone noticed...


----------



## noco (23 May 2014)

explod said:


> Rubbish, it is called socialism and is being brought on,by the greed and narrowmindedness of the extreme right.




But this is what Communism preaches in order to convert people into their way of thinking....they use the old dialogue of greed......do you believe there is no greed or corruption in Communist Countries?

Do you really believe there is a difference between Socialism, Fabianism and the Greens movement to Communism?

They are all looking for the end result whereby everything is state owned.....no freedom of speech.....they don't believe in free enterprise ......profit is a dirty word ......is this way you would like to live?

Loudly voice your opinion......criticize the government...belittle and intimidate our leaders....... riot in the streets to express your disdain about Government policies and you will soon end up in jail.

Would you prefer to live in Russia, China, North Korea or Cuba?


----------



## noco (24 May 2014)

The University where they train socialist thugs......This type of political persuasion  should not be tolerated   in our Universities. 


http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/teac/


----------



## noco (25 May 2014)

Socialist (communism) men at work to disrupt progress, add to the costs, create havoc and add to the financial burden on the public of having to commit police for the  security of others....just read the link to see the extra cost involved. 


http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/the_price_of_socialism/


----------



## explod (25 May 2014)

You know what makes commos and crooks?

Cutting back on government educational support in poorer communities.

Noco, you sound as though you live a miserable existence.


----------



## noco (25 May 2014)

explod said:


> You know what makes commos and crooks?
> 
> Cutting back on government educational support in poorer communities.
> 
> Noco, you sound as though you live a miserable existence.




I was not really going to waste my time in responding to you PLOD because I know you have attempted to  bait me....So I thought I would not disappoint you.

If the Government had not had to lay out $4.3 million, plus a lot more to come from these thugs who say we have not even started yet, then there would have been more money to spend on education.....they are comparable to alcoholics......spend there money on grog and there will not much left to feed the kids at home.

These university thugs, and they are a minority group, are supposed to be the brains of the future......They are brain washed by Socialist Professors and aided and abetted by militant unions and the Labor Party indirectly through the Fabian Society and GETUP.....so is it good for the nation?....Definitely not....If they want to live under Communist rule by all means let them but if they dare what they are doing now they will most likely be shot or sent to prison.  
*
You made the stupid remark that I may live a miserable existence....So you don't like what I say and the only way you know is to attack my way of living for which you would have no idea....this is the usual rot that comes from the mouths of Socialists.
For your information, I live in a very happy and comfortable environment.*


----------



## noco (25 May 2014)

noco said:


> I was not really going to waste my time in responding to you PLOD because I know you have attempted to  bait me....So I thought I would not disappoint you.
> 
> If the Government had not had to lay out $4.3 million, plus a lot more to come from these thugs who say we have not even started yet, then there would have been more money to spend on education.....they are comparable to alcoholics......spend there money on grog and there will not much left to feed the kids at home.
> 
> ...



*



No Right to make your case

    GERARD HENDERSON
    The Australian
    May 24, 2014 12:00AM

    Print
    Save for later

Police break up a demonstration by students at University of Technology, Sydney, this wee

Police break up a demonstration by students at University of Technology, Sydney, this week. Picture Craig Greenhill Source: News Corp Australia

< Prev

Next >

••

SINCE my days at university, I have supported police who are confronted by radical students and their somewhat older cohort of revolutionaries, who present themselves as modern-day followers of Leon Trotsky.

The Bolshevik Trotsky murdered Russian sailors at Kronstadt in 1921. And today’s Trots seem to delight in attacking police, who tend to comprise the remnants of what was once called the working class.

The scene in Melbourne last Wednesday of a demonstrator punching a young policeman in the back of the head indicated the contempt some radicals have for those employed to uphold law and order — and freedom — within democratic societies.

The recent violent demonstrations against Foreign Affairs Minister Julie Bishop at the University of Sydney and former Liberal MP Sophie Mirabella at the University of Melbourne demonstrate the authoritarian intolerance of the contemporary radical Left.

Those who comprise groups such as the Socialist Alliance and the Education Action Collective do not want to engage in discussion. Rather, they want to close down debate.

This is part of the authoritarian mindset that is prevalent within the extreme Left and the extreme Right. In Western societies, the totalitarian Right collapsed following the military defeat of Nazism and fascism. The totalitarian Left, however, has not completely gone away. Moreover, some of its heroes — such as Vladimir Lenin, Mao Zedong and Ho Chi Minh — have not been discredited in left-wing thought.

Most of the contemporary campus Left has probably never heard of German-born Marxist Herbert Marcuse (1898-1979) who was much admired by the Left intelligentsia half a century ago. It is often a sign of important thinkers that their influence extends through the ages in an anonymous manner.

In 1965, Marcuse published his essay Repressive Tolerance. Marcuse advocated what he termed “liberating tolerance”. This entailed “intolerance against movements from the Right and toleration of movements from the Left”. Marcuse advocated “the withdrawal of tolerance from regressive movements”; that is, org*anisations with which he dis*agreed. And Marcuse proclaimed the need for the Left to exhibit “intolerance towards the self-styled conservatives, to the political Right”.

On the advice of the Australian Federal Police, Tony Abbott cancelled a visit he and Education Minister Christopher Pyne were to make to Deakin University in Victoria on Wednesday.

That morning Rowan Payne, from the Deakin University Student Association and the National Union of Students, appeared on ABC1’s News Breakfast program. Payne was given numerous opportunities by presenter Virginia Trioli to condemn the intolerance exhibited against Bishop and Mirabella along with the threat of violence that had prevented the Prime Minister from visiting Deakin University.

Payne said that he and his fellow students were “terribly upset” with the Abbott government and looked back in happiness to “the glory days of free education in this country”.

Free tertiary education was introduced by Gough Whitlam’s big spending, big taxing Labor government in the early 1970s and abandoned by Labor prime minister Bob Hawke just over a decade later. Hawke did not see any glory in the fact men and women in the police force and elsewhere were compelled to fund the tertiary education of students who were destined to earn much more than they did.

As was the case with student radicals in the 60s and 70s, Payne and his fellow intolerant comrades get succour from their teachers. On the day that Abbott’s visit to Deakin University was cancelled, Scott Burchill appeared on News Breakfast. Burchill is a left-wing academic at Deakin University who has spent most of his career in taxpayer funded or subsidised employment.

To the apparent surprise of Trioli and her co-presenter Michael Rowland, Burchill essentially endorsed the action against Bishop and Mirabella. He maintained that: “When you start hacking and cutting and taking away people’s budgets and forcing them to work longer hours or study longer, you shouldn’t be surprised that people get angry and upset about these things.” Burchill went on to rationalise physical attacks as “the traditional university way”.

Right now, Marcuse’s concept of repressive tolerance seems all the rage within Western universities. In recent times, the supposedly left-liberal Brandeis University in the US overturned its decision to grant heroic Somali-born human rights activist Ayaan Hirsi Ali an honorary degree. What’s more, former US secretary of state Condoleezza Rice felt forced to withdraw from giving the commencement address at Rutgers University.

Hirsi Ali was attacked by left activists for her forceful opposition to Islamism in general and female genital mutilation in particular. Rice was condemned for the fact she supported the coalition of the willing’s invasion of Iraq to remove the dictator Saddam Hussein. There is a widespread view on many campuses that what the Left depicts as “error” has no right to exist and that those “in error” have no right to enter universities.

To some extent, this intolerance is encouraged by the fact so much of what passes for debate at contemporary universities and literary festivals is a left-wing stack.

Take the University of Melbourne, for example. Its public lectures for May contained a segment entitled “Budget assessment”. There was only one view heard: that of University of Queensland left-wing economist John Quiggin.

In 2012 its law school’s Wednesday Lectures series featured only left-wing speakers, namely Raimond Gaita, Larissa Behrendt, Gerry Simpson and Robert Manne. It was much the same last year.

When institutions such as this sponsor forums where all speakers agree with each other in a leftist kind of way, it’s hardly surprising when the radical Left physically attempts to prevent conservative views from being heard on *campus.

Gerard Henderson is executive director of the Sydney Institute.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...o-make-your-case/story-fnkqo7i5-1226929209400*


----------



## explod (25 May 2014)

You miss the point entirely.

Forget them once they have hit 16, no amount of whip will change the rotten apples.

A fix will take half a generation but liberal philosophy on all for making money will never get their or your head round it.

A good read of possible approaches could start with, for you noco is Malcolm Fraser and Margaret Simons, 2010. It will be in the library


----------



## noco (25 May 2014)

explod said:


> You miss the point entirely.
> 
> Forget them once they have hit 16, no amount of whip will change the rotten apples.
> 
> ...




Plod have you been on the plonk today? ...... What you have just stated does not make a lot of sense.

What I have stated are the facts.


----------



## explod (29 May 2014)

What noco is the meaning of a "leftist kind of a way"

Education is about exploring all angles and ideas of which the Libs are bereft.

You have still not advised where all these jobs for the unemployed are going to come from.  A few new shopping centres and freeways are certainly not going to do it.


----------



## sydboy007 (29 May 2014)

noco said:


> The University where they train socialist thugs......This type of political persuasion  should not be tolerated   in our Universities.
> 
> 
> http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/teac/




Sounds like Joe Hockey has to step down eh?


----------



## noco (14 June 2014)

Heer is absolute proof, Gillard is  a Communist.....Even Bill Shorten new she was a Communist just as we have proof about Chris Bowen and Jenny Macklin who are members of the Fabian Society.

Read the sub links for more information on how the Trade unions are associated with communism.



http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/gillards_plan_for_power

olumn - More than just red hair
Icon - Comments 56 Comments | Permalink
Andrew Bolt Blog Icon Arrow

Andrew Bolt
October 19 2007 (6:10am)


WHAT you were matters less than what you are, so it can’t hurt Julia Gillard to admit her past—and reject it. Then why won’t she?

Fact: for at least eight years the deputy Labor leader was an official of the hard-Left Socialist Forum.

Here’s how Melbourne University’s archives describe her group:

“The Socialist Forum was established in 1984, initially by disaffected members of the Communist Party of Australia (CPA). Its membership included Australian Labor Party (ALP) members and political activists . . . (Its) stated aim was to contribute to the development of democratic socialism in Australia . . .”

And one of its unstated aims was to help former communists join Labor.

Back then Gillard had no trouble admitting to that communist influence, writing in an SF pamphlet: “Around 45 of the forum’s members left the Communist Party of Australia in the division of a year ago . . .”

She’d know.

She not only wrote such pamphlets for the SF’s 200 or more members, but worked until 1993—when she’d already become a lawyer—as its organiser and then on its management committee.

The policies she pushed were the usual sandwich-board stuff: scrapping our US alliance, super-taxing the rich, introducing death duties, blah blah. But here’s a novel one: twinning Melbourne with Leningrad—renamed now, post-communism, St Petersburg.

Of course, most of us grow wiser with experience and—note well, young radicals—leave such heady but ruinous Leftism behind.

But has Gillard? It’s a fair question to ask someone who wants to be our deputy prime minister, in charge of workplace “reform”, especially when she’s part of a Labor team of which some 70 per cent are ex-union officials.

But here’s the troubling thing about her replies. Far from repudiating her past radicalism, she refuses to even admit to it. Here, for instance, is part of her interview on the ABC’s Lateline program on Wednesday:

Gillard: I was a full-time university student and I had a part-time job for an organisation called Socialist Forum, which was a sort of debating society . . .

Interviewer: It wasn’t a front organisation for communists?

Gillard: Certainly not. It was an organisation where people who identified themselves as progressives, some in the Labor Party, some outside the Labor Party, would come together and would talk about ideas. I did clerical and administrative work . . .

Good skills with that airbrush, Julia.

Gillard—a long-time official and a leader of a group created by communists—is transformed. In her new version, she becomes just a part-time typist in her “student days” for “progressives”, who merely debated stuff. Her communists become simply people “outside the Labor Party”.

That’s neither frank nor, I suggest, quite honest. And when asked a direct question . . .

Interviewer: Are you now, or have you ever been, a member of the Communist Party?

Gillard: Tony, I think that question shows how silly all of this is getting, though I suspect in this interview, probably the Howard Government would think you’re the dangerous radical. After all, I’m only from the Labor Party, you’re from the ABC.

A “no” would have been shorter. But more importantly, can Gillard now own up to her past radicalism, and explain how she came to reject it?

After all, she’s still of the Socialist Left and as Labor’s health spokesman at the last election offered us the Whitlamesque Medicare Gold disaster, after choosing as her leader the anti-American Mark Latham. She has some reassuring to do.


----------



## sydboy007 (15 June 2014)

noco said:


> Socialist (communism) men at work to disrupt progress, add to the costs, create havoc and add to the financial burden on the public of having to commit police for the  security of others....just read the link to see the extra cost involved.
> 
> 
> http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/the_price_of_socialism/




Tune in to the senate investigation of CBA and how they ripped off thousands of customers, allowed dozens of financial planners to fake signatures when they were unable to and push clients into expensive product so they and their managers could meet their targets and collect their bonuses.  CBA still has 7 or 9 staff that were flagged years ago as engaging in some serious misconduct.

How about we get a royal commission on the financial sector and provide whistle blower protection for those in the know on what has been going on for years.  I dare say the FIRE sector has done more harm to the economy than unions have over the last decade.


----------



## noco (17 June 2014)

sydboy007 said:


> Tune in to the senate investigation of CBA and how they ripped off thousands of customers, allowed dozens of financial planners to fake signatures when they were unable to and push clients into expensive product so they and their managers could meet their targets and collect their bonuses.  CBA still has 7 or 9 staff that were flagged years ago as engaging in some serious misconduct.
> 
> How about we get a royal commission on the financial sector and provide whistle blower protection for those in the know on what has been going on for years.  I dare say the FIRE sector has done more harm to the economy than unions have over the last decade.






 The Fabians and PM Gillard

Opinion, Politics

by
The Fabian Society logo shows plainly what the Fabians consider themselves to be

The Fabian Society logo shows plainly what the Fabians consider themselves to be

PM Gillard is a member of the Fabian Society in Australia. There is no denying this fact. She has stated it herself…and we know she never lies.

But what is the Fabian Society?

Over the past 120 years, Fabian Society members have been almost singularly responsible for creating Communism in Soviet Russia and Communist China, Fascism in Italy and Germany, and socialism generally throughout the world.

The Fabian Society is a British socialist organization whose purpose is to advance the principles of democratic socialism via gradualist and reformist, rather than revolutionary, means.

It is best known for its initial ground-breaking work beginning late in the 19th century and continuing up to World War I. The society laid many of the foundations of the Labor Party and subsequently affected the policies of states emerging from the decolonisation of the British Empire, especially India.

Today, the society functions primarily as a think tank and is one of 15 socialist societies affiliated with the Labor Party. Similar societies exist in Australia (the Australian Fabian Society), Canada (the Douglas-Coldwell Foundation and the now disbanded League for Social Reconstruction) and in New Zealand.

Since its foundation in 1884, the Fabian Society has been a home for some of the most important thinkers on the left. It has counted Rupert Brooke, Oscar Wilde, Emmeline Pankhurst, Ernest Bevin, Muhammad Ali Jinnah among its famous members.

Every UK Labor Prime Minister, from Ramsay MacDonald to Tony Blair, and Gordon Brown, has been a member of the Society. Today, well over 200 parliamentarians are members and the Fabian Society continues to be at the heart of the Labor movement.

*There is no real difference between Fabianism and Leninist Communism. Both their goals are to impose collectivism. Communism sought to impose collectivism using overwhelming force. We have seen how that faile*d.

The Fabianists believe in achieving their aims by stealth. They were opposed to the violent revolutions in Russia and China. Instead, they prefer to infiltrate into positions of power and then go about implementing their socialist agenda step by step. They operate so stealthily and operate so slowly, chipping away at the very fabric of society little by little, that most people don’t even notice they have lost their freedom until it is too late. At the same time, the Fabianists are extremely skilled at manipulating public opinion using emotive causes that sound so attractive that most people miss the sinister purpose behind them.

http://www.restoreaustralia.org.au/fabians-and-pm-gillard/


----------



## SirRumpole (17 June 2014)

Communism in Australia is dead and buried, and it's about time you quit trying to dig it up again like a dog with a bone.


----------



## noco (17 June 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> Communism in Australia is dead and buried, and it's about time you quit trying to dig it up again like a dog with a bone.




No way Rumpy...Communism is still very much alive.......that is only wishful thing on your part.

You are have to look at who, in the Labor Party and the Greens, are members of the Fabian Society.

Gough Whitlam is still there patron.


----------



## noco (17 June 2014)

.

Julia Gillard
Julia Gillard, PM of Australia, and self-confessed Communist that morphed into the Fabian Society

Julia Gillard and her comrades have done everything precisely by the Fabian book. They have got into the corridors of power using honeyed words and big promises, as well as knifing their only obstacle in the back.Once in power they have ruthlessly, but quietly, gone about imposing their socialist aims on a population powerless to act against them. We have been disarmed. We have no way to determine how we are governed. The Fabianists dictate what laws we are ruled by. We are spied on (cameras everywhere today). The press, that pillar of our social fabric, has let us down and succumbed to the bullying politicians. Instead of standing up for the rights of the common man, they have surrendered their power to those in power. They have left We the People totally exposed to the depredations of the wolves in sheep’s clothing.

We are sheep ready for the Fabian wolves to destroy. And they are gradually destroying the very fabric of our society by imposing unneeded taxes on the very industries that could be taking us to a brighter future.

The only good thing we can say about this is that they are so inept they haven’t even been able to collect a single dollar from their much despised mining tax.

There is a ray of hope at least!

They have sold off Australian land and minerals to foreigners. Public services like water and electricity have been ‘privatized’, imposing an intolerable burden on the people they are supposed to serve.

They have opened the doors to illegal invaders who are bringing in a religion that goes totally against our way of life. They are using Islam to create divisions in our society and turn citizen against citizen. At the same time, they have neglected our own needy; our aged and veterans, the  very citizens who have contributed so much to our country and who should now be enjoying the fruits of their labour. Instead, they are living on the brink of poverty.

This is just not right!

We simply cannot afford to let creeping socialism allied with the Greens destructive environmental policies continue to destroy our way of life.

What is most amazing is that the Fabians are hardly subtle. Even their logo tells you exactly what they are….a wolf in sheep’s clothing.

If we want to give our children a better country we must stop supporting groups like the Fabian/Laborites/Greens. We must take control of our political system…the political system the bunch of no-hopers have systematically tried so hard to destroy.

It’s time for a change!

And the only way to achieve that change is to restore the power of the people.

We can do this by amending Section 128 of the Constitution to give not only the politicians but We the People the right to INITIATE referendums.

Once we have the power to initiate referendums the many activist groups working to improve our society, as well as private citizens, will be able to start amending our constitution so that we can create a better future based on how We, the People, tell our politicians how we want to be governed.

Don’t think that this fight will be easy. The politicians can see what we want and they will fight tooth and nail to stop us from having the power only they have been able to wield up until now.

If we want our freedom back: If we want to create a better future for our children, we must stand up and demand that the politicians restore power to the people.

We must never give up.

It’s up to every one of us to stand up and take back the power! Download and sign the petition so that we can submit a motion to Parliament to amend S128.

It’s up to us.

It’s up to you.

We are in a fight for the future of our country and that of our children.

Are you going to let the children down?

http://www.restoreaustralia.org.au/fabians-and-pm-gillard/


----------



## noco (11 July 2014)

Once again we see how the Fabian Society works.

Free speech for them but not for others.....

The Fabians ( Communists ), want to control all media outlets to promote their own propaganda and restrict all others from criticizing statements they make......this is typical communistic  tactics.  


Christine Milne, dangerous hypocrite of free speech
Icon - Comments 29 Comments | Pe
Andrew Bolt Blog Icon Arrow

Andrew Bolt
July 11 2014 (10:57am)

Free speech

How dare the Greens leader pose as a defender of free speech, when she’s actually a defender of speech that suits?

    Freedom of speech everywhere! Christine Milne tweets, Wednesday:

        I’M about to speak in the Senate for Peter Greste & for press freedom around the world.

    Freedom of speech in Oz! Milne, Senate, Wednesday:

        WE have to stand up for journalists wherever they work around the world ... Australia is a country that values and appreciates the importance of the free press and the need to protect the freedoms of journalists.

    Except when you don’t like the media or the message? Milne, July 25, 2011:

        THE Murdoch press has been running a very strong campaign against action on climate change. The bias is extreme, in The Australian in particular. You’ll see column inch after column inch of every climate sceptic in the country ... You’ll find day after day a real attempt at regime change … And one of the useful things about the hacking scandal in the UK is that it will lead to an inquiry into the media in Australia. We are at least going to see some real discussion ... around issues such as the level of ownership and dominance of the Murdoch press in several capital cities in Australia. We’ll also have a look at a range of other issues, including who are fit and proper people, into whether we need that test into people to be running media outlets. It’s time we had a good inquiry and certainly bias is certainly going to be one of the things that’s certainly to be looked at.


----------



## noco (17 August 2014)

The attached link is clear evidence of  Communist's intention relating to infiltration of the Labor Party...It was rife in the 50s', the 60's and the 70's and is still going on today.

Today they are known as Democratic Socialists and Green/Labor left wingers all in the name of the Fabian Society.......Juliar Gillard, Chris Bowen, Jenny Macklin, Tony Burke and Penny Wong are all members of the Fabian Society, not forgetting our once "Great Leader" Gough Whitlam who is still their patron......Tom Uren who was Minister in the Whitlam Government was also  a communist.

The aim of communism was to take over the Labor Party in an attempt to nationalize the banks, industry, mining and agriculture.......In 1972/1975, Whitlam wanted to buy back " the farm" with Middle East money organized through Clemlani....Whitlam was stopped in his tracks when he was finally sacked by the Governor General Sir John Kerr......And yes, there was a lot of controversy. 




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...cially-out-there/story-fnbcok0h-1227018460443

*The communists were trying to take over the Labor Party. We shouldn’t forget that. The Americans were clearly concerned about Gietzelt, as I was.”*


----------



## noco (20 October 2014)

Most interesting reading about the Fabian Society and what they stand for.

They talk about centralized power and the nationalizing of the banking system.

They talk about high taxes and the eradication of human rights....accepting the decisions of the bureaucracy....all land to be owned by the state. 


http://www.alor.org/Library/FabianSocialistContributiontotheCommunistAdvance.htm

*The essence of the Fabian's Soviet-by-Stealth programme was to exploit the natural tendency of all politicians, irrespective of label, to concentrate power. The Fabians set about influencing all politicians to support legislation which would so start centralising power that a process of delegation of power to a bureaucracy would become inevitable. Once the bureaucracy was empowered to make regulations and decrees having the force of law, responsible Parliamentary Government would be undermined, and the traditional Constitutional safeguards of the individual's rights destroyed.
In other words, the Fabians set out deliberately to pervert the Parliamentary system. *

*General Conclusions

Although far from being as exhaustive as it might be, this survey of the Fabian Socialist Movement in relationship to the Communist advance, forces the admission of the following general conclusions:
The Fabian Socialist movement grew out of the same collectivist philosophical soil as did the Marxist-Leninist movement.
So far from being a moderating influence on the world-wide revolutionary movement spear-headed by the Marxist-Leninists, the Fabian-Socialists have played a decisive part in advancing the revolution.
Particularly amongst the English-speaking peoples of the non-Communist world, they have furthered Socialist ideology and policies in a manner which the Marxist-Leninists could never have done on their own. They have in fact played the major role in preparing the Western nations for their eventual predicted take-over by their more violent Socialist brothers, the Communists.

The Fabian Socialists have not only produced a fertile recruiting ground for the Communists; many of them have actively collaborated with the Communists. And when they have not directly collaborated, they have provided an effective smokescreen for the Marxist-Leninists, both helping to shield Communist activities and to mask the Communist advance.
It is clear, therefore, that the Communist advance is not going to be halted until the Fabian Socialist smokescreen is swept away by effective exposure and, even more important, the Fabian economic, financial and political policies of gradualism are first halted and then reversed. *


----------



## Tisme (20 October 2014)

Are all the social welfare milestones Fabian?

http://www.aifs.gov.au/institute/pubs/fm2008/fm80/hs.pdf


----------



## noco (29 June 2015)

Some interesting facts of how the Green/Labor socialists 2007/2013 under Rudd/Gillard/Rudd and Bob Brown endeavored to control the minds of young people via their Education revolution and leftist propaganda. 


http://australiafirstparty.net/australias-school-education-contaminated-by-leftist-propaganda/

*Labor Party Treachery
Australia’s school education contaminated by Leftist propaganda
July 27, 2014

Since the wreak-havoc Greens-Labor’s Corrosion Era of 2007-2013, Rudd and Gillard may as well still be in power across Australia.

Left Labor’s radical socialist worldview permeates Australia’s national education curricula.  It continues to contaminate young Australian minds.  Australian school students are being force fed socialist agenda such as:

    Political Correctness
    Climate Alarmism
    British Invasion Theory
    Globalism
    Fabian Marxism
    Asianisation
    Multicultural Prejudice against Traditional Australians
    Indebted Welfarism
    Mainstreaming Sodomy
    and the full suite of Greens Party Policies.
*

*Greens Leftist politics continues to pervade Australia’s school curricula. Like Gillard-installed Mark Scott still ruling the agenda of our national broadcaster the ABC, the Leftist propaganda pervades Australian society as though Rudd-Gillard were still in power.*

The Green/Labor socialist's (communism) ideology is first take control of the media to promote and poison the minds of young people and the Green/Labor party were well and truly intrenched in the "EDUCATION REVOLUTION".

*Chairman Rudd’s Declaration on Educational Goals for Young Australians in 2007 was characteristic of Communist Russia and Maoist China.  It enforced Rudd’s central blueprint for his cultural-Left curricula.  It was not Rudd’s idea but simply copy-pasted from that which Tony Blair (a Fabian) had already forced upon British schools – Climate Alarmism, Globalism, Fabian Marxism, Afro-Arab Multiculturalism and Laptop-driven Childhood Obesity.*


----------



## Tisme (29 June 2015)

noco said:


> Some interesting facts of how the Green/Labor socialists 2007/2013 under Rudd/Gillard/Rudd and Bob Brown endeavored to control the minds of young people via their Education revolution and leftist propaganda.




one of the first things Newman did was to rollback education subjects based around ecommerce, technology, etc. How does that equate to communism? The share market couldn't operate without ecommerce, computer programming, etc but apparently they aren't required here in the sunny state... the last thing we need here are people who use their own noodle, can think outside the box and not afraid of big words like "concatenate", "parse", etc (computer based stuff I was learning back in the seventies......over four decades ago).


----------



## noco (29 June 2015)

Tisme said:


> one of the first things Newman did was to rollback education subjects based around ecommerce, technology, etc. How does that equate to communism? The share market couldn't operate without ecommerce, computer programming, etc but apparently they aren't required here in the sunny state... the last thing we need here are people who use their own noodle, can think outside the box and not afraid of big words like "concatenate", "parse", etc (computer based stuff I was learning back in the seventies......over four decades ago).




Do you have a link on your criticism of Newman or is that just hearsay on your part?


----------



## noco (12 July 2015)

Well, well, well I never thought I would see the day when a prominent member of the Labor socialist left would suggest that Labor should rethink its ideology about Democratic socialism (communism)..

Bob Carr wants the Labor Party to move away from socialism because it is not generally acceptable. 


http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...b-carr-urges-alp/story-fn59niix-1227437560024
*
Bob Carr, a former NSW premier and foreign minister, says Labor must emerge from its national conference later this month having abolished its antiquated commitment to socialism and agreed on a new mission statement to defin*e its modern purpose.

Mr Carr has thrown his support behind NSW Labor leader Luke Foley, who urged the party this week to banish its 1921 shibboleth (old fashion doctrine or formula of a party), the socialist objective, when he delivered the fifth Wran Lecture in honour of former NSW premier Neville Wran in Sydney.

Mr Carr said voters had never been even remotely interested in socialist ideals and it was time the party took the opportunity to remove it from its constitution.

“I think there is more life in the Rosetta Stone than there is in the socialist objective,” Mr Carr told The Weekend Australian.

“We should quickly settle on an alternative form of words that buries socialist rhetoric and impulse*s that have been outdated for at least 70 years.”

Labor’s constitution designates it as a “democratic socialist” party and describes its core objective as “the democratic socialisation of industry, production, distribution and exchange”.

Mr Carr said the objective was outdated, impractical and never represented Labor’s true ideals or its focus in state or federal government. “You lift the living standards of working-class Austra*l*ians — which we all want to do — by promoting a competitive economy with high labour and envir*onmental standards,” he said.

“Labor has rejuvenated the public sector, vigorously promoted competition policy in the priv*ate sector and, at the state and federal level, privatised airlines, banks, betting agencies and coalmines, where it has been demonstrably in the public interest.”

Mr Carr agreed with Mr Foley that the party should replace the socialist objective with a new statement of Labor values and purpose for the 21st century.

“We should talk about the actual* things we do in government to work with the private *sector to civilise capitalism so that workers get their due share,” he said.

“We should unabashedly be in favour of an internationally competitive private sector that pays the world’s highest wages and adhere*s to the world’s best envir*onmental benchmarks.”

In July last year, the NSW Labor conference voted in favour of abolishing the socialist objective and will call for a new statement to be developed at the national conference later this month.

Federal Labor leader Bill Shorten and Treasury spokesman Chris Bowen support the push.

“I was urging this in the 1970s,” Mr Carr reflected. “I raised it again in the mid-1980s as a minister in Neville Wran’s government. As I pointed out in a Fabian Society lecture at the time, it is ridiculous and futile to mobilise time and energy to attempt to defend* socialism.”*

NB. Mention of the Fabian Society.


----------



## galumay (12 July 2015)

The ALP has never been a socialist party, much less a communist one. Although the words were there in the constitution there has never been any attempt to run a platform that could be considered socialist.

Its a sensible move to remove an irrelevant and anachronistic term from the constitution. 

What is more challenging for the ALP is to see if it can move itself from conservative side of politics and reinvent itself as a social democrat party that reflects values of decency and a fair go. Sadly it is almost indistinuishable from the nut jobs in government at the moment and offers almost nothing to differentiate itself. Support for legislation that protected pedophiles in detention centers was the latest in a string of guttless decisions from the ALP. 

We are virtually at the point of a one party state now, there is so little difference between the 2 parties and no viable alternatives. We now have an extremist, facsist like government seemingly intent of destroying the core values and reputation of this country. They are largely controlled by fundamentalist religious powers in combination with a very effecient propoganda unit run by Murdoch on their behalf. 

I despair for my country. Without a real and strong opposition who actually stand for something different to the current awful government I cant see any chance of reversing the destruction.


----------



## noco (12 July 2015)

galumay said:


> The ALP has never been a socialist party, much less a communist one. Although the words were there in the constitution there has never been any attempt to run a platform that could be considered socialist.
> 
> Its a sensible move to remove an irrelevant and anachronistic term from the constitution.
> 
> ...





My dear friend, you are deluding yourself...Julia Gillard confessed she was a communist......Julia Gillard is a member of the Fabian Society along with many in the Labor Party....The late Gough Whitlam was the Fabian Society's patron......If you belong to the Fabian Society you are a communist....The Fabian Society control the Labor Party in a very subtle way without you even knowing it.

Do think again and do some research into the Fabian Society....I have posted it several times on this forum


----------



## Smurf1976 (12 July 2015)

galumay said:


> What is more challenging for the ALP is to see if it can move itself from conservative side of politics and reinvent itself as a social democrat party that reflects values of decency and a fair go. Sadly it is almost indistinuishable from the nut jobs in government at the moment and offers almost nothing to differentiate itself.




Labor today is further to the Right than the Liberals used to be, whilst the Liberals themselves have also gone a lot further in that direction to the point of starting to become somewhat extreme in regard to some issues. 

The sooner the masses realise that we live in a society and that the economy is just one part of that society the better off we'll all be.


----------



## IFocus (12 July 2015)

galumay said:


> The ALP has never been a socialist party, much less a communist one. Although the words were there in the constitution there has never been any attempt to run a platform that could be considered socialist.
> 
> Its a sensible move to remove an irrelevant and anachronistic term from the constitution.
> 
> ...






Smurf1976 said:


> Labor today is further to the Right than the Liberals used to be, whilst the Liberals themselves have also gone a lot further in that direction to the point of starting to become somewhat extreme in regard to some issues.
> 
> The sooner the masses realise that we live in a society and that the economy is just one part of that society the better off we'll all be.




+ 1 gents..............


----------



## sydboy007 (12 July 2015)

So if communism is not dead and buried, and to be highlighting this makes me assume the thread starter believes this to be a bad thing, why are they so supportive of a communist controlled and funded mining company from developing a mine in an area that shares aquifers with some of the best agricultural land in the country.

Surely if communism is so bad, we should be doing as much as we can to starve the remaining communists of cash?  It doesn't seem to be a good idea to allow them access to our resources, especially from CPC controlled companies that are the end consumer of the resource.

is communism good when it's developing mines but bad if it tries to help workers?  Is communism sometimes good and sometimes bad?


----------



## noco (12 July 2015)

sydboy007 said:


> So if communism is not dead and buried, and to be highlighting this makes me assume the thread starter believes this to be a bad thing, why are they so supportive of a communist controlled and funded mining company from developing a mine in an area that shares aquifers with some of the best agricultural land in the country.
> 
> Surely if communism is so bad, we should be doing as much as we can to starve the remaining communists of cash?  It doesn't seem to be a good idea to allow them access to our resources, especially from CPC controlled companies that are the end consumer of the resource.
> 
> is communism good when it's developing mines but bad if it tries to help workers?  Is communism sometimes good and sometimes bad?




So why did Bob Carr mention socialism and the Fabian Society and why does he want to remove the 1921 Labor Party ideology of socialism  from their charter?.....'Socialism" seems to be a dirty word on Carr's mind. 


“I was urging this in the 1970s,” Mr Carr reflected. “I raised it again in the mid-1980s as a minister in Neville Wran’s government. As I pointed out in a Fabian Society lecture at the time, it is ridiculous and futile to mobilise time and energy to attempt to defend* socialism.”


----------



## sydboy007 (12 July 2015)

noco said:


> So why did Bob Carr mention socialism and the Fabian Society and why does he want to remove the 1921 Labor Party ideology of socialism  from their charter?.....'Socialism" seems to be a dirty word on Carr's mind.
> 
> 
> “I was urging this in the 1970s,” Mr Carr reflected. “I raised it again in the mid-1980s as a minister in Neville Wran’s government. As I pointed out in a Fabian Society lecture at the time, it is ridiculous and futile to mobilise time and energy to attempt to defend* socialism.”




Don't know.  He's entitled to his opinion.  I've not met a fabian who pushes their ideas on to me, unlike a lot of the religious.  Actually, I've not knowingly met a fabian.  i suppose I've technically met plenty of communists having travelled in Vietnam a few times and China, though I think the majority of them are only members as a condition of employment.

Why do you support a communist controlled company developing a coal resource in Australia?  Doesn't your support end up funding communists?


----------



## luutzu (12 July 2015)

noco said:


> So why did Bob Carr mention socialism and the Fabian Society and why does he want to remove the 1921 Labor Party ideology of socialism  from their charter?.....'Socialism" seems to be a dirty word on Carr's mind.
> 
> 
> “I was urging this in the 1970s,” Mr Carr reflected. “I raised it again in the mid-1980s as a minister in Neville Wran’s government. As I pointed out in a Fabian Society lecture at the time, it is ridiculous and futile to mobilise time and energy to attempt to defend* socialism.”




Howard Zinn, american historian, could answer that - That Socialism came to be associated with Soviet/Chinese Communist authoritarianism and so became a dirty word.

Those Communist states call themselves "socialist" and their human rights record aren't too good... So while Socialism is very different from the Red kind, you would have to rebrand it as "democratic socialism", or "the good kind of socialism"... and some people are simple and you'd have to waste time just to explain and so it's easier to change the label.

After "Socialism" being tarnished by word association, then, and still now apparently, "union" is bad and being grill for corruption. Capitalist corruption, as we all know, is never corrupt - and capitalist who are corrupt are  just plain old law-breakers (or lobbying to legalise what ought to be illegal and get caught)... but union law breaking, why that's union and socialism for you - so corrupt.


Here's something interesting: Socialism might be on the rise in the US, of all places. 
Bernie Sanders, an independent US Senator [?], running for president is opening talking about redistributing the wealth to the masses, equal opportunity and all. 

Too bad he'll have an estimated $4Billion from the Republican and the Democrats to show him who owns the place.


----------



## noco (12 July 2015)

sydboy007 said:


> Why do you support a communist controlled company developing a coal resource in Australia?  Doesn't your support end up funding communists?




Where did you get the idea that I support communist controlled company developing coal in Australia?......I don't recall ever stating it....Seems a bit of hearsay on your part.


----------



## explod (12 July 2015)

noco said:


> Where did you get the idea that I support communist controlled company developing coal in Australia?......I don't recall ever stating it....Seems a bit of hearsay on your part.




Well your governuts are letting them in.


----------



## Tisme (12 July 2015)

explod said:


> Well your governuts are letting them in.




That kind of news doesn't make the Courier Mail ...... only anti Labor stuff is allowed.


----------



## sydboy007 (12 July 2015)

noco said:


> Where did you get the idea that I support communist controlled company developing coal in Australia?......I don't recall ever stating it....Seems a bit of hearsay on your part.




Your posts in the Abbott government thread.

Posts 6816 and 6819

Perhaps the name Shenhua Coal wasn't obvious enough for you to realise it was a Chinese state enterprise?

I wonder how many workers Abbott will let in on 457 visas to build it.


----------



## noco (13 July 2015)

sydboy007 said:


> Your posts in the Abbott government thread.
> 
> Posts 6816 and 6819
> 
> ...




Please don't twist things around like your comrades do. 

I was referring to the concept of a coal mine in land unsuitable for agriculture...I still don't support communism as you try to make out or were you on a QandA "GOTCHA" mission?

The country needs foreign investments where ever it comes from and as it so happens to be from the Chinese.


----------



## noco (13 July 2015)

sydboy007 said:


> So if communism is not dead and buried, and to be highlighting this makes me assume the thread starter believes this to be a bad thing, why are they so supportive of a communist controlled and funded mining company from developing a mine in an area that shares aquifers with some of the best agricultural land in the country.
> 
> Surely if communism is so bad, we should be doing as much as we can to starve the remaining communists of cash?  It doesn't seem to be a good idea to allow them access to our resources, especially from CPC controlled companies that are the end consumer of the resource.
> 
> is communism good when it's developing mines but bad if it tries to help workers?  Is communism sometimes good and sometimes bad?




You assume too much.......A-S-S-U-M-E  makes an ass out of you and me.


----------



## SirRumpole (13 July 2015)

noco said:


> The country needs foreign investments where ever it comes from and as it so happens to be from the Chinese.




This country has a sovereign wealth fund called the Future Fund whose job it is to invest and produce a return ti finance Public Service Superannuation funds.

If its good enough for foreigners to invest in coal mines or whatever, then its good enough to require majority Australian ownership of these investments through the Future Fund or Australian private equity.

Foreign ownership only results in money leaving this country where it does no good for us. Shared investment with foreign and local funding allows money to remain in this country and to be reinvested in local businesses.


----------



## Tisme (13 July 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> This country has a sovereign wealth fund called the Future Fund whose job it is to invest and produce a return ti finance Public Service Superannuation funds.
> 
> If its good enough for foreigners to invest in coal mines or whatever, then its good enough to require majority Australian ownership of these investments through the Future Fund or Australian private equity.
> 
> Foreign ownership only results in money leaving this country where it does no good for us. Shared investment with foreign and local funding allows money to remain in this country and to be reinvested in local businesses.




I'm sorry to say this, but I do believe Australia still suffers the cultural cringe  in most things, except sport. It does not have the maturity to invest in it's own capacity and still looks offshore for wisdom, skills and ideas. Meanwhile our cousins across the ditch seem to be able to invent and prosper from their have a go attitude.

Our tenuous grip on personal houses and property doesn't help things either. We are afraid to lose what we have (nest egg and esteem) if we get off our bums and take a risk.


----------



## SirRumpole (13 July 2015)

Tisme said:


> I'm sorry to say this, but I do believe Australia still suffers the cultural cringe  in most things, except sport. It does not have the maturity to invest in it's own capacity and still looks offshore for wisdom, skills and ideas. Meanwhile our cousins across the ditch seem to be able to invent and prosper from their have a go attitude.
> 
> Our tenuous grip on personal houses and property doesn't help things either. We are afraid to lose what we have (nest egg and esteem) if we get off our bums and take a risk.




Agreed, which is why I think that if local private enterprise won't invest in big projects then there needs to be adequate government funding that produces a return. Just what the Future Fund actually invests in is a mystery. 

Foreign tobacco companies so I heard.


----------



## luutzu (13 July 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Agreed, which is why I think that if local private enterprise won't invest in big projects then there needs to be adequate government funding that produces a return. Just what the Future Fund actually invests in is a mystery.
> 
> Foreign tobacco companies so I heard.




Would be good to know what the Future Fund invests in.

If the current wisdom of investing is applied there, as they do, apparently, at universities and on to finance... they're most likely to diversify and spread it everywhere - with 2% invested in Australia.

Strange how "investing" is now associated with putting money into stocks and bonds and other financial products, but not so much into owning actual projects and businesses.


----------



## sydboy007 (13 July 2015)

noco said:


> Please don't twist things around like your comrades do.
> 
> I was referring to the concept of a coal mine in land unsuitable for agriculture...I still don't support communism as you try to make out or were you on a QandA "GOTCHA" mission?
> 
> The country needs foreign investments where ever it comes from and as it so happens to be from the Chinese.




So let me understand you correctly

* You are against communism?

* You are not against communist controlled companies from investing in resource projects in Australia?

* Are you only against Australian domiciled communists?


----------



## noco (18 July 2015)

From Plod's post.

*Go back and read the first para of my last post.

Do you take anything in champ?

My socialism is just a fair go for all citizens and no overseas interests profiting at our expense.

And back to Government owned banks as we had in Menzies time
*

I would like some answers from you regarding my post #6941 The Abbott Government.

Perhaps you might try to digest the following old pal....I have plenty more where this one came from....

I am interested to know how your model of Socialism, which ever one you choose, would fit in with the West Minster system 

The Labor Party sold off the Common Wealth Bank


http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/socialism


Dictionary
socialism
noun so·cial·ism \ˈsō-shə-ˌli-zəm\

:* a way of organizing a society in which major industries are owned and controlled by the government rather than by individual people and companies
How "Spam" became something on
your phone and not on your plate.  »
Full Definition of SOCIALISM
1
:  any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
2
a :  a system of society or group living in which there is no private property
b :  a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
3
:  a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done
See socialism defined for English-language learners
See socialism defined for kids
*


----------



## noco (18 July 2015)

Explod, here is a little more for you to digest about Socialism.....I would like some answers from you this time.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/socialism

*socialism (ˈsəʊʃəˌlɪzəm)
n
1. (Economics) an economic theory or system in which the means of production, distribution, and exchange are owned by the community collectively, usually through the state. It is characterized by production for use rather than profit, by equality of individual wealth, by the absence of competitive economic activity, and, usually, by government determination of investment, prices, and production levels. Compare capitalism
2. (Government, Politics & Diplomacy) any of various social or political theories or movements in which the common welfare is to be achieved through the establishment of a socialist economic system
3. (Government, Politics & Diplomacy) (in Leninist theory) a transitional stage after the proletarian revolution in the development of a society from capitalism to communism: characterized by the distribution of income according to work rather than need*


----------



## noco (18 July 2015)

For some reason nobody wants to talk about the Socialism failure in Greece.

Do we want to go down the same path?


http://www.cnbc.com/2015/07/01/greek-disaster-is-all-about-socialism.html

*And yet while Greece's epic debt problems have dominated the news, I haven't heard very much about who is to blame for what's happened in that country. When any bank or other capitalist entity fails, the news media and the general public seem to name their favorite specific villains almost instantly. The word "profit" becomes dirty somehow and public figures start pining away for a more giving society that never was. But where is the condemnation of socialism and the failed politicians who peddled a proven failure of a system not only to the Greeks but to the half billion people who live in the E.U.? Where is the recognition that when the Greeks recently elected an even more leftist and socialist government, it sped up the path to collapse? Why is this Greek crisis being depicted as simply some kind of surprising isolated incident or the failure of a quirky nation that has some kind of unique set of challenges? Even if you watch all the great interviews Michelle Cabruso-Cabrera has been conducting on CNBC with ordinary Greek citizens, you won't hear socialism blamed by the people... ever. Even in the eye of one of the worst postwar economic storms in European history, socialism is getting yet another pass.

Read MoreA scary Venezuelan lesson for us

Make no mistake, the classic weaknesses of socialism are playing out in as clear a way as you can possibly see them in Greece right now. Here they are: Greece ran out of other people's money. Greece's politicians made sweeping pension and benefit promises they could not keep. Greece expected to live in a fashion greater than the wealth it produced, etc. But I don't expect any bestselling books to be published in the coming year filled with anecdotes about socialist politicians who believed or didn't believe their own socialist lies. I don't expect Michael Moore or the big Hollywood studios to come out with movies about Greek pensioners making more in retirement than they did when they worked and then furiously threatening anyone who suggested they take some kind of cutback. And I can live with that because the best books and writings about the dangers and follies of socialism have probably already been written by Milton Friedman, Frederic Bastiat and Ludwig von Mises. And I doubt anyone could ever make better movies about the economic effects of socialism than Dr. Zhivago or Ninotchka. I'll live without the recognition of socialist mayhem from the entertainment media.

But the biggest problem with the rest of the media not identifying socialism as the culprit in this massive public failure goes beyond letting the guilty party go free. The real danger is that all the other nations and politicians currently pushing socialist programs on small and grand scales will not be slowed in the slightest by Greece's collapse. Dozens of U.S. states with unpayable pension obligations will continue moving along as usual. The federal government will continue to expand food stamp and medicaid rolls even as the economy improves. We're simply squandering the relatively free lesson we should be learning from someone else's massive socialist failure. We may not have changed much about our capital markets to help avoid a repeat of the 2008 crashes, but at least there was a very loud call for reform. Where's the call to fix the failed socialist model of the E.U. from a source other than American right wing talk radio?

That call is likely not going to come. Some kind of new deal will be worked out and the rest of the E.U. will try to generate enough wealth to placate the neverending welfare demands coming from its member countries. When it doesn't, this scenario will repeat itself over and over until a much more painful remedy for all of Europe and the world will take place. And it will all be because it's become too politically incorrect or burdensome to diagnose the clear cause of this economic malady. *


----------



## explod (18 July 2015)

Greece has not been socialist.   They are looking to it now because continued borrowing without real wages to pay have them against thye wall.   There are 20 other western countries on the same brink because of no productivity to the state in what they do.


----------



## SirRumpole (18 July 2015)

We don't need socialism. We don't need unconstrained capitalism. We just need businesses with a sense of ethics that don't try to rip off customers, suppliers, shareholders, governments, the environment or society in general.

Even in our biggest companies we have the shysters and the snake oil salesmen, people who will do anything for a buck. Can ethics be legally enforced ? Letting people get away with giving dodgy financial advice or screwing suppliers instead of going to gaol only encourages those who should not be running businesses.

It's about time the corporate veil was stripped aside, and board members and CEO's made to be personally responsible for their company's sins. Then we will see how ethical they can be.


----------



## wayneL (18 July 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> We don't need socialism. We don't need unconstrained capitalism. We just need businesses with a sense of ethics that don't try to rip off customers, suppliers, shareholders, governments, the environment or society in general.
> 
> Even in our biggest companies we have the shysters and the snake oil salesmen, people who will do anything for a buck. Can ethics be legally enforced ? Letting people get away with giving dodgy financial advice or screwing suppliers instead of going to gaol only encourages those who should not be running businesses.
> 
> It's about time the corporate veil was stripped aside, and board members and CEO's made to be personally responsible for their company's sins. Then we will see how ethical they can be.




Horace, good post.

We are in an age of public capitalism and corporate socialism.... loosely speaking. A balance of liberalism (in the ideological sense) and regulation to ensure balance in the mercantile and social contract makes most sense to me.


----------



## noco (18 July 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> We don't need socialism. We don't need unconstrained capitalism. We just need businesses with a sense of ethics that don't try to rip off customers, suppliers, shareholders, governments, the environment or society in general.
> 
> Even in our biggest companies we have the shysters and the snake oil salesmen, people who will do anything for a buck. Can ethics be legally enforced ? Letting people get away with giving dodgy financial advice or screwing suppliers instead of going to gaol only encourages those who should not be running businesses.
> 
> It's about time the corporate veil was stripped aside, and board members and CEO's made to be personally responsible for their company's sins. Then we will see how ethical they can be.




It is buyer beware...If you are mug enough to pay the price others will accept it.....If you are sensible, you will shop around for the best price.

It is called competition.

I have always looked for three prices whether it be a solicitor, a specialist doctor, a dentist, service mechanic, plumber, tyres for my car or electrician.......It is amazing how much you can save....So if you get ripped off, it is your own fault.


----------



## noco (18 July 2015)

explod said:


> Greece has not been socialist.   They are looking to it now because continued borrowing without real wages to pay have them against thye wall.   There are 20 other western countries on the same brink because of no productivity to the state in what they do.




*But where is the condemnation of socialism and the failed politicians who peddled a proven failure of a system not only to the Greeks but to the half billion people who live in the E.U.? Where is the recognition that when the Greeks recently elected an even more leftist and socialist government, it sped up the path to collapse? Why is this Greek crisis being depicted as simply some kind of surprising isolated incident or the failure of a quirky nation that has some kind of unique set of challenges? Even if you watch all the great interviews Michelle Cabruso-Cabrera has been conducting on CNBC with ordinary Greek citizens, you won't hear socialism blamed by the people... ever. Even in the eye of one of the worst postwar economic storms in European history, socialism is getting yet another pass.
*

You obviously did not read this section of my post.


----------



## luutzu (18 July 2015)

noco said:


> *But where is the condemnation of socialism and the failed politicians who peddled a proven failure of a system not only to the Greeks but to the half billion people who live in the E.U.? Where is the recognition that when the Greeks recently elected an even more leftist and socialist government, it sped up the path to collapse? Why is this Greek crisis being depicted as simply some kind of surprising isolated incident or the failure of a quirky nation that has some kind of unique set of challenges? Even if you watch all the great interviews Michelle Cabruso-Cabrera has been conducting on CNBC with ordinary Greek citizens, you won't hear socialism blamed by the people... ever. Even in the eye of one of the worst postwar economic storms in European history, socialism is getting yet another pass.
> *
> 
> You obviously did not read this section of my post.




Turns out Greece didn't get into this trouble all on its own.

There's a little bit of help from a big friend named Goldman Sachs that managed to hide its debt from the EU, then structured it in a way that double its debt pretty much overnight... then come neo-con capitalists and cutting Socialist programs like pensions, unions to represent workers, cut wages and managed to put 60% of Greeks under 30 in unemployment for 7 years and counting.

Wooohooo for Capitalism.

link here:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-reich/how-goldman-sachs-profite_b_7820794.html


oh, and from the article, they didn't just do it to the Greek either. They put a couple of American cities into bankruptcy and some school district and towns in America have to cut funding to educate the kids and services to the needy because they got tricked by bankers and are owing hundreds of millions to them.

I have a feeling you might not do too well in a society you're proposing noco


----------



## luutzu (18 July 2015)

wayneL said:


> Horace, good post.
> 
> We are in an age of public capitalism and corporate socialism.... loosely speaking. A balance of liberalism (in the ideological sense) and regulation to ensure balance in the mercantile and social contract makes most sense to me.




Wait, Rumpole's name is Horace?

How old are you to have a name that old Rumpole? Have to say, you're very liberal and open minded for an older person (no offence older people)... well, except on the gay and raising kids thing.


----------



## SirRumpole (19 July 2015)

luutzu said:


> Wait, Rumpole's name is Horace?
> 
> How old are you to have a name that old Rumpole? Have to say, you're very liberal and open minded for an older person (no offence older people)... well, except on the gay and raising kids thing.




Not 60 yet, but almost.

Horace is the name of the TV character I take my nic from.


----------



## Tisme (19 July 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Not 60 yet, but almost.
> 
> Horace is the name of the TV character I take my nic from.




Bailey might be bit old hat for young ones.


----------



## nioka (19 July 2015)

noco said:


> It is buyer beware...If you are mug enough to pay the price others will accept it.....If you are sensible, you will shop around for the best price.
> 
> It is called competition.
> 
> I have always looked for three prices whether it be a solicitor, a specialist doctor, a dentist, service mechanic, plumber, tyres for my car or electrician.......It is amazing how much you can save....So if you get ripped off, it is your own fault.




Great idea. Please tell me how to shop around for Council Rates, a friendly policeman, a hospital, a schoolteacher, a politician, a public servant etc, All these have set rates based on paying for a certain standard of living while the real producers of wealth are price takers competing with third world cost structures or subsidised European production.


----------



## noco (19 July 2015)

nioka said:


> Great idea. Please tell me how to shop around for Council Rates, a friendly policeman, a hospital, a schoolteacher, a politician, a public servant etc, All these have set rates based on paying for a certain standard of living while the real producers of wealth are price takers competing with third world cost structures or subsidised European production.




sir Rumpole was referring to private enterprise as per his post below.

*We don't need socialism. We don't need unconstrained capitalism. We just need businesses with a sense of ethics that don't try to rip off customers, suppliers, shareholders, governments, the environment or society in general.

Even in our biggest companies we have the shysters and the snake oil salesmen, people who will do anything for a buck. Can ethics be legally enforced ? Letting people get away with giving dodgy financial advice or screwing suppliers instead of going to gaol only encourages those who should not be running businesses.

It's about time the corporate veil was stripped aside, and board members and CEO's made to be personally responsible for their company's sins. Then we will see how ethical they can be. *

The public service is to do with Governments like Palazczuk in Queensland who increased vehicle registration and drivers licenses fees by more than the inflation rate after the Newman Government had frozen them for 3 years....One has little choice except to kick them out at the next election.


----------



## noco (19 July 2015)

luutzu said:


> Turns out Greece didn't get into this trouble all on its own.
> 
> There's a little bit of help from a big friend named Goldman Sachs that managed to hide its debt from the EU, then structured it in a way that double its debt pretty much overnight... then come neo-con capitalists and cutting Socialist programs like pensions, unions to represent workers, cut wages and managed to put 60% of Greeks under 30 in unemployment for 7 years and counting.
> 
> ...




*Subject: Fwd: Why is Greece in trouble!

This all looks like it is heading our way!




This is a translation of an item in the French language press:

1. The public sector pays its employees on average three times more than
the private sector. And there nearly three quarters of a million civil
servants for a labour force of less than five million.

2. Tax evasion is so pervasive that 25% of people among the wealthy do
not pay taxes. And the government does not intervene, even if they are
known.

3. There are four times as many teachers per student in Greece (than) in
Finland, the country that gets top marks. Moreover, Greece is back
of the pack in the vast majority of educational tests. All this while
the Greek teachers are among the highest paid in the world.

4. The official retirement age is 62 years. However, that age (goes) down to 55
years for men and 50 years for women whose jobs are considered
"difficult". Nothing wrong so far, except that more than 600 occupations
are considered "difficult". Among them are found hairdressers, radio
announcers, television presenters, wind instrument musicians, servers, etc.

5. There are 40 000 girls who receive a life pension of 1000 euros per
month simply because they are unmarried daughters of deceased civil
servants.

6. Pacemakers in Greek hospitals were acquired at a price 400 times
higher than that paid by British hospitals.

7. In the last decade, Greece has created over 300 new public companies.

8. Last year, the Institute for the Protection of Lake Copais still had
thirty employees. However, this lake has dried up in 1930.

9. There are pensions paid to many people some who died  over 50
years ago. In fact the dead are not always recorded and pensions continue to
be received by survivors. As a result, Greece has the highest
proportion of people declaring fictitious age of 110 years old.

10. The French average receive their pension 51% of their final salary,
the Germans, 40%, North Americans 41%, and the Japanese 34%. Meanwhile,
the Greek pensioners receive on average 96% of their previous salary.




*


----------



## luutzu (20 July 2015)

noco said:


> *Subject: Fwd: Why is Greece in trouble!
> 
> This all looks like it is heading our way!
> 
> ...




So was it corruption and mismanagement that did Greece in or it was just all Socialism? Or Socialism is simply corruption and mismanagement?

Capitalism could, maybe, also be corrupt and mismanaged too right? I mean, helicopter rides, fund raisers at resorts and golf courses with expense billed to the taxpayers (all taxpayers)... and a revolving door that goes from big business into gov't and back out again into business.


----------



## noco (20 July 2015)

luutzu said:


> So was it corruption and mismanagement that did Greece in or it was just all Socialism? Or Socialism is simply corruption and mismanagement?
> 
> Capitalism could, maybe, also be corrupt and mismanaged too right? I mean, helicopter rides, fund raisers at resorts and golf courses with expense billed to the taxpayers (all taxpayers)... and a revolving door that goes from big business into gov't and back out again into business.




And free holidays on the Snowy Mountains for Conroy and Burke.

Workers union fees directed into union Secretaries pockets...you know the rest it you don't go to the thread "RC into union corruption.

SHY on paid holiday in the Mediterranean helping illegal immigrants get to Italy.

Gillard used the Government jet to go to a wedding...Labor MP using $24,000 worth of chartered flights between Hobart and Launceston.

Plenty more where that came from.

Pot calling the kettle black.


----------



## wayneL (20 July 2015)

luutzu said:


> Capitalism could, maybe, also be corrupt and mismanaged too right? I mean, helicopter rides, fund raisers at resorts and golf courses with expense billed to the taxpayers (all taxpayers)... and a revolving door that goes from big business into gov't and back out again into business.




WTF has that got to with capitalism? That is corporate welfare, AKA my point in the other thread, corporate socialism.

In a true capitalist system Goldman would be b/k or largely diminished. It was the leftists in The USA that opened that can of worms anyways.


----------



## SirRumpole (20 July 2015)

noco said:
			
		

> .So if you get ripped off, it is your own fault.




You are a great example to the business community.


----------



## Tisme (20 July 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> You are a great example to the business community.




Yes the old caveat emptor excuse, followed by the Pontius Pilate wiping of the hands which the various Fair Trading and ACC organisations are supposed to remedy.

I reckon free enterprise, free market, vocal LNP stalwarts show gross hypocrisy when they collect their communist underpinned senior citizen gratuities, PBS medicines and state sponsored pensions. They should be made to compete on a weekly basis for those prizes and best man wins.


----------



## noco (20 July 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> You are a great example to the business community.




Mate, I was in sales and marketing for 28 years both in Australia and overseas....I have been screwed by professionals........I had some hard knocks along the way but I also learned plenty of lessons.


----------



## SirRumpole (20 July 2015)

noco said:


> Mate, I was in sales and marketing for 28 years both in Australia and overseas....I have been screwed by professionals........I had some hard knocks along the way but I also learned plenty of lessons.




Yeah, it's sort of like child abuse isn't it, the abused becomes an abuser...


----------



## Tisme (20 July 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Yeah, it's sort of like child abuse isn't it, the abused becomes an abuser...




Reformed smokers are the worst.


----------



## noco (20 July 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Yeah, it's sort of like child abuse isn't it, the abused becomes an abuser...



\
I don't know how you can bring child abuse into the equation....It has no relevance at all.

I do hope you have gained something out of this next time you deal with a company when you go to buy a product or a service.......You might just save yourself some money by shopping around.

A case of interest....I had been dealing a with a solicitor for many years and I always believed he was doing the right thing even socializing with him until one time I sold a business and two properties......He told me I would need two contracts....fortunately on this occasion I asked him how much and without a blink of an eye he said $7000....To keep him honest, I went to another legal  eagle who told me I would three separate contracts at which time I thought, more cost....To my surprise the second solicitor quoted me $4000.

Another case I can refer you to was when I needed a remote control for my garage door...Th local bloke here quoted me $75.....I bought the exact same product over the internet for $15 including postage.

Do get my drift now?


----------



## SirRumpole (20 July 2015)

noco said:


> Do get my drift now?




Yes I get your drift, my drift is that the consumer would not have to waste their time shopping around if businesses were ethical in the first place, and to make sure that they are there should be big penalties for those who rip others off.


----------



## noco (20 July 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Yes I get your drift, my drift is that the consumer would not have to waste their time shopping around if businesses were ethical in the first place, and to make sure that they are there should be big penalties for those who rip others off.





No, my friend you just don't get it......it is buyer beware.......We live in a world of free enterprise where profits are made...taxes are paid......you cannot apply a penalty on some business you think has ripped you off.....It just does not work that way.

I should ask you a question......Have you ever had your own business?


----------



## SirRumpole (20 July 2015)

noco said:


> No, my friend you just don't get it......it is buyer beware.......We live in a world of free enterprise where profits are made...taxes are paid......you cannot apply a penalty on some business you think has ripped you off.....It just does not work that way.




That may be how you want your world to work, I have a different view. Why do you think the banks are being taken to court over customer ripoffs ? It's the law.



> I should ask you a question......Have you ever had your own business?




No, I just spend my hard earned cash propping up other people's businesses.


----------



## Tisme (20 July 2015)

noco said:


> No, my friend you just don't get it......it is buyer beware.......We live in a world of free enterprise where profits are made...taxes are paid......you cannot apply a penalty on some business you think has ripped you off.....It just does not work that way.
> 
> I should ask you a question......Have you ever had your own business?




You need to bone up on the Australian Consumer Laws. There are plenty of business' who have been pinged in Oz who thought the law of the jungle applied. 

You cannot legally misrepresent the rights of the consumer as covered by the ACL.


----------



## noco (20 July 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> That may be how you want your world to work, I have a different view. Why do you think the banks are being taken to court over customer ripoffs ? It's the law.
> 
> 
> 
> No, I just spend my hard earned cash propping up other people's businesses.





Well, spend it wisely....Wisdom grows with age...I hope it does not take you another 26 years to learn how wisdom works.


----------



## luutzu (20 July 2015)

wayneL said:


> WTF has that got to with capitalism? That is corporate welfare, AKA my point in the other thread, corporate socialism.
> 
> In a true capitalist system Goldman would be b/k or largely diminished. It was the leftists in The USA that opened that can of worms anyways.




Corporate socialism, or corporate welfare, is when corporation relies on gov't bailout when they fail and about to go bankrupt... and when they are not going bankrupt they rely on gov't for handouts and special tax deals and incentives.

For example, according to David Cay Johnson, all major sports in the US relies on gov't and taxpayers. They get gov't money for building the stadium but get to keep all the profit; Or that Donal Trump and other developers managed to convince friendly politicians to literally take money out of the Poverty Fund in New Jersey and give to them to build hotels and casinos because... well because it create jobs and the poor can obviously enjoy shopping.


So these corporate welfare, they are the end result of unregulated, pure Capitalism. That is, if you do not regulate Capitalism, the capitalists will use their money and influence and corrupt and abuse the state and the people. That's just how money and power works. Works in Captalist society that's unregulated, works in Socialist regime with no opposition party (unregulated). 

Hence, what happes in Greece is not the result of Socialism as noco and others like to claim - it was just corruption and mismanagement; then comes Austerity - a strong form of capitalism as it really operates.


----------



## noco (20 July 2015)

luutzu said:


> Corporate socialism, or corporate welfare, is when corporation relies on gov't bailout when they fail and about to go bankrupt... and when they are not going bankrupt they rely on gov't for handouts and special tax deals and incentives.
> 
> 
> 
> Hence, what happes in Greece is not the result of Socialism as noco and others like to claim - it was just corruption and mismanagement; then comes Austerity - a strong form of capitalism as it really operates.




Do you have a link to your claim?.......I have already demonstrated Greece is Socialism orientated.

From post #171

*Make no mistake, the classic weaknesses of socialism are playing out in as clear a way as you can possibly see them in Greece right now. Here they are: Greece ran out of other people's money. Greece's politicians made sweeping pension and benefit promises they could not keep. Greece expected to live in a fashion greater than the wealth it produced, etc. But I don't expect any bestselling books to be published in the coming year filled with anecdotes about socialist politicians who believed or didn't believe their own socialist lies*


----------



## luutzu (20 July 2015)

noco said:


> Do you have a link to your claim?.......I have already demonstrated Greece is Socialism orientated.
> 
> From post #171
> 
> *Make no mistake, the classic weaknesses of socialism are playing out in as clear a way as you can possibly see them in Greece right now. Here they are: Greece ran out of other people's money. Greece's politicians made sweeping pension and benefit promises they could not keep. Greece expected to live in a fashion greater than the wealth it produced, etc. But I don't expect any bestselling books to be published in the coming year filled with anecdotes about socialist politicians who believed or didn't believe their own socialist lies*




Yes I do, but will have to google it. Just it will be a few number of them. How about just take my word that I've read and watch interviews from economists who have concluded as such?

But let say that it was Socialism and left wing stuff that brought Greece to collapse around the time of the GFC. Since the GFC and the bailout of Greece - since Austerity and all the terms to get rid of Socialism in Greece, such as cutting pensions, cut spending etc. How has Greece been doing?

In other words, Socialism, let's assume, brought Greece to bankruptcy... How has the Austerity ("Capitalism"??) that's been imposed on Greek work for it?

I heard since then it shrunk the Greek economy by 25%, put a lot of people into poverty, push youth unemployment into 50-60%, drove a lot of skilled Greeks overseas looking for work and pretty much ruining an entire generation of Greeks without jobs, without work experience and without hope. Not to mention retirees and older people to the brink.

Don't tell me it could have been worst man. It couldn't have because we know for a fact that the Great Depression was brought deeper with similar austerity measures by Hoover, and only managed to get out with FDR's new deal social programmes and regulations and other Socialism stuff like gov't intervention, gov't investment/spending to create jobs... and eventually got boosted when they enter WW2.


----------



## noco (15 August 2015)

So we have some Australian  left wingers begging the President of Venezuela. to come and give us a lesson on how to manage our economy....WOW.

I hope the Green/Labor left wing socialist here in Australia have learned something.

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...|heading|homepage|homepage&itmt=1439620747270

* [Seven] years ago a collective of our snowfield socialists - including the ABC’s Phillip Adams, propagandist John Pilger, the Greens’ Kerry Nettle and Kevin Rudd’s nephew Van Thanh Rudd - begged Venezuelan strongman Hugo Chavez to come teach Australians a lesson:

        Every country has its own traditions and culture and has to find its own solutions, but what Venezuela has been able to achieve in so little time will be a source of inspiration and ideas for many in Australia.

Now:

    The daughter of Hugo Chavez, the former president who once declared ‘being rich is bad,’ may be the wealthiest woman in Venezuela, according to evidence reportedly in the hands of Venezuelan media outlets.

    Maria Gabriela Chavez, 35, the late president’s second-oldest daughter, holds assets in American and Andorran banks totaling almost $4.2billion, Diario las Americas reports.

Venezuela itself isn’t so blessed by the Chavez legacy:

    As dawn breaks over the scorching Venezuelan city of Maracaibo, smugglers, young mothers, and a handful of kids stir outside a supermarket where they spent the night, hoping to be first in line for scarce rice, milk, or whatever may be available.

    Some of the people in line are half-asleep on flattened cardboard boxes; others are drinking coffee. Almost all are bemoaning their situation.

    With shortages of basic goods and looting on the rise, more Venezuelans say they are resorting to nighttime waits in front of closed stores.

*


----------



## sydboy007 (15 August 2015)

luutzu said:


> But let say that it was Socialism and left wing stuff that brought Greece to collapse around the time of the GFC. Since the GFC and the bailout of Greece - since Austerity and all the terms to get rid of Socialism in Greece, such as cutting pensions, cut spending etc. How has Greece been doing?




What I find contradictory from Noco is that he's fighting the good fight against communism, but is fully supportive of Chinese state investment into the country.

Now, from my point of view, if you were trying to weaken the Chinese communists I wouldn't be allowing them free entry into the country, especially when we're allowing them to go on a spending spree of existing housing and buy up large chunks of the country.

Being anti communist but supportive of their mercantlist approach to economic growth, doesn't quite make sense to me.


----------



## noco (15 August 2015)

sydboy007 said:


> What I find contradictory from Noco is that he's fighting the good fight against communism, but is fully supportive of Chinese state investment into the country.
> 
> Now, from my point of view, if you were trying to weaken the Chinese communists I wouldn't be allowing them free entry into the country, especially when we're allowing them to go on a spending spree of existing housing and buy up large chunks of the country.
> 
> Being anti communist but supportive of their mercantlist approach to economic growth, doesn't quite make sense to me.




Why not trade with China if it is going to put money in our coffers to pay back the Green/Labor left wing socialist mess from 2007/2013.

We need the munya.


----------



## explod (15 August 2015)

sydboy007 said:


> What I find contradictory from Noco is that he's fighting the good fight against communism, but is fully supportive of Chinese state investment into the country.
> 
> Now, from my point of view, if you were trying to weaken the Chinese communists I wouldn't be allowing them free entry into the country, especially when we're allowing them to go on a spending spree of existing housing and buy up large chunks of the country.
> 
> Being anti communist but supportive of their mercantlist approach to economic growth, doesn't quite make sense to me.



Noco would not know a commo from a worker or a person with a sense of fair play if he crashed into them. 

And keeps himself insulated by spouting rubbish. 

And for 2007 there was a world financial crash and Labour did a good job in holding things reasonably in this country.


----------



## Macquack (15 August 2015)

noco said:


> Why not trade with China if it is going to put money in our coffers to pay back the Green/Labor left wing socialist mess from 2007/2013.
> 
> We need the munya.




I remember back in the eighties, those bloody $2 shops full of Chinese rubbish. People (including myself) feeling good about how much purchasing power they had, able to buy half the store for 20 bucks. Well, it was a trap. F***ed our manufacturing industries and now real estate in the big cities is out of reach of just about everybody except the Chinese.

Pretty much everything these days is made in China, and the quality is marginally better but still garbage.


----------



## noco (15 August 2015)

Macquack said:


> I remember back in the eighties, those bloody $2 shops full of Chinese rubbish. People (including myself) feeling good about how much purchasing power they had, able to buy half the store for 20 bucks. Well, it was a trap. F***ed our manufacturing industries and now real estate in the big cities is out of reach of just about everybody except the Chinese.
> 
> Pretty much everything these days is made in China, and the quality is marginally better but still garbage.




That just goes to show how smart the Chinese are by not having corrupt unions striking for higher pay, shorter working hours, penalty rates, 4 weeks annual leave, leave loading, etc.etc...No wonder Australia is stuffed with the added union costs over the past 60 years.....The chooks are now coming home to roost.

So on that basis of your argument, we would be better off if we got less pay, longer working week (say 50 hours) , no annual leave and we would all be better off.

Up with communism down with capitalism...that is the way to go according to you lefties.

So what do you really want?

Do you want your cake and eat it too?

This is one of the main reason we now have fewer workers belonging to unions....It used to be 50% and now it is down to 15 %......I wonder why? ...can you tell me?


----------



## noco (15 August 2015)

explod said:


> Noco would not know a commo from a worker or a person with a sense of fair play if he crashed into them.
> 
> And keeps himself insulated by spouting rubbish.
> 
> And for 2007 there was a world financial crash and *Labour* did a good job in holding things reasonably in this country.




Ah yes....the Rudd/Gillard/Rudd extravaganza...The Libs would have done twice as much with half the money.

There would have been no wasted money on over priced Julia Gillard memorial school halls......no wasted money on home insulation with 4 deaths and a couple hundred houses burnt to the ground and so many business going to the wall....No Cash for clunkers...No grocery watch....$11 billion saved on illegal immigrants

Labor did a good job alright ...a good job in stuffing the country


----------



## sydboy007 (15 August 2015)

noco said:


> Why not trade with China if it is going to put money in our coffers to pay back the Green/Labor left wing socialist mess from 2007/2013.
> 
> We need the munya.




So then you support money going to the communists?

You can't have it both ways

On the one hand your shouting of the evils that communism is.

On the other hand you're happy to see Australia spend billions on imports and allow them to buy up resources and agricultural land in the country.

Seems you want the cost free fight against the commies.


----------



## sydboy007 (15 August 2015)

noco said:


> That just goes to show how smart the Chinese are by not having corrupt unions striking for higher pay, shorter working hours, penalty rates, 4 weeks annual leave, leave loading, etc.etc...No wonder Australia is stuffed with the added union costs over the past 60 years.....The chooks are now coming home to roost.
> 
> So on that basis of your argument, we would be better off if we got less pay, longer working week (say 50 hours) , no annual leave and we would all be better off.
> 
> ...




Just wow.  So maybe we should emulate the Chinese environmental protection as well?  Possibly harvest organs from various Abbott Government dissidents and prisoners.  

I'd prefer to follow the Swiss / Dutch / Norwegians / Germans.  How do you explain Sweden with 2/3 the working population in unions.

There's better ways than wal marting the economy.


----------



## SirRumpole (16 August 2015)

This is an example of how much communists think about the safety of their citizens.

Is this what is heading our way with a "free" trade deal ?

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-08-...st-site-evacuated-over-chemical-fears/6700008


----------



## noco (16 August 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> This is an example of how much communists think about the safety of their citizens.
> 
> Is this what is heading our way with a "free" trade deal ?
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-08-...st-site-evacuated-over-chemical-fears/6700008




If the Green/Labor left wing socialist win the next election with their hare brain scheme of Global WARMING  (oops sorry Climate Change, warming has stopped) and bring in the CARBON TAX of $209 per tonne ( it used to be $25 per tonne) it will cost us $600 billion and that is according to their own calculations.

So therefore Tony Abbott's scheme of direct action to reduce emissions by 26% to 28% by 2020 looks pretty good..

Roll over Greece we will be coming an join you.


----------



## SirRumpole (16 August 2015)

noco said:


> If the Green/Labor left wing socialist win the next election with their hare brain scheme of Global WARMING  (oops sorry Climate Change, warming has stopped) and bring in the CARBON TAX of $209 per tonne ( it used to be $25 per tonne) it will cost us $600 billion and that is according to their own calculations.




Would you care to refer to any of Labor's policy announcements that say they will do this ?

Their plan was always to replace a fixed price with a floating price, and as I understand it, that is their current policy.


----------



## noco (16 August 2015)

sydboy007 said:


> So then you support money going to the communists?
> 
> You can't have it both ways
> 
> ...




Ok, so if we stop trading with China for cheap imports  and we have a Green/Labor left wing socialist government in office who insist we make our own goods here in Australia at a fair higher price which our people cannot afford, how will that affect inflation here in Australia?

I suppose the union would say, get the government to subsidize all industries like vehicle manufacturing....impose higher tariffs....great idea, but where will the money come from?...I know from the $600 billion carbon tax...now why didn't think of that?

Have you got any more good ideas?


----------



## Tisme (16 August 2015)

Not sure what constitutes communism these days, but I did meet one of its tribe a long long time ago and surprisingly he didn't have horns and cloven feet ... just goes to show how sneaky that race of people can be, mingling with humans  unnoticed and all that.


----------



## Smurf1976 (16 August 2015)

noco said:


> So therefore Tony Abbott's scheme of direct action to reduce emissions by 26% to 28% by 2020 looks pretty good.




Carbon tax = basically a market based approach, albeit with a market mandated to exist in the first place.

Direct action = government intervention in private industry.

I'm not saying one is necessarily better than the other, but we're in interesting times when Labor and even the Greens are in favour of a market based approach whilst the Liberals favour government intervention.

Perhaps the Liberals really are smarter than the rest and have finally realised that the economy is just one part of society and that free markets, whilst they have their place, are by no means perfect or even efficient in many cases.


----------



## SirRumpole (16 August 2015)

Smurf1976 said:


> Perhaps the Liberals really are smarter than the rest and have finally realised that the economy is just one part of society and that free markets, whilst they have their place, are by no means perfect or even efficient in many cases.




I wouldn't credit the Liberals under the current leadership with any form of "smartness" or insight into the issue of global warming or it's solution.

The fact is as you pointed out, the market based mechanism is a Labor and Greens policy, and this government will do anything, including wasting billions on "direct action" to avoid agreeing with Labor/Greens on any issue if it has a choice. 

Malcolm Turnbull promoted an ETS and his party dumped him as leader. It would be political suicide (for Abbott) to do a backflip and say Turnbull was right all along.

It's all about politics with Abbott, not the best policies.


----------



## noco (16 August 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Would you care to refer to any of Labor's policy announcements that say they will do this ?
> 
> Their plan was always to replace a fixed price with a floating price, and as I understand it, that is their current policy.




Actually it came up in question time in parliament last week and Shorten did not deny it...A figure of $209 per tonne was mentioned costing the economy $600 billion......It might be a bit like the modelling Labor did about increasing the GST and kept in the dark.

I have tried to google it for you but without success but I will keep working on it....with your expertise in insider information, you might be able to find out yourself......Tony Abbott had it is his hands at the time and it was a fairly thick volume. 

BTW . I am still waiting for one of you lefties to comment on my post #203 about your comrades inviting the President of Venezuela to lecture Australia on how to run our economy.


----------



## noco (16 August 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> I wouldn't credit the Liberals under the current leadership with any form of "smartness" or insight into the issue of global warming or it's solution.
> 
> The fact is as you pointed out, the market based mechanism is a Labor and Greens policy, and this government will do anything, including wasting billions on "direct action" to avoid agreeing with Labor/Greens on any issue if it has a choice.
> 
> ...




Actually Malcolm Turnbull made application to join the Labor Party but for some reason they knocked him back......Labor probably told Malcom he would be more valuable to them (Labor) if he joined the Liberals..... No doubt this is where most of the leaks come from the Liberal cabinet room......Another Fabian infiltration..


----------



## SirRumpole (16 August 2015)

> Actually it came up in question time in parliament last week and Shorten did not deny it...A figure of $209 per tonne was mentioned costing the economy $600 billion......It might be a bit like the modelling Labor did about increasing the GST and kept in the dark.




Opposition members don't get to deny anything in Question Time,. it's all about Ministers saying complete guff and getting away with it.

Labor has said it wants a floating price ETS not a fixed price Carbon tax. Get over it, and don't believe everything (or anything) Abbott says, because he's got form for lying.


----------



## Tisme (16 August 2015)

noco said:


> Actually it came up in question time in parliament last week and Shorten did not deny it...A figure of $209 per tonne was mentioned costing the economy $600 billion......It might be a bit like the modelling Labor did about increasing the GST and kept in the dark.
> 
> I have tried to google it for you but without success but I will keep working on it....with your expertise in insider information, you might be able to find out yourself......Tony Abbott had it is his hands at the time and it was a fairly thick volume.
> 
> BTW . I am still waiting for one of you lefties to comment on my post #203 about your comrades inviting the President of Venezuela to lecture Australia on how to run our economy.




I thought Labor's policy was a ~$20/tonne for a couple of years and the accumulated  take then used to underwrite a market driven trading scheme?


----------



## SirRumpole (17 August 2015)

$209 a tonne sounds like Alan Jones's figures, like wind power costs $1500 kw/h when its actually $150.


----------



## sydboy007 (17 August 2015)

noco said:


> If the Green/Labor left wing socialist win the next election with their hare brain scheme of Global WARMING  (oops sorry Climate Change, warming has stopped) and bring in the CARBON TAX of $209 per tonne ( it used to be $25 per tonne) it will cost us $600 billion and that is according to their own calculations.
> 
> So therefore Tony Abbott's scheme of direct action to reduce emissions by 26% to 28% by 2020 looks pretty good..
> 
> Roll over Greece we will be coming an join you.




The same question time when Abbott shows us mathematics ability by claiming a carbon tax that would add roughly 10% to an electricity bill had in fact caused a pensioner's electricity bill to almost double.

We also have the economically challenged JoHo the treasurer clown who can't even get his forecasts remotely correct, a communications minister who gets all confused about utes.

So forgive me for being very sceptical that any figures they provide regarding carbon reduction schemes would be reliable. They can't even tell the truth about how poorly direct action is running.  Blown so much the budget already.


----------



## sydboy007 (17 August 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> $209 a tonne sounds like Alan Jones's figures, like wind power costs $1500 kw/h when its actually $150.




Closer to $100 these days with the improvements in turbine efficiency.

Yet noco still support the nuclear option even though it's twice the cost.


----------



## noco (17 August 2015)

sydboy007 said:


> Closer to $100 these days with the improvements in turbine efficiency.
> 
> Yet noco still support the nuclear option even though it's twice the cost.




Do you have a link I could refer to regarding nuclear being twice the cost?


----------



## sydboy007 (18 August 2015)

noco said:


> Do you have a link I could refer to regarding nuclear being twice the cost?




google hinkley point.  it's going to be the 16B pound new plant in the UK.  In 2012 they were guaranteed a wholesale price of 92.5 pounfs per MWh increasing at CPI ie the price would now be close to 100 pounds.  That money will see 2 * 1.6GW plants built

then google Olkiluoto Nuclear Power Plant.  Construction started in 2005 and was to be completed by 2009.  Now it might be running by 2018.  The initial €3.2B cost was forecast to be €8.5B for 2016 finish so will be interesting to see how much extra gets added with the 2 year delay.

EDF's Flamanville reactor was due to be completed by 2012 at a cost of €3.3 billion, but is now projected for completion in 2016 at a cost of €8.5 billion

The first nuclear plant being built in the USA  in decades is looking to be at least 18 months over schedule adding $720M to costs.  Electricity customers will wear the increase.

Of the current 66 nuclear plants under construction 49 are behind schedule.  Even in China 20 of the 27 reactors under construction are behind schedule..

Wind and solar farms by their nature are far less risky to construct.  They are smaller in capacity and a delay at one project may not be seen at another.

All the countries having delays already have a nuclear power industry.  Do you think Australia would be able to do better?

Where do you suggest we build Australia's first nuclear power station.  

What criteria did you use to come up with your suggestion?


----------



## noco (18 August 2015)

sydboy007 said:


> google hinkley point.  it's going to be the 16B pound new plant in the UK.  In 2012 they were guaranteed a wholesale price of 92.5 pounfs per MWh increasing at CPI ie the price would now be close to 100 pounds.  That money will see 2 * 1.6GW plants built
> 
> then google Olkiluoto Nuclear Power Plant.  Construction started in 2005 and was to be completed by 2009.  Now it might be running by 2018.  The initial â‚¬3.2B cost was forecast to be â‚¬8.5B for 2016 finish so will be interesting to see how much extra gets added with the 2 year delay.
> 
> ...




On Capital Hill.


----------



## Smurf1976 (18 August 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> $209 a tonne sounds like Alan Jones's figures, like wind power costs $1500 kw/h when its actually $150.




It's actually about $0.10 per kWh or $100 per MWh in rough terms for a typical large scale wind farm built today.

If it cost $1500 per kWh then I'm very, very sure that there would be absolutely zero demand for the power produced. Close to $2000 a day just to run a 2 door fridge / freezer = not going to happen. 

Cheap power (in an Australian context) = existing coal, existing hydro, some undeveloped hydro sites.

Medium cost = wind, new coal, gas, most new hydro, landfill gas, solar and biomass under some circumstances.

High cost = nuclear, oil, wind / solar / hydro at poor sites. Biomass under some circumstances.

No comment about dry geothermal or tidal, wave etc since there's not enough real world operating experience to generalise.  

If we ever build a nuclear plant in Australia then the motivation will be political rather than economic or practical. We have other means of producing power more cheaply and have no economic or technological edge in nuclear, indeed we're at a comparative disadvantage with lack of experience, lack of support systems and services and high costs compared to other places that have working nuclear plants.

Nuclear power is much like flags and republics in my view. Something that comes up for debate so as to divert attention and cause controversy for the sake of it rather than being a sensible solution to any actual problem we have.


----------



## sydboy007 (18 August 2015)

noco said:


> On Capital Hill.




Has the information provided caused you to reconsider your support for nuclear power?


----------



## explod (18 August 2015)

noco said:


> On Capital Hill.




Which is an icon,  similar to a statue,  or the crucifix ,  a church spire and the flag. 

They are the symbols of control over the common people.  Common is the lead into the meaning of the word communism.   Communism is merely the people seeking equality and a fair go. 

Looks like you are coming round noco.


----------



## noco (18 August 2015)

sydboy007 said:


> Has the information provided caused you to reconsider your support for nuclear power?




To a point but it depends where those statics were derived....Because we have an abundance of uranium in South Australia, it could be cheaper to run than say a country who has to import uranium......I checked it out a couple of years ago and there were  something like 500 + nuclear power plants around the world.

USA    100 +
UK       34
Russia  30
Japan   70
Canada 24
France  58
China     ?

15% of the world electricity was produced by nuclear power in 2005  in 31 countries.

There were 150 nuclear powered naval vessels in 2005.

Now Jay Weatherall, the South Australia premier is keen to go nuclear and to take advantage of spent rod storage underground in a remote part of SA......Bob Hawke also suggested it some years ago....With the vast remote areas in central Australia, we could take advantage of storing spent rods at a price to other countries.

So nuclear does solve the problem of pollution which the Green/Labor coalition are keen to prevent.

The efficiency of solar and wind I believe is only 15% where as coal is 35 %...I don't know where nuclear rates.


----------



## wayneL (18 August 2015)

explod said:


> Communism is merely the people seeking equality and a fair go.




Plod? You actually believe this?

You belief the serfs of Soviet Russia, North Korea, Cambodia under Pol Pot or Moaist China are/were given a fair go... say compared to.....




....Australia?


----------



## sydboy007 (18 August 2015)

noco said:


> To a point but it depends where those statics were derived....Because we have an abundance of uranium in South Australia, it could be cheaper to run than say a country who has to import uranium......I checked it out a couple of years ago and there were  something like 500 + nuclear power plants around the world.
> 
> USA    100 +
> UK       34
> ...




In the western world cost over runs are minimum double.  Would you support say a UK Hinkley point where construction is forecast to be roughly $32B in construction costs alone.  Even the smaller sites are costing roughly $16B to build in Europe, in countries that have prior experience with nuclear power.

That's the problem with nuclear.  The MASSIVE CAPEX along with very long lead times till a single MW is produced.

If the Govt decided today that a nuclear reactor was to be built it's likely we'd be waiting for around 12 years before it started producing electricity.  What guarantees would be provided to make it economic?  What if it has a fukushima style issue?  Who pays?  Where does the highly radioactive waste get stored?  

Considering nuclear waste from a reactor is deadly for millennium I'm not sure I'd like to turn the outback of Australia into the world's nuclear waste dump.

As Smurf has shown, there is no economically rational reason to build nuclear power in Australia.  We have an abundance of solar resources, lots of potential wind resources yet to be exploited, along with massive potential for offshore wind as well.  Factor in some battery storage along the lines of California and we could move in a cost effetive way towards a high level of renewable energy generation.

The great thing of renewable energy is it requires more workers than the tradition fossil fuelled power stations.  It's also distributed so helps to create jobs outside the capital cities.  better yet, it's likely most of the workers in the industry aren't unionised like they are in the current coal power plants.


----------



## explod (19 August 2015)

wayneL said:


> Plod? You actually believe this?
> 
> You belief the serfs of Soviet Russia, North Korea, Cambodia under Pol Pot or Moaist China are/were given a fair go... say compared to.....
> 
> ...




Those cherry picked were not what Marx intended.  Unfortunately corruption and repression distort the intent.  A bit like the current libs trying to change laws to suit capitalist agendas.


----------



## Smurf1976 (19 August 2015)

noco said:


> The efficiency of solar and wind I believe is only 15% where as coal is 35 %...I don't know where nuclear rates.




Efficiency of anything is relevant only if the resource being used is physically limited, costs money, or has some other downside to its use.

Efficiency of labour use in a business matters because it costs money to pay workers. 

Efficiency of land use in the CBD of a large city matters because there is a physical constraint to the amount of land available at that location.

Efficiency of oil use matters because oil has a number of undesirable aspects associated with its use (CO2 sure isn't the only problem there), such that using less of it is desirable.

The sun is free, is not a physically limited resource and has no downside to its use. As such there is no fundamental need to use it efficiently, indeed the vast majority of sunlight is at present completely wasted. The efficiency of solar panels is worth improving so as to cut the financial cost of manufacturing panels of a given output and to increase the number which can be installed in a given area, but the sunlight itself is plentiful and with no significant impact of use such that efficiency doesn't really matter.


----------



## noco (19 August 2015)

Smurf1976 said:


> Efficiency of anything is relevant only if the resource being used is physically limited, costs money, or has some other downside to its use.
> 
> Efficiency of labour use in a business matters because it costs money to pay workers.
> 
> ...




But the wind turbines are highly subsidized by the government and may never be suitable for base load power.


----------



## wayneL (19 August 2015)

explod said:


> Those cherry picked were not what Marx intended.  Unfortunately corruption and repression distort the intent.




And therein lies the fatal flaw and why communism can never work as Marx envisaged, human nature.

I didn't have to cherry pick, there are no successful examples of communism where people are given a "fair go".


----------



## SirRumpole (19 August 2015)

noco said:


> But the wind turbines are highly subsidized by the government and may never be suitable for base load power.




They won't be used for baseload power unless they are delivering sufficient power to supply demand. They are part of a mix of power generators that get used when the economics of each dictates that a particular system is the more efficient to use at a particular time.

Wind turbines + storage can result in baseload power supply; eg pumping water back into a hydro storage or charging batteries.


----------



## sptrawler (19 August 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Get over it, and don't believe everything (or anything) Abbott says, because he's got form for lying.




I think they all have a bit of form on that front, but talk it up, someone will take you seriously.


----------



## sptrawler (19 August 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Wind turbines + storage can result in baseload power supply; eg pumping water back into a hydro storage or charging batteries.




Send a P.M to smurph, to fact check that one.


----------



## SirRumpole (20 August 2015)

sptrawler said:


> I think they all have a bit of form on that front, but talk it up, someone will take you seriously.




Of course, but TA happens to be the PM, and so should come under more scrutiny than others.


----------



## sydboy007 (20 August 2015)

noco said:


> But the wind turbines are highly subsidized by the government and may never be suitable for base load power.




Fossil fuel productition and energy generation receive massive levels of subsidy from Govt.

http://www.worldenergyoutlook.org/resources/energysubsidies/



> *The IEA’s latest estimates indicate that fossil-fuel consumption subsidies worldwide amounted to $548 billion in 2013*, $25 billion down on the previous year, in part due to the drop in international energy prices, with subsidies to oil products representing over half of the total. Those subsidies were over four-times the value of subsidies to renewable energy and more than four times the amount invested globally in improving energy efficiency.




Get rid of fossil fuel subsidies and you wouldn't need to provide renewable energy with much subsidies to compete.

I'd have thought you'd support renewable energy due to it's distributed nature.  No command and control central planning ala the communists.


----------



## Tisme (20 August 2015)

This thread is getting slightly off course


----------



## SirRumpole (20 August 2015)

Tisme said:


> This thread is getting slightly off course




I'm amazed the thread has lasted this long.

It's just one person's hobby horse and we are all indulging him.


----------



## noco (20 August 2015)

Tisme said:


> This thread is getting slightly off course




Yes it is but it is also keeping the thread alive...Don't stop ....Just love it.

It is making ASF viewers aware as to where the LUGs (Labor...unions...Greens) are taking us down the road to ruin

It is also making viewers aware of how the Fabian Society has control of Labor, the unions and the Greens.

How the Fabians are slowly and subtly converting us to central control......They don't believe in free enterprise and profits are a dirty word. 

How the Fabians ideology is to take control of the media first....the ABC and its associated programs and the AGE News paper......Control the media and then control the minds of the naive who believe their propaganda......Criticize a conservative government and and discredit its leader as often as possible...The staff on the ABC consists of 42% Greenies....32% Labor and 14 % conservatives.

Julia Gillard, Jenny Macklin, Tony Burke, Chris Bowen just to name a few plus all the Greens and most of the Labor left wing are members of the Fabian Society....The Late Gough Whtilam was the patron of the Fabians.....Julia Gillard was a self confessed communist.

I would hope I am making more readers aware of the Fabians modus operandi and I will not stop.

GETUP is an off shoot of the Fabian Society of which Bill Shorten is a foundation member and past board member....The unions recently donated $1 million to GETUP to continue their propaganda of lies and deceit.

If you want to learn more about the Fabians go to http://www.restoreaustralia.org.au/fabians-and-pm-gillard


----------



## SirRumpole (20 August 2015)

Don't take your tin foil hat off noco old chap !


----------



## noco (20 August 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Don't take your tin foil hat off noco old chap !




ROFL...I just love it when you come back with your sarcasm Rumpy as I know I have hit the right nerve.

But all jokes aside I and so worried about you....I am concerned that you have included yourself in the list of those naive people who swallow the Fabian propaganda.


----------



## Tisme (20 August 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Don't take your tin foil hat off noco old chap !




He did a good job the last post:


----------



## noco (20 August 2015)

Tisme said:


> He did a good job the last post:
> 
> View attachment 63932




Ahhhh...good to see I have hit another nerve in the right spot.

Keep them coming fellows.


----------



## Macquack (20 August 2015)

noco said:


> Ahhhh...good to see I have hit another nerve in the right spot.
> 
> Keep them coming fellows.




While I agree with your opponents, good to see you back noco, firing on all 8 cylinders.


----------



## SirRumpole (20 August 2015)

noco said:


> ROFL...I just love it when you come back with your sarcasm Rumpy as I know I have hit the right nerve.
> 
> But all jokes aside I and so worried about you....I am concerned that you have included yourself in the list of those naive people who swallow the Fabian propaganda.




Noco, I had never even heard of the Fabians before I read your writings here.

Maybe I should be grateful to you for alerting me to the grave threat posed to our society by people with a social conscience, and I promise you that if I ever meet one of this mythical group I shall mention you and your meanderings to them.

See you your Fabians and raise you three IPA's.

All the best matey.


----------



## wayneL (20 August 2015)

Let's define"social conscience" shall we?

The Fabian Society is real. Determining their precise motives is a whole 'nuther kettle of stinky fish.


----------



## IFocus (20 August 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Noco, I had never even heard of the Fabians before I read your writings here.
> 
> Maybe I should be grateful to you for alerting me to the grave threat posed to our society by people with a social conscience, and I promise you that if I ever meet one of this mythical group I shall mention you and your meanderings to them.
> 
> ...




+ 1............


----------



## wayneL (21 August 2015)

Well as nobody seems willing to define what they mean by social conscience (a straw man argument anyway), some light reading for you so we can just chuck that nonsense in the bin where it belongs.

https://fabiansociety.wordpress.com/


----------



## SirRumpole (21 August 2015)

wayneL said:


> Well as nobody seems willing to define what they mean by social conscience (a straw man argument anyway), some light reading for you so we can just chuck that nonsense in the bin where it belongs.
> 
> https://fabiansociety.wordpress.com/




Social conscience ? the idea that corporations are part of a society and should act for the benefit of society overall rather than only considering returns to shareholders.

That would be one manifestation that I would expect of a fair society. Of course there will be differences between what individuals consider the "greater good", but that's why we have elected governments.

So you think that social conscious is nonsense Wayne ?

 Anything is good if it makes a profit would be your mantra ?


----------



## wayneL (21 August 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Social conscience ? the idea that corporations are part of a society and should act for the benefit of society overall rather than only considering returns to shareholders.
> 
> That would be one manifestation that I would expect of a fair society. Of course there will be differences between what individuals consider the "greater good", but that's why we have elected governments.
> 
> ...




You didn't read the link did you? TSK TSK

And puleeeez, lets cut the straw fallacy that I think social conscience is nonsense. I asked for a definition.


----------



## SirRumpole (21 August 2015)

wayneL said:


> You didn't read the link did you? TSK TSK
> 
> And puleeeez, lets cut the straw fallacy that I think social conscience is nonsense. I asked for a definition.




I gave you one definition.

What's yours ?


----------



## Tisme (21 August 2015)

wayneL said:


> Let's define"social conscience" shall we?
> 
> .




Trick question?


----------



## noco (21 August 2015)

For certain people to say the Fabian Society is not in control of the Green/Labor coalition are completely in denial.

There is sufficient evidence to prove that Green/Labor coalition are following the Fabian Society rules to the letter.

It is also a fact that the United Nations are all part of Fabian Society ideology with world government as their main aim.

As mentioned on previous occasions, The Fabians through the Green/Labor coalition by gaining power from within and their first objective is to control the media in order promote their propaganda and lies often enough to brain wash the naive into believing the way to is by promoting fairness and the green imaginary. 

http://www.fourwinds10.net/siterun_data/religion_cults/news.php?q=1252088437

Creeping Communism

*The Fabians whose logo until very recently was a Wolf in Sheep's clothing are a breed of Communism who believed in Collectivism (Communism) by stealth and many of the Globalists would belong to this scheming organisation.

Since the collapse of Communism you can rest assured that they are now to be found amongst the Fabians.

The Fabians are well established in Australia and many are in the Labor party. All of Prime Minister Gough Whitlam's cabinet were Fabians and Prime Ministers Hawke and Keating also belonged to the Fabians.*

On 19 July 2006 ex P.M. Malcolm Fraser spoke to the Fabians http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&q=Malcolm+Fraser+and+the+Fabian+society&btnG=Search&meta= and on 22 MARCH 2006 P.M. Howard also spoke to them http://www.fabian.org.au/1048.asp

Either Gough Whitlam or John Faulkner is the current president and in the current Labor cabinet Deputy Prime Minister Julia Gillard amongst others are members of the society.

The London School of Economics has been their breeding ground.

Below is a history of this treacherous organisation which is intent on creating a one world dictatorial government.

*************

THE FABIAN SOCIETY
    Notable members

    Gough Whitlam (ALP Prime Minister 1972–75)
    Bob Hawke (ALP Prime Minister 1983–1991)
    Paul Keating (ALP Prime Minister 1991–1996)
    John Cain (ALP Premier of Victoria)
    Jim Cairns (ALP Deputy Prime Minister)
    Don Dunstan (ALP Premier of South Australia)
    Geoff Gallop (ALP Premier of Western Australia)
    Neville Wran (ALP Premier of NSW 1976–86)
    Frank Crean (ALP Deputy Prime Minister)
    Arthur Calwell (ALP Former Leader)
    John Faulkner (ALP Senator and National President)
    Julia Gillard (ALP Deputy Prime Minister)
    John Lenders (ALP Treasurer of Victoria)
    Henry Hyde Champion (Journalist)
    John Percy Jones (Businessman)
    Nettie Palmer (Writer)
    Ernest Besant-Scott (Historian)
    Lucy Morice (Feminist)
    Charles Strong (Clergyman)
    William Henry Archer (Statistician)
    Edward Shann (Economist)
    Charles Marson (Clergyman)
    David Charleston (Trade Unionist)
    John Howlett Ross (Teacher)
    Bernard O'Dowd (Writer)
    Phillip Adams (Broadcaster)

But there was another movement coming to birth at about this same time that

eventually gave competition to the hard-core Marxists. Some of the more erudite members

of the wealthy and intellectual classes of England formed an organization to perpetuate the

concept of collectivism but not exactly according to Marx. It was called the Fabian Society.

The name is significant, because it was in honor of Quintus Fabius Maximus Verrrucosus,
the Roman general who, in the second century B.C., kept Hannibal at bay by wearing down

his army with delaying tactics, endless maneuvering, and avoiding confrontation wherever

possible. Unlike the Marxists who were in a hurry to come to power through direct

confrontation with established governments, the Fabians were willing to take their time, to

come to power without direct confrontation, working quietly and patiently from inside the

target governments.


----------



## noco (21 August 2015)

Here is the traditional Fabian Society hold on Labor.

Read the address by Simon Crean.

http://evatt.org.au/papers/fabian-society-labor-tradition.html

The Fabian Society & the Labor tradition
Simon Crean

*Thank you for the invitation to address the Fabian Society. In the last 12 months we have seen just about every Shadow Minister address the Fabian Society. To my recollection, this is a dramatic change. Labor Shadows used to be more often seen addressing CEDA or the Sydney Institute or the BCA. This is a great development because it's about getting the party members and supporters involved again in policy development - which is one of the goals of the party reforms I have made. It's about reconnecting with our base and good Labor ideas.

Over the next couple of weeks we will be celebrating the thirtieth anniversary of the election of the Whitlam government. The Fabian Society was heavily involved in the development of Gough's great reform program, which changed Australia forever. Race Matthews in particular had a central role and served in Gough's caucus. So as we celebrate our victory in 1972, we celebrate the contribution of people like Race and the many, many other Fabians who worked so hard to make it happen.

As everyone knows, the Fabians are named after the Roman General, Quintus Fabius Maximus, who led Rome in its war with the Carthaginian General, Hannibal. His nickname was derived from the Latin word for delaying - 'Cunctator' - not the sort of name you want to try to pronounce after a few beers or glasses of wine at a dinner like this. Despite this, the story of Fabius - I'll call him that, not his nickname - is perhaps instructive.

During his struggle against Hannibal, Fabius was always being criticised for not rushing into battle at every opportunity. He'd seen his generals destroyed time after time by his opponents when they'd adopted a hairy-chested approach and attacked without thinking first. Fabius believed in a more strategic approach. He was resistant to the quick fix and rightly ignored the critics of his day. But he was determined to win. He had one policy - defeat Hannibal and save Rome. Nothing would shift him from it. He won. There's a lesson for Labor today. Just as Fabius defeated Hannibal, who was considered invincible in his day, we will defeat Howard - or Costello, should he ever replace him - and save Australia from their right-wing agenda. We will do this by fighting our opponents on our issues, in our way. We will not be shifted.*


----------



## noco (21 August 2015)

Ah Shucks fellows...you have disappointed me today......No comments from the lefties.

I guess the private mail system is running hot between you all.

Boycott Noco and lets hope this thread will die of natural death.

Alas.....there will more news to come.


----------



## noco (21 August 2015)

A disillusioned Fabian, Don Aitkin, expresses his opinion of Climate Change and the Fabians.


http://donaitkin.com/climate-change-and-the-fabian-society/

    Sport
    Theatre

13
Jul
Climate change and the Fabian Society

I joined the Fabian Society so long ago that I’ve forgotten when. Some time in the 1960s, I would think. For those who don’t know about it, the Fabian Society is an organisation dedicated to achieving progress through gradual and piecemeal reforms rather than through revolution. It was founded in the late 19th century, and predates the Labour Party in Britain. It had as members and supporters many of the most prominent thinkers of their day, and a lot of its ideas have found their way into law, and the way we live.

My political heritage came through Protestant working class grandparents and school-teacher parents: education, hard work, sympathy for the underdog, save, own  your home, don’t borrow except for a house, and so on. At university I gained the view that history was the working out of the idea of human progress. I grew up in the heartland of the old Country Party, so to all the foregoing I gained in addition sympathy for  farmers, graziers and rural workers, and a feeling that those of us who lived in the country rather than the city were also underdogs — a thought emphasised whenever we went to visit relatives in Sydney. I still hope that Country beats City in Rugby League. Since 1958, my first Federal election, I have voted Labor more often than for its main opponents.

The Fabians take their name from a celebrated Roman General, Quintus Fabius Maximus, who got his nickname Cunctator (delayer) through defeating Hannibal by not engaging with the Carthaginian general directly, but through harrying his support lines. Hannibal had more troops, so a pitched battle was not in Rome’s interest. Fabius was not popular in the early stages of the second Punic War but became celebrated when the Romans realised that his strategy actually worked. He became one of the heroes of the Roman Republic, and was extolled in histories in the period of the Roman Empire as well.

The Fabians liked his cautious strategy in political terms, and based their appeal on a great deal of real research into the living conditions of workers, and what would be needed to overcome this or that real problem in English society. Their work had some effect on Conservatives and Liberals too, who saw, from a different perspective, that if revolution were to be avoided, the workers would have to see that they had a real stake in the confutation of the present structure of society. I wrote about this some time ago.

The Fabians in Australia seemed to me for a long time to be  sort of think-tank for the ALP, but from the incremental rather than the socialist wing. But I now see that there has been a subtle change in the way they present themselves. If you go to the AFS website you get this:

We aim to promote greater equality of power, wealth and opportunity. We promote debate, encourage research, and publish commentary, into political ideas and public policy reform. We host regular policy forums, conferences, dinners, and networking events with high profile guest speakers.

The Australian Fabians are committed to:

A fairer and more sustainable Australia.
Promoting progressive values in the community.
Developing solutions to the biggest policy challenges of today.

Attuned as I doubtless was to the English and research-based origins of the Fabians fifty years ago, and never having gone to a meeting (though I knew quite a few members) I discovered that this was not quite what I had in mind. Somehow the incremental, cautious, research-based character has gone. What you see here is indistinguishable from any other pro-Labor support group. There’s nothing wrong with these aims, but there’s nothing especially Fabian about them, either. The sense of fact-based, incremental change is gone.

I mention all this because I have for some time been needling the local secretary about the wholly orthodox ways in which the AFS has been referring to global warming and ‘climate change’. Last month the AFS produced a newsletter that gave pride of place to the Pope’s encyclical and other essays  supporting its message. So I wrote to him as follows:

Why does the Fabian Society assume that ‘climate change’ is real, caused by human activity and dangerous to humanity and other life forms? There is much better evidence the other way.

Why do you only provide orthodox reading in this area? I have been writing about this issue for ten years now, and have some claim to have experience in assessing science requests for more money to do research. My take on the Pope’s encyclical is different (http://donaitkin.com/pope-francis-surveys-the-world-and-its-problems- which-now-include-climate-change/). I don’t claim that it is the last word, but shouldn’t Fabians be looking at both sides of this question?

I received a courteous reply, whose central points were these:

The Australian Fabians are dedicated to broadening the debate around making a fairer and more equal Australia – as a result we consider topics such as trade, economic policy, indidgenous affairs, good public administration, and yes, climate change and urban planning…

I understand you have a particular skepticism towards what I consider to be a general scientific consensus on climate change. While the Fabians generally do promote debate, the moral, economic and politicial imperatives of realising a low-pollution future mean that our debate on the topic would focus on particular methods of bringing this about – for example, direct subsidies, carbon pricing, transition schemes, etc. It would not attempt to question the underlying science. Indeed, I can’t think of a policy area more crucial to ensuring a fairer Australia in the longer-term than addressing the impacts of carbon pollution…

I am happy to note the concerns you’ve raised at the next meeting of our Executive, but if this is a particular ongoing concern of yours, the Fabians may not be the organisation you would like us to be.

*He’s right at the end of his last sentence. Things have changed, and I haven’t caught up. Why do I care? Well, let’s look at his remark that I can’t think of a policy area more crucial to ensuring a fairer Australia in the longer-term than addressing the impacts of carbon pollution… Can I suggest, as nicely as I can, that he really needs to look at the supposed connection between fairness, or equity, and increased greenhouse gases (I’ll ignore the scientific illiteracy of ‘carbon pollution’). There isn’t any, as far as I can determine. If the Fabians are concerned about those who are poorer than others, then they ought to be apprehensive about any policies that increase the cost of energy, because those increases fall most heavily on those for whom the marginal utility of a dollar is greatest. And yes, this is an ‘ongoing concern’ of mine, and it should be for the Fabians, as well.

True Fabians, I think, would try to escape from the fog of ideology — that’s what made them powerful in the beginning. The way you do that is to keep asking the right questions, and digging to get the right answers. The whole area of global warming and ‘climate change’ is beset with mindless thought-clichÃ©s, like ‘carbon pollution’, ‘greatest moral challenge’, ‘scientific consensus’, ‘two-degree limit’, and the rest of them. These rhetorical devices get in the way of thinking, and they mean nothing when you examine them hard.

If the Fabians are to be true to their origins, then they need to push the fog away, and ask, once again, how they best help to overcome real problems that real Australians have, right now. Thought-clichÃ©s aren’t the way to do it. And yes, I think that it’s time I ended my association with the Fabians.*


----------



## Tisme (22 August 2015)

noco said:


> Here is the traditional Fabian Society hold on Labor.
> 
> Read the address by Simon Crean.
> 
> ...




 That was funny


----------



## noco (23 August 2015)

Is there a connection between Islam and communism??....there may well be...Read the link herewith.



http://www.natalt.org/2015/07/19/co...laim-australia-and-where-to-now-for-the-left/

*Finally, I would suggest that the alliance between Islam and Trotskyite communism has been shown to be a mistake. Ironically, the day before the Melbourne rally, a Muslim terrorist attack took place in Chattanooga, Tennessee (the perpetrator texted a friend a verse from Koran just before the attack). I myself predicted that something like this would happen on the Friday before the rally, as Muslim terrorists show a propensity to carry out their attacks on Fridays. I think, by 2015, even the most ill-informed Westerner knows that an association exists between the doctrine of Muhammad (as contained in the Koran, the Sira and the Hadith) and intolerance, oppression, violence – values which are not commensurate with Western values or that matter any non-Muslim’s values. By throwing their lot in with Islam, the unsavoury aspects of the doctrine and the practice will rub off on the Left; the average Australian, the average worker, will ask himself what the devil the commies are doing by associating with Islam. Now, it’s quite true that the Trotskyites don’t give a damn for public opinion, and they don’t care for the opinion of the Australian working-classes – in fact, they despise the working-class. All the same, they aren’t doing themselves any favours. They want to portray themselves to the media as the ‘good guys’ who are taking a stand against intolerance, cruelty, etc. But one will ask, quite naturally, if that’s the case, why are they associating with Islam? (Added to that, I think, after this weekend, that the average Australian views the communists themselves as being a violent and intolerant group, which they are).

It would be in the interests of the communists in this country, and the Left as a whole, if the Trotskyites were to ditch their old 1930s-style terror tactics and their new association with Islam. But communists can’t change. As stated before, they live in a bubble universe. I think Jolly and the other communist leaders made their outlandish proclamations of ‘victory’ with one eye on the rank and file of their respective groups; that is, they wanted to keep their spirits up and cheer them on. Communism doesn’t work, nobody in Australia wants it, nobody even in Russia and China wants it; but the Trotskyite cults and grouplets, in order to survive, must pretend that communism is still viable and furthermore that their tactics are working.

Finally, it should be pointed out that the old ‘anti-fascist’ tactics – as pioneered by Trotskyite front groups such as the Anti-Nazi League and Unite Against Fascism – are becoming outmoded as well. The militant Left would make it a practice of taking photographs of nationalists and seeking to obtain their personal details, and then put pressure on their employers to get them fired. But, with the age of social media, nationalists politics in Australia has developed a new transparency – more and more of the leadership, such as Shermon and Blair, are willing to show their faces and use their names. What’s more, too many people are coming to these rallies for the ‘anti-fascists’ to keep track of; the ‘anti-fascists’ aren’t dealing with cults and cliques, small in number, any more.

When watching a news report of the rally in Sydney, the mincing, effeminate spokesman for the Sydney communists declared to the camera that the Reclaimers were all ‘Neo-Nazis and fascists’. The camera then panned across the massed Reclaim crowd – most of them ‘mums and dads’ wearing or waving the Australia flag. (It appeared to be a sea of red, white and blue). As time goes on, the communists will find it harder to maintain that Reclaim is neo-Nazi, fascist, racist, etc. It will become apparent to all that the communists are labouring under the delusion that Australia itself is ‘fascist’, ‘racist’, ‘Nazi’ – Slim Dusty himself was a ‘racist’ and a ‘Nazi’.*


----------



## noco (26 March 2016)

Fabians, Greens, Labor,Democratic Socialism, Communism, Unionism what ever one likes to brand them, all have the same goal.

Everything is centrally controlled by the state......We own all the minerals so therefore we, according to Socialists, own the land the minerals and the food we grow and should share in the wealth.

In their minds free enterprise and profits are dirty words.

So to convert Australia from Capitolism  to Socialism (Communism) first you must control the media as we have seen develop in the ABC and SBS......41% of journos in the ABC are Green and 32% are Labor...So the propaganda machine is set in place to brainwash the naive into thinking The Liberal National Party are a bad political party....Criticize where ever possible and discredit their leader at every opportunity and this is very evident and blatant on QandA with Tony Jones and Insiders with Barry Cassidy.

Having utilized the media to promote their cause with the prospect of gaining power and should they gain that power again The Labor Party and the Greens will move to central control of the banks, mining, manufacturing (what is left of it thanks to the unions) and Agriculture.

They will tax the mining industry to the kilts, as we noted 2007 to 2013 until they leave and invest in another country.   


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r8amQ4lyypE

Please listen to the associated links that go with the above U-Tube.


----------



## McLovin (26 March 2016)

Thanks for the vid. I got a good laugh out of what communism is called in "biased countries"





That'll fool 'em.

Why are we 266 posts deep in this thread and only now getting to definitions of communism, and from high schoolers at that? The spelling and grammar is a little off, but I guess it's a small price to pay to live in America's capitalist wonderland.


----------



## SirRumpole (26 March 2016)

Personally I would rather have a government controlled car industry than no car industry at all as long as their products gave value for money.

Why should pursuance of profit be the only determinant of what is a good idea or not ?

As I've said many times, we wouldn't have a reliable electricity supply in NSW (Snowy Mountains Hydro) if it wasn't for government investment, and now thanks to ultra Right "market economics" we soon won't have a car industry.


----------



## noco (26 March 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Personally I would rather have a government controlled car industry than no car industry at all as long as their products gave value for money.
> 
> Why should pursuance of profit be the only determinant of what is a good idea or not ?
> 
> As I've said many times, we wouldn't have a reliable electricity supply in NSW (Snowy Mountains Hydro) if it wasn't for government investment, and now thanks to ultra Right "market economics" we soon won't have a car industry.




We won't have a car industry thanks to the communist dominated unions demands for higher and higher wages....During the Gillard reign when she was heavily subsidizing this industry to the tune of millions of dollars, Gillard said the car industry would right until 2022.......They were then paying semi skilled workers $80,000 per year to do repetitive work..that is heap more than nurses, ambos and firemen..Is it any wonder the industry has gone out the back door along with clothing and foot wear factories.

How can you compare the car industry with the Snowy Mountain Hydro scheme...there is no comparison.

If the car industry was government run, it would surely run at a loss......But of course that is the way the socialist think....The same thing would happen with a socialist government if they were able to introduce central control.


----------



## luutzu (26 March 2016)

noco said:


> We won't have a car industry thanks to the communist dominated unions demands for higher and higher wages....During the Gillard reign when she was heavily subsidizing this industry to the tune of millions of dollars, Gillard said the car industry would right until 2022.......They were then paying semi skilled workers $80,000 per year to do repetitive work..that is heap more than nurses, ambos and firemen..Is it any wonder the industry has gone out the back door along with clothing and foot wear factories.
> 
> How can you compare the car industry with the Snowy Mountain Hydro scheme...there is no comparison.
> 
> If the car industry was government run, it would surely run at a loss......But of course that is the way the socialist think....The same thing would happen with a socialist government if they were able to introduce central control.




So now that the Capitalists are freed to run the auto industry, where is it?

How did the auto industry in Australia and elsewhere got started and ran for a long while with all them unions being very strong during those hey-days?

Where has the manufacturing move to now? Third World economies and one big massive Communist country.


----------



## SirRumpole (26 March 2016)

luutzu said:


> So now that the Capitalists are freed to run the auto industry, where is it?
> 
> How did the auto industry in Australia and elsewhere got started and ran for a long while with all them unions being very strong during those hey-days?
> 
> Where has the manufacturing move to now? Third World economies and one big massive Communist country.




You're right you know.


----------



## noco (26 March 2016)

luutzu said:


> So now that the Capitalists are freed to run the auto industry, where is it?
> 
> How did the auto industry in Australia and elsewhere got started and ran for a long while with all them unions being very strong during those hey-days?
> 
> Where has the manufacturing move to now? Third World economies and one big massive Communist country.




In the hey days of the 50's, wages were much lower than they are now and we could compete but thanks to the unions they have destroyed the car industry.

The manufacturing has moved to communist countries where wages are much lower to the point of slave labour and they don't work 38 hours a week with expensive penalty rates like they seek in Australia.

Would you like to live in a communist country under those conditions?...I doubt it because you know when you are well off living under Australian conditions....So don't bitch about losing our manufacturing...we have ourselves to blame.


----------



## luutzu (27 March 2016)

noco said:


> In the hey days of the 50's, wages were much lower than they are now and we could compete but thanks to the unions they have destroyed the car industry.
> 
> The manufacturing has moved to communist countries where wages are much lower to the point of slave labour and they don't work 38 hours a week with expensive penalty rates like they seek in Australia.
> 
> Would you like to live in a communist country under those conditions?...I doubt it because you know when you are well off living under Australian conditions....So don't bitch about losing our manufacturing...we have ourselves to blame.




Senior executives wage to the grunts in Australia is 6 to 1? CEO to grunt is some 30 to 1. These increases does not affect costs of manufacturing? Are what the almighty union wanted and demand?

From Robert Reich's docu (Inequality for All), I think he was saying that if the American workers wage were to keep up with inflation and productivity gain, it would be something like $US120,000 per year, instead of $US47,000 per year average.

Productivity have gone up and up, but workers wages have either flat lined or declined. CEO pays of course goes from some 12 times worker's pay to averaging some 362 times today.

So I don't know what it was like in the 50s, but one group got a lot richer and one got a lot poorer. Well sure, not third world level poverty... but not all champagne and caviar either.

----

Sure we can't complete with China or places where average wage is $2 to $5 bucks a day... but do we have to compete with them on their term at their game?

Can't compete with car manufacturing, fine... how about submarine? Or trams or high speed rail? Or other higher tech manufacturing?

Must we either build cars or mine some ore or give bad financial advise?


----------



## luutzu (27 March 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> You're right you know.




I was only asking


----------



## Macquack (28 March 2016)

noco said:


> In the hey days of the 50's, wages were much lower than they are now and we could compete but thanks to the unions they have destroyed the car industry.
> 
> The manufacturing has moved to communist countries where wages are much lower *to the point of slave labour* and they don't work 38 hours a week with expensive penalty rates like they seek in Australia.
> 
> Would you like to live in a communist country under those conditions?...I doubt it because you know when you are well off living under Australian conditions....So don't bitch about losing our manufacturing...we have ourselves to blame.




You need to re-read what you have said! Because it obviously came out ALL WRONG.

"the *unions they have destroyed* the car industry"

"manufacturing has moved to communist countries where wages are much lower *to the point of slave labour *"

"*Would you like to live *in a communist country *under those conditions?...*"

"*we have ourselves to blame*".

Unf***ingbelievable.


----------



## noco (28 March 2016)

Macquack said:


> You need to re-read what you have said! Because it obviously came out ALL WRONG.
> 
> "the *unions they have destroyed* the car industry"
> 
> ...




So my friend how has it come out all wrong?.......You make a statement but you do not explain or elaborate, but finish up with an explicit language.

So what do you blame for the loss of the car industry and other manufacturing industries if it is not the unions?..The car industry was thriving in the 50's to the 80's......


----------



## Smurf1976 (29 March 2016)

noco said:


> So what do you blame for the loss of the car industry and other manufacturing industries if it is not the unions?..




The Lima Agreement and the associated notions of "free trade" and that we had to "compete" against the Third World had rather a lot to do with it. We consciously chose to give away much of our industrial base.

We'd still have a very viable manufacturing industry, with or without unions, if we were actually playing on the so-called "level playing field" that exists nowhere other than in an economic textbook.


----------



## luutzu (29 March 2016)

noco said:


> So my friend how has it come out all wrong?.......You make a statement but you do not explain or elaborate, but finish up with an explicit language.
> 
> So what do you blame for the loss of the car industry and other manufacturing industries if it is not the unions?..The car industry was thriving in the 50's to the 80's......




I think the point Macquack was making was that the points made in your forward already answer it - Australian workers can't, shouldn't [?], be paid at third world level pay to be "competitive".

Being "competitive" and "efficient", and often being efficient does not mean work better or smarter or cut back wastage... but efficient is code for less pay, or one person doing two jobs for same pay if it kills them. But to this "competitive" nonsense... It is one way corporations play one gov't against another gov't - both international and within the same state or between states.

That is, they go to one gov't, negotiate hard to get free this and exempt that and incentives this and laws they like... then they use those sweet conditions to leverage better ones from other gov't. The dumbest one win the privilege to host the company and the "jobs".

Fair enough, you say, I'd do the same and so why can't they... True, I try that too now and then.. but business owners are smart enough and care for their or their stakeholders' interests enough to know where they can go to and where they'd say no. Gov't, for some reason, does not care too much and give too much.

That and gov't, since the 70s, have work hand in fist with big businesses to screw the average joe over. That it is safer for democracy if the population are insecure and would take any job at any condition, would be too worried about their own family's financial need that they'd leave gov't alone to do as they please.

A weak, constantly insecured, ill educated or highly indebted "intellectuals" mean: Big profit for corporations, more freedom for gov't to carry out their master plans for world peace and international unity and cooperation.

----

Why were manufacturing so good from '50s to '80s?

Strong unions to look after workers' interests - not saying all unions are good and all union leaders care and can't be corrupted. But at least with unions, workers' interests are represented, and it somewhat balances out against employers and their paid for and owned politicians.

When workers are well paid, they have more to spend. More money to spend create demands; demands need to by supplied and that in turn create more jobs. 

With more money and free or very little cost to higher education or general education; people get more skill and more thinking upstairs. That lead to greater efficiency, new ideas, new innovations... all these drives greater profits and productivity. And no, efficiency and high profit from able management is wishful thinking dreamt up by MBA schools to suckers more fees.

-

Also, in the 50s, Communist China was only one year old. They just got out of about 100 years of European selling their people opium, take their stuff and a few of their cities and ports; then the Japanese invasion during WW2 in midst of civil war.

So the dust were just settled in the 50s for China; then Mao and his Comrades got bright ideas about steel production, unskilled enginnering of dams and general hatred for old school stuff like farming... and some 20 million Chinese died in the ensuing famine in that Great Leap to nowhere.

South Korea didn't end their war until 1954 [?]; VN/Indochina was still trying to stop the French from civilising them; Europe was destroyed; South America was never much of anything and the Americans just got started regime changing all over their continent; Africa was colonised since ever and are about to get really liberated when US permit Europe to reclaim its former colonies, mine African resources for rebuilding effort back home.

This goes on for a couple decades and the US did great out of it; I'm guessing Australia did somewhat pretty well too... Then come the 70s when hippies and smart alecs have way too much time and too little debt start questioning wars and want peace and clean air and safe water got way out of hand... 

Come to the rescue was Reagan the Hollywood actor and ad model; teaming with Thatcher and they go saving democracy from the people. With media being bought, with academia being bought, with "intellectuals" being bought and kids being taught that greed is good and freedom mean rich people can do whatever it is they want because they know best and they love everyone...

So laws were made, minds were bent and unions were being cracked over the head like the good old days before Lenin  scared the heck out of capitalists and Hitler scared the heck out of everybody that freedom and solidarity sounds like a pretty good idea for a happy population not marching in the streets overthrowing stuff but going to war and have something to defend and fight for.

At around these time... the comrades in China thought shiet, Mao is great and his red book is awesome poetry or  whatever, but people are literally dying by the millions; those living are barely alive and dumb as a bell learning not much else beside Mao's and Lenin and Marxist stuff without questioning or thinking about it... So we better open up the economy, get some job and some money flowing in else the people rise up and we'll have to fly to Switzerland or something.

----

With China opening for business; other countries soon follow... and corporations, being always nationalistic and never see a desperate opportunity they won't exploit starts to to on over and so gov't either have to cut taxes, more incentives and let them screw worker's pay and rights and pension or else they'd move to China. Conditions were met but not enough and they move anyway...

So gov't better fund new industry or have something new to manufacture... we can't compete with poverty stricken workers; we shouldn't compete to relax environmental protection... 

bed time.


----------



## McLovin (29 March 2016)

noco said:


> So what do you blame for the loss of the car industry and other manufacturing industries if it is not the unions?..The car industry was thriving in the 50's to the 80's......




The car industry died because it couldn't compete. It produced bloody awful, poorly built, overpriced vehicles. It wasn't thriving, it was being kept alive by government subsidies and tariffs (up to 50% on imported vehicles). You can take your pick on any manufacturing in Australia during that period, they were all being protected from competition. A base model 1985 Commodore, which was a total piece of ****, cost $46,500 in today's money. 

The economy was a closed shop, consumers and taxpayers paid the price of helping uneconomic industries keep hobling along, and it would've eventually sent the country broke. We had the most heavily protected manufacturing industry in the world back then, and it was hardly a beacon of quality. Thank God those commies in the ALP opened it up in the 80s.


----------



## SirRumpole (29 March 2016)

McLovin said:


> The car industry died because it couldn't compete. It produced bloody awful, poorly built, overpriced vehicles. It wasn't thriving, it was being kept alive by government subsidies and tariffs (up to 50% on imported vehicles). You can take your pick on any manufacturing in Australia during that period, they were all being protected from competition. A base model 1985 Commodore, which was a total piece of ****, cost $46,500 in today's money.
> 
> The economy was a closed shop, consumers and taxpayers paid the price of helping uneconomic industries keep hobling along, and it would've eventually sent the country broke. We had the most heavily protected manufacturing industry in the world back then, and it was hardly a beacon of quality. Thank God those commies in the ALP opened it up in the 80s.




I'd still buy a Commodore over a Great Wall, but I would also buy a Hyundai (5 year warranty) over a Commodore.

The Yanks and the Chinese build cars down to a price, the Japs, Germans and Koreans build them up to a standard.

If we ever get our manufacturing back, we should follow the latter example.


----------



## McLovin (29 March 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> I'd still buy a Commodore over a Great Wall, but I would also buy a Hyundai (5 year warranty) over a Commodore.
> 
> The Yanks and the Chinese build cars down to a price, the Japs, Germans and Koreans build them up to a standard.
> 
> If we ever get our manufacturing back, we should follow the latter example.




I'd say in the US, the UAW was a case of a union helping kill off an industry. The UAW negotiated worker health plan was at one point adding US$2,000 to the price of a new car out of Detroit. You only have to look at how viable car manufacturing in southern US states is to know that Detroit's problems were not just about poorly run businesses. In any event, a domestic focused car industry in Australia made about as much sense as a tanning salon at a nudist retreat.


----------



## SirRumpole (29 March 2016)

McLovin said:


> In any event, a domestic focused car industry in Australia made about as much sense as a tanning salon at a nudist retreat.




If looked at purely from a business sense _maybe_ that's true. From a national interest perspective it's better to have a manufacturing capability than not to have one. It's always better to be _able_ to do something than not be able to do it.

In WW2 auto production lines produces plane parts and other defence items. Manufacturing relies less on people these days than it does on machines so if we are going to be 'innovative" and "leading edge technological" there is no reason why we can't or shouldn't get into high technology manufacturing instead of just throwing the baby (manufacturing  in general) out with the bathwater (constipated US managed car makers).


----------



## McLovin (29 March 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> If looked at purely from a business sense maybe that's true. From a national interest perspective it's better to have a manufacturing capability than not to have one. It's always better to be able to do something than not be able to do it.
> 
> In WW2 auto production lines produces plane parts and other defence items. Manufacturing relies less on people these days than it does on machines so if we are going to be 'innovative" and "leading edge technological" there is no reason why we can't or shouldn't get into high technology manufacturing instead of just throwing the baby (manufacturing  in general) out with the bathwater (constipated US managed car makers).




In WW2 we were producing prop planes with not much more than a compass, altimeter and maybe an ADF. I seriously doubt the production lines at Ford or Holden could be rejigged to start manufacturing jet engines and advanced avionics systems, or even that knowledge of how to build a car would be all that useful.

Silicon Valley is leading edge technological centre and it doesn't manufacture anything, and yet we still talk as if without manufacturing we are doomed. There is room for manufacturing, but as you move up the technology curve specialisation becomes the main game and skills become less interoperable. The only thing the knowledge of building cars is good for is building cars.


----------



## Tisme (29 March 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> If looked at purely from a business sense _maybe_ that's true. From a national interest perspective it's better to have a manufacturing capability than not to have one. It's always better to be _able_ to do something than not be able to do it.
> 
> In WW2 auto production lines produces plane parts and other defence items. Manufacturing relies less on people these days than it does on machines so if we are going to be 'innovative" and "leading edge technological" there is no reason why we can't or shouldn't get into high technology manufacturing instead of just throwing the baby (manufacturing  in general) out with the bathwater (constipated US managed car makers).




We tend to under value ourselves here. The Holden team wholly designed some of those US and Korean cars we consider foreign, sold millions of the 4 pot "familly II" engines to US, Belgium, Egypt and South Africa.South Korea, Taiwan, Japan, Indonesia, UK, Poland, etc. I think it was Button under Hawke who tried to grow the industry, but as usual politics crueled that down the line in favour of votes. Of course anything that had it's foundations rooted in anything Labor, even 70 years ago has to be purged from existence in the New Liberal Party doctrine....like dogs marking their territory on our collective provenance.


----------



## SirRumpole (29 March 2016)

Tisme said:


> We tend to under value ourselves here. The Holden team wholly designed some of those US and Korean cars we consider foreign, sold millions of the 4 pot "familly II" engines to US, Belgium, Egypt and South Africa.South Korea, Taiwan, Japan, Indonesia, UK, Poland, etc. I think it was Button under Hawke who tried to grow the industry, but as usual politics crueled that down the line in favour of votes. Of course anything that had it's foundations rooted in anything Labor, even 70 years ago has to be purged from existence in the New Liberal Party doctrine....like dogs marking their territory on our collective provenance.




It shows the turgid influence of the IPA in the policy making of this government. They know the price of everything and the value of nothing, and that is why our economy will head downhill in future if this mob stays in power.


----------



## Tisme (29 March 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> It shows the turgid influence of the IPA in the policy making of this government. They know the price of everything and the value of nothing, and that is why our economy will head downhill in future if this mob stays in power.




It's predicated of hate. I don't know what causes that hate (jealously, seven deadly sins, evil, inbreeding, etc) but at some point when their testicles stop ruling their furnaces and they actually start enjoying a red for its flavour rather than it's social wank factor they should ask themselves why they would want to inflict the same social setting on the broader community that fostered their arrested development in their own childhood domestic cauldron. Talk about misery loves company.


----------



## Smurf1976 (29 March 2016)

It's not just manufacturing. Everything from accounting to engineering can be offshored and it's happening.

I suspect we'll see change in the not too distant future once the white collar professionals realise that they have more in common with blue collar manufacturing workers than they had thought. If it can be shipped in or is done in an office then it can almost certainly be done somewhere else.

All that leaves us with are things that either can't physically be done somewhere else, eg plumbing or hairdressing, or where there's a need for 1:1 human contact with the service provider (eg a GP or the hospitality industry). That sort of thing employs quite a few but I can't see how it's going to sustain the whole country.

Australia has vast natural resources, a decent education system, relative political stability and a vast land area that covers multiple climate zones. Something is seriously wrong when a country with those advantages struggles to afford health care for its people and things like that. 

I see no problem with competing against others on equal terms. If country x has comparable wages and laws (eg environment) then competition ought to encourage innovation. But it's ridiculous to be trying to compete against those with incredibly low wages, a disregard for the health of workers and no real environmental standards. That's a race to the bottom that we've no chance of winning until we too are poor.

Factory in Australia has to compete with factories in other developed countries with similar laws = fine with me.

Factory in Australia has to compete with workers earning $2 per hour and with the waste just dumped in the river = hell no, it's not the 1950's now and we shouldn't be accepting that.

Same concept for administrative and professional work. Nobody in Australia is ever going to be competitive when the competition is being paid 90% less and works in a sweatshop. And nor should we be trying to compete with that, only a fool would even try.

I'm confident that at some point we'll see a return of protectionism among developed countries. That sentiment seems to be stirring somewhat in the US now (Trump etc) and it's only a matter of time until we see it here. Personally, I'm fine with the concept of free trade with comparable countries but not with those paying the workers a pittance, taking shortcuts with the environment and safety etc.


----------



## Tisme (29 March 2016)

Smurf1976 said:


> , I'm fine with the concept of free trade with comparable countries but not with those paying the workers a pittance, taking shortcuts with the environment and safety etc.




Unfortunately we are dealing with the competing egos of politicians. A sensible board of directors who were trying to sell coals to Newcastle wouldn't sign a supply and buy agreement with another company until it's processes were secured and assets protected. OUR board of directors signed a heads of agreement while our OUR company is in the middle of losing major income and asset.

Of course there's always a buyout option where the company is sold for cheap, the workers get put out of a job and the directors get a big payout and parachute in professional directors chairs and give only a passing thought to faux pas of their actions.


----------



## Macquack (30 March 2016)

noco said:


> So my friend how has it come out all wrong?.......You make a statement but you do not explain or elaborate, but finish up with an explicit language.
> 
> So what do you blame for the loss of the car industry and other manufacturing industries *if it is not the unions?..*The car industry was thriving in the 50's to the 80's......




You have admitted that if the Australian unions are prepared to work for "slave labour" they may have a slight shot at keeping their jobs.

I have worked you out, you want everybody else in Australia to work for "slave labour", but not the almighty Lord Noco.

If you want to keep your dreams alive, buddy,  go live in the Philippines.


----------



## noco (30 March 2016)

Macquack said:


> You have admitted that if the Australian unions are prepared to work for "slave labour" they may have a slight shot at keeping their jobs.
> 
> I have worked you out, you want everybody else in Australia to work for "slave labour", but not the almighty Lord Noco.
> 
> If you want to keep your dreams alive, buddy,  go live in the Philippines.




I have admitted to nothing and I do not know how you decipher that from my comments to the  point where I have stated that the Australian unions should be prepared to work for "slave labor"...I have traveled to several third world countries and I know exactly how they operate......Perhaps you and your union mates to go and live in these countries and set up a union office and sort some of these people out....I doubt  whether you would succeed in a Communist country if you tried because they would probably shoot or lock you up for life.

FFS stop making up stories......You have worked me out????????????????.....You would not have a clue....Typical Fabian rhetoric ...attack the ball and not the man OK.......Your typical comeback when you have lost an argument.....Your attempts to discredit, humiliate and  and belittle me will not work and is so infantile.


----------



## McLovin (31 March 2016)

Smurf1976 said:


> Factory in Australia has to compete with factories in other developed countries with similar laws = fine with me.




And we still won't have a manufacturing industry, unless wages are cut (and at the same time accept the price of manufactured goods will rise). Australian manufacturing didn't shrink because it was competing with third world labour it shrunk because it was hopelessly uneconomic. We don't have a population or workforce to be a manufacturing powerhouse.





I tend to think of free trade agreements as agreements on what trade is free. We get concessions where we have a comparable advantage and vice-versa. I'm not really convinced they add much value, because where a domestic industry will be protected it will be protected, whether or not there is an FTA.


----------



## Tisme (31 March 2016)

People pay extra for a Euro car because they : think it has prestige, it is better engineered, they have a cultural cringe about our own product, ignore the high servicing costs and electrical failures, ignore the lies about fuel economy, etc.

People buy a Jap car because : it's cheap, it's supposedly reliable, if you are asian because it's Toyota, they have a cultural cringe about our own product, etc

Only the few people but local product because: they don't care that those with cultural cringe call them bogans, realise that local product is on many occasions far superior. of better bang for buck, and much cheaper for parts which are needed into second ownership.

If we are going to position Australia as a mass market producer we will lay down with dogs, but if we keep the dream alive for niche and quality product (without our self destructive cultural cringe) we could may some good money.

Wages cost is a furphy perpetrated on the masses to mask the ineptitude of the professional directors who haven't got a clue on most occasions.


----------



## SirRumpole (31 March 2016)

Tisme said:


> People pay extra for a Euro car because they : think it has prestige, it is better engineered, they have a cultural cringe about our own product, ignore the high servicing costs and electrical failures, ignore the lies about fuel economy, etc.
> 
> People buy a Jap car because : it's cheap, it's supposedly reliable, if you are asian because it's Toyota, they have a cultural cringe about our own product, etc
> 
> ...





I guess the niche market is electric or hybrid these days. Again it comes down to the amount of R&D money in this country compared to a few mega corporations o/s.


----------



## McLovin (31 March 2016)

Tisme said:


> If we are going to position Australia as a mass market producer we will lay down with dogs, but if we keep the dream alive for niche and quality product (without our self destructive cultural cringe) we could may some good money.




Yes we could, but cars, European or otherwise, are not a niche product so I'm not quite sure why the reference point is vehicles. If you want a real niche product manufactured in Australia then something like Cochlear would be a good example of the sort of product we should be manufacturing.




Tisme said:


> Wages cost is a furphy perpetrated on the masses to mask the ineptitude of the professional directors who haven't got a clue on most occasions.




Yeah of course it is.


----------



## qldfrog (31 March 2016)

McLovin said:


> We don't have a population or workforce to be a manufacturing powerhouse.



I actually believe this is irrelevant, Switzerland has a small population, yet a very nice manufacturing base a la german mode.
Sure we can not manufacture cars, but we could be a world leader in mining, drilling equipment offshore platform etc or agricultural machinery/processing;
the size does not explain it all you need small(relatively) innovative companies and a proper infrastructure around: be it education, investment, taxation, logistics(road/port/rail) and the right mindset, i do not believe we have anything.
I was appaled a few days ago when people were blaming the slow internet here on small population.There are hardly any other countries on earth whose population is more concentrated than ours: provision of fast internet in a 50km radius  around 6 cities would cover more than 80% of the need, yet see how it goes, I have adsl(not 2) and very limited mobile signal within 25km of Brisbane GPO in 2016;
I was trekking in the jungle of Sumatra and had excellent cover there between gullies and high ranges...
I so believe the australian problem is not population, workforce numbers or unions.But a sum of wrong values,  a"corrupt" system with monopolies everywhere and a wrong mindset


----------



## SirRumpole (31 March 2016)

qldfrog said:


> I actually believe this is irrelevant, Switzerland has a small population, yet a very nice manufacturing base a la german mode.
> Sure we can not manufacture cars, but we could be a world leader in mining, drilling equipment offshore platform etc or agricultural machinery/processing;




Not to mention medical equipment, integrated circuits etc.

Salaries mean less these days than investment in production technology.


----------



## McLovin (31 March 2016)

qldfrog said:


> I actually believe this is irrelevant, Switzerland has a small population, yet a very nice manufacturing base a la german mode.




Switzerland is in the EU single market with half a billion people on it's doorstep which provides it with both a supply chain and a market to sell it's finished goods. On the other hand, Switzerland is not such a bad example of what high value, high margin manufacturing should look like in a country with very high wages. A company like Cochlear would slot right into the Swiss economy. I'm sure I don't need to state the obvious, but the Swiss aren't building cars. We should be using our small population to our advantage: We don't need to employ 10's of millions of workers in manufacturing like the US or Germany does.



qldfrog said:


> be it education, investment, taxation, logistics(road/port/rail) and the right mindset, i do not believe we have anything.




You'd have to be extremely pessimistic to say we lack all of the above.



qldfrog said:


> I was appaled a few days ago when people were blaming the slow internet here on small population.There are hardly any other countries on earth whose population is more concentrated than ours: provision of fast internet in a 50km radius  around 6 countries would cover more than 80% of the population, yet see how it goes, I have adsl(not 2) and very limited mobile signal within 25km of Brisbane GPO in 2016;
> I was trekking in the jungle of Sumatra and had cover there...
> I so believe the australian problem is not population, workforce numbers or unions.




I've heard that argument and I shake my head too.


----------



## Tisme (31 March 2016)

McLovin said:


> Yes we could, but cars, European or otherwise, are not a niche product so I'm not quite sure why the reference point is vehicles. If you want a real niche product manufactured in Australia then something like Cochlear would be a good example of the sort of product we should be manufacturing.




Well it is a niche when it is targetted at a small market for higher margin. HSV, for instance, do this successfully. Even the humble Vectra is now pitching itself as a Eurowank car and getting the prestige buyers ... 





McLovin said:


> Yeah of course it is.




You sound unconvinced, yet there's ample evidence to suggest paying peanuts is a slow march to third world status and untimely company collapse. 

If we don't value the product then of course we don't rate/value the inputs of production.


----------



## qldfrog (31 March 2016)

McLovin said:


> You'd have to be extremely pessimistic to say we lack all of the above.



OK 
education : what is the level of STEM litteracy in Australia vs the world...not among the bests..
investment: do I need to mention CSIRO or the appaling level of R&D  here? getting an investment property does not count...
taxation:heavy red tape, benefiting super, corporate evasion and negative gearing investment units (once again)
Billions and billions in non productive assets, super fund unwilling or unable by law to invest in innovation/productive assets and increasing PE of a concentrated ASX50 monopolies


 logistics(road/port/rail) : can we just agree that we are really below par there?

and the right mindset: the tall poppy syndrome, let's tax the rich aka anyone not billionnaire but succeeding

I mean is it pessimistic? facts may not please but Australia is not the place to develop a high end enterprise, and yes we can quote Atlasian or Cochlear but seriously, this is not really either current (cochlear or CSL would not happen nowadays) and not sure atlasian could  either.I came here a little more than 20y ago, i brought my own education and skill sets, taxation was then simpler and the corporate evasion not so big: i was able to start my company but since 2000 it is red tape on red tape layer in legal and taxation laws.


----------



## McLovin (31 March 2016)

Tisme said:


> Well it is a niche when it is targetted at a small market for higher margin. HSV, for instance, do this successfully. Even the humble Vectra is now pitching itself as a Eurowank car and getting the prestige buyers




Do they really do it successfully? An HSV R8 rebadged as a Vauxhall in the UK costs the same as a C63 Merc or BMW M3. The best bit about the HSV is the American engine in it. I'd hate to think what the unit cost would be if they didn't have a ready made Commodore to start with. 

They still make Vectras? You know they are/were made in Europe?





Tisme said:


> You sound unconvinced, yet there's ample evidence to suggest paying peanuts is a slow march to third world status and untimely company collapse.
> 
> If we don't value the product then of course we don't rate/value the inputs of production.




No, I'm unconvinced that the lack of manufacturing is solely because of the cluelessness of company directors. My parents ran a manufacturing business for 30 years. All Australian made except for a few bits of componentry that had to be imported. Margins were big. Imported stuff from China was significantly cheaper but never really got market share off them because they kept ahead of the curve and had a reputation for durable, quality products and continuous investment in IP. You just can't do that when your making Dunlop Volleys out the back of Alexandria.



			
				qldfrog said:
			
		

> OK
> education : what is the level of STEM litteracy in Australia vs the world...not among the bests..
> investment: do I need to mention CSIRO or the appaling level of R&D here? getting an investment property does not count...
> taxation:heavy red tape, benefiting super, corporate evasion and negative gearing investment units (once again)
> ...




Like I said, extremely pessimistic.


----------



## Smurf1976 (31 March 2016)

Australia did have a competitive advantage in energy. Cheap gas and even cheaper electricity relative to most places on earth.

Then the politicians decided to throw it away in order to pursue free market ideology. End result is that we're nowhere near as competitive with energy as we used to be, we've gone from third cheapest to among the more expensive (varies depending on the nature of the load etc but in broad terms that is true).

Now, if our political leaders couldn't get something relatively straightforward right _and which we had already got right for an extended period of many decades_ then I very much doubt they'll be getting too many other things right either.

We have metallic ores and cheap energy on our doorstep and there are industries where _cheap_ energy alone amounts to 25% of the production cost of refined metal, with most of the rest being raw materials, building the plant in the first place, transport and so on with labour being a relatively small share. If we can't get that right despite huge natural advantages in our favour then we've got no chance of successfully doing anything that's actually difficult.

My view is that businesses ought to be privately owned and run and there's a definite need to focus on quality and innovation. But infrastructure such as roads, rail, ports, airports, electricity, gas networks and water supply are far better off in public ownership. It ends up costing less and gives business and consumers alike an advantage. Worked pretty well in the past and hasn't worked anywhere near as well since what used to be considered an essential service was turned into a commodity.

I've singled out the energy industry here simply because I know a lot about it. But if politicians can't get that right, and it never was rocket science, then I'd be highly surprised if too many other decisions really stack up either.


----------



## SirRumpole (31 March 2016)

Smurf1976 said:


> Australia did have a competitive advantage in energy. Cheap gas and even cheaper electricity relative to most places on earth....




+1 to your entire post.

Governments should supply needs, private enterprise should supply wants.

There are grey areas of course but that should be the principle.


----------



## McLovin (31 March 2016)

Smurf1976 said:


> My view is that businesses ought to be privately owned and run and there's a definite need to focus on quality and innovation. But infrastructure such as roads, rail, ports, airports, electricity, gas networks and water supply are far better off in public ownership. It ends up costing less and gives business and consumers alike an advantage. Worked pretty well in the past and hasn't worked anywhere near as well since what used to be considered an essential service was turned into a commodity.




When it comes to energy, I agree that energy being used for domestic industry should be provided on a cost+margin basis that provides a sort of cost of capital return. That won't happen unless there's a genuine intent to reform industry. The government selling off monopolies and keeping them as monopolies, as with airports, is a real disaster for users of that infrastructure.

As a counterpoint to infrastructure being owned by government monopolies...


----------



## Smurf1976 (31 March 2016)

McLovin said:


> As a counterpoint to infrastructure being owned by government monopolies...




I did leave communications off my list. 

To be fair though, the underlying cost of providing that has greatly decreased due to technology improvement over the years. It would have cost more in the past than it does today under either public or private ownership.

Back to energy, the bottom line is that the industry was radically reformed during the 1990's and 00's and the end result is that costs have gone up in real terms despite technology and inherent underlying costs working in the opposite direction. The long running drive to cut costs turned into a drive to maximise revenue, that's pretty much the entire focus these days. Australia used to have the third cheapest electricity in the OECD, beaten only by Canada and NZ with their heavy reliance on hydro (which is inherently cheap) but we're nowhere near as competitive now.

I'd be highly surprised if the outcome hasn't been similar in other industries I know less about. I very much doubt that a privately owned toll road ends up cheaper overall than if government just built it and repaid the debt over the next 30 years. Likewise I'd be even more surprised if privately run for-profit airports, which are a natural monopoly in most cases, are cheaper than a publicly owned facility. You may not pay that cost directly but you can be pretty sure that airlines are factoring it into their pricing.

Many things definitely work best in private ownership, I'd hate to see government getting involved in agriculture or something like that, but things like airports, power and roads are all natural monopolies where attempts to introduce competition inevitably add costs due to asset duplication and loss of economies of scale which the private operators may or may not seek to reduce. But they'll never get the level of a previously non-existent cost down to the point it would otherwise be at, that being zero.


----------



## Tisme (31 March 2016)

McLovin said:


> No, I'm unconvinced that the lack of manufacturing is solely because of the cluelessness of company directors. My parents ran a manufacturing business for 30 years. .




I wasn't referring to pty ltd family companies, but the professional directors who parachute themselves into public companies and milk it for all it's worth


----------



## Logique (1 April 2016)

The Coalition is just playing politics until after the election.


----------



## Macquack (2 April 2016)

noco said:


> .
> FFS stop making up stories......You have worked me out????????????????.....You would not have a clue....Typical Fabian rhetoric ...attack the ball and not the man OK.......Your typical comeback when you have lost an argument.....Your attempts to discredit, humiliate and  and belittle me will not work and is so infantile.




Fair point Noco. 

From now on I will stick to just "quoting" your statements and inserting a big *FFS*. 

Anyway, how is your health going?


----------



## So_Cynical (2 April 2016)

Reading Russell Brands book Revolution, hes a lefty rat bag for those that did not know.

Anyway he makes a point that if mankind discovered a nearby habitable planet and colonized it, would the chosen economic system be capitalism? is it a good idea to adopt a system that is responsible for 90% of the wealth  accumulating  in just 3 or 4% of the population, for the richest 10 people to have more wealth than the poorest 50% (3 billion) its crazy, clearly broken and leads to poor social outcomes.

You wouldn't do it.


----------



## noco (28 May 2016)

A new flag for Australia with the RED emblem???????

The SAFE SCHOOLS PROGRAM is one of the Marxist methods of breaking down the morals of young teenagers.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...t/news-story/0186eacde79d86309c3ff2fc6598e45d

*Safe Schools Coalition co-ordin*ator Roz Ward was forced yesterday to quit her advisory role with the Victorian government and faces a university *investigation over a Facebook post where she *labelled the Australian flag “racist” and called for it to be replaced with a socialist red *ensign.

Ms Ward, who was advising the government on LGBTI issues, posted the incendiary statement after Premier Daniel Andrews apologised in the parliament on Monday for past gay discrimin*ation.

The government hoisted a gay-pride rainbow flag on Victoria’s Parliament House as part of the historic event.

Ms Ward posted a photo of the rainbow flag on top of Parliament House on Facebook with the comment: “Now we just need to get rid of the racist Australian flag on top of state parliament and get a red one up there and my work is done.”

The Weekend Australian *discovered the message during the week and on Thursday night asked the government and Ms Ward for comment.

In response, Ms Ward’s resignation and an apology was distributed to the media yesterday and the post removed yesterday morning from her Facebook page.

Ms Ward’s biggest allies, La Trobe University and the *Victorian government, yesterday strongly criticised her post.

The government’s Gender and Equality Commissioner, Rowena Allen, said it was inappropriate.

“Ms Ward has acknowledged that the post was inappropriate and may have caused offence, even if meant in jest, and posted in private,” Ms Allen said.

“The Safe Schools program is not about any one person, it’s about providing safe and inclusive environments for all LGBTI kids at school. The Victorian government remains proud in its support of the Safe Schools program, and this will in no way affect the running of the program.”

Ms Ward remains employed as the Victorian co-ordinator of Safe Schools through La Trobe University, but a university spokesman said her post was being inves*t*igated.

“While the university respects academic freedom and the importance of free speech, we are concerned about the impact these comments could have on the good standing of our researchers in this field and the university takes this very seriously,’’ the spokesman said. “We will commence an invest*igation and consider all our available options.”

Ms Ward yesterday expressed regret. “I apologise for any offence that comments, posted on my *private Facebook page, may have caused the government and *members of the LGBTI community,’’ she said.

“These were private comments that were never intended for the public domain.’’

A government spokeswoman said: “Ms Ward’s view on the Australian flag is inappropriate and does not in any way represent the Victorian government’s view.”

The move may cause a headache for Mr Andrews, who has *decided to fund Safe Schools in its current form, despite the federal government deciding its curriculum should change.

The program, which was ostensibly designed to prevent bullying of gay and transgender students, will be compulsory in Victorian state secondary schools by 2018.

The federal government pulled its funding from Safe Schools in March and gutted the curriculum after concerns from conservatives that it promoted a leftist ideolog*ical agenda.

Ms Ward has come under fire previously for linking the program with political causes. Railing against a “push to fit people into gender constructs that promote heterosexuality’’ at a Marxist *conference last year, she alluded that Safe Schools was part of a broader strategy to change society.*


----------



## noco (23 November 2016)

Do listen to this U-Tube and relate as to what is happening here in Australia.

This why the socialists I the USA are not happy with out come of the Presidential elections.

There are several other links associated with this U-Tube.

How to break down the morals of children with the so called Safe Schools Program.

How to ruin the economy of a Western country.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gIdBuK7_g3M

Obama was brought up under communism.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CO4Z1f5McWc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=17GXs3PPWEM


----------



## SirRumpole (23 November 2016)

So_Cynical said:


> Reading Russell Brands book Revolution, hes a lefty rat bag for those that did not know.
> 
> Anyway he makes a point that if mankind discovered a nearby habitable planet and colonized it, would the chosen economic system be capitalism? is it a good idea to adopt a system that is responsible for 90% of the wealth  accumulating  in just 3 or 4% of the population, for the richest 10 people to have more wealth than the poorest 50% (3 billion) its crazy, clearly broken and leads to poor social outcomes.
> 
> You wouldn't do it.




Yes, well capitalism has it's advantages. The ability to start your own business and be your own boss is one of the delights of living in a democracy, as long as it doesn't get out of hand and you end up like Clive Palmer or dare we day DJT. 

Once a business gets so big that it has the resources to flout or influence the laws of a country then it's time for governments to crack down and ensure businesses are acting in the community interest. A standard of ethics for businesses would be a good start.


----------



## noco (23 November 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Yes, well capitalism has it's advantages. The ability to start your own business and be your own boss is one of the delights of living in a democracy, as long as it doesn't get out of hand and you end up like Clive Palmer or dare we day DJT.
> 
> Once a business gets so big that it has the resources to flout or influence the laws of a country then it's time for governments to crack down and ensure businesses are acting in the community interest. A standard of ethics for businesses would be a good start.




Yes it wonderful when own a successful business and you gainfully employ people and observe it's expansion......It is wonderful when you own  and operate your own  business and would love to knock off each day after your employees have finished their 8 hours or less work......It is wonderful when you work 60 to 80 hours per week to ensure your employees maintain their jobs......But who cares if because you mismanage your business or for some reason you have a downturn or go bankrupt due to unforeseen circumstances?

The answer : NO BODY.

The cry is who will pay the employees their entitlements?......What entitlements does the business owner get?

NILCH.

You will only understand what it is like to be an owner operator if you have had that experience.

With regards to Clive Palmer, he has done the wrong thing and will now pay the price.

The unions are still deeply entrenched wit communism and can ruin a business over night if you don't toe the line to their demands......Many business pay the union price just to maintain peace.


----------



## noco (21 December 2016)

Once again Marxism is tightening it's grip on the media.....This time it is Face Book....More lies and propaganda.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/blogs/a...k/news-story/6583345ef73058fbda3d8b6a7b3c0a7e


*Facebook has already been attacked for censoring conservatives.  

Now it's hiring almost exclusively Left-wing factcheckers - led by partisans - to decree what is "fake" news. This is ominous:


Snopes, which will now have the power to declare what news is or is not legitimate on the world’s largest online platform, almost exclusively employs leftists.

Facebook announced Thursday that mythbusting website Snopes will be one of a few fact-checking organizations allowed to label stories as “fake news.”

Almost all of the writers churning out fact checks for Snopes have a liberal background, and many of them have expressed contempt for Republican voters. The Daily Caller could not identify a single Snopes fact-checker who comes from a conservative background...

At least two of the site’s fact-checkers joined Snopes after writing for Raw Story, a far-left publication that describes itself as a “progressive news site that focuses on stories often ignored in the mainstream media.” Several others have demonstrated liberal partisanship.



Snopes managing editor Brooke Binkowski said on Twitter that Brexit supporters were “pandering to racist mouth-breather ‘Britain First’ types.” 

Snopes fact-checker Arturo Garcia is an editor-at-large for Raw Story. Garcia is also a managing editor of Racialicious, a pro-Black Lives Matter blog... Back when Trump was reportedly considering launching his own media network, Garcia implied that it would be a TV channel for white people, calling it “White Entertainment Television.” 



Another Snopes fact-checker, Bethenia Palma Markus, previously wrote for Raw Story and is listed as a “contributing writer” by Truth-Out.org, a left-wing nonprofit working to “spur the revolution in consciousness and inspire the direct action that is necessary to save the planet and humanity.”...







Facebook routinely buried conservative news and topics from trending on the site and artificially made liberal topics part of the national discussion, former Facebook employees admitted last May. TheDC previously reported that the former Facebook trending news team was filled by liberals...

Facebook announced Thursday it will use fact-checking organizations that have signed the Poynter Institute’s International Fact Checking Code of Principles. The Associated Press reports that Facebook is currently working with Snopes, ABC News, Factcheck.org and PolitiFact, and that the list could grow.

The spokesperson said Facebook will flag stories it thinks might be fake, based on feedback from its users, and that those four news organizations will then determine whether the story is real or not. If a story is determined to be fake, Facebook users will see a warning before they share the story.*


----------



## noco (22 December 2016)

The Fabian society is well entrenched in the United Nations and their agenda is world government.



https://fabiansociety.wordpress.com/

*The Fabian Society and World Government

Outside Britain, the Fabian Society’s ultimate goal – which it has pursued through the Labour Party and other front organisations like the Socialist International and the United Nations – has been the establishment of a Socialist World Government (Ratiu, 2012).

The UN was created in 1944 as a successor to the Milner-Fabian League of Nations with the involvement of the Fabian Socialist Rockefellers and their Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) and, from inception, was dominated by Socialists with links to the Socialist International like Paul-Henri Spaak, Trygve Lie, Dag Hammarskjold and many others.

The Socialist International itself was created in 1951 by the London Fabian Society as the successor to Karl Marx’s First International. Its main function has been to co-ordinate the Socialist movement worldwide, in particular, with a view to establishing world government and promoting the UN as the central instrument for this:

“The ultimate objective of the parties of the Socialist International is nothing less than world government. As a first step towards it, they seek to strengthen the United Nations so that it may become more and more effective … Membership of the United Nations must be made universal” (“The World Today: The Socialist Perspective,” Declaration of the Socialist International Oslo Conference, 2-4 June 1962).

This was parroted by Socialist parties (and governments) around the world, the British Labour Party at the forefront:

“Labour remained faithful to its long-term belief in the establishment of east-west co-operation as the basis for a strengthened United Nations developing towards world government … For us world government is the final objective and the United Nations the chosen instrument …” (Labour Party manifesto 1964).*


----------



## noco (24 December 2016)

It is fascinating to watch events unfold in Australia.......I mean whilst things are bubbling away with the threat of Islam, the threat terrorism acts, the building of mosques, the demonstrations by young Muslims for Sharia laws and their denouncing our way of life, Halal certification on Islamic food in super markets, the bigger threat that is being overlooked is the threat of Communism via the Green/Labor left wing socialist coalition and that Fabian Bill Shorten in the  Labor Party is grinning from ear to ear while attention is taken away from him......There are some on this forum who believe Bill is in the center but believe me Bill Shorten is taking his instructions from the Communist dominated  Fabian Society......They are chipping away at our way of life without many people realizing it is happening......Labor were once the be end to all end for the working man but the modern Labor Party have changed and now care less about working conditions and more about filling their coffers by acts of distortion as we have witnessed with the CFMEU.....They are hell bent on destroying our  economy and their  disgusting way of corrupting the minds of young kids as young as 5 is appalling.

Wake up Australia as to what is going on around you.


----------



## Bill M (24 December 2016)

noco said:


> Halal certification on Islamic food in super markets, the bigger threat that is being overlooked is the threat of Communism via the Green/Labor left wing socialist coalition and that Fabian Bill Shorten in the Labor Party is



Hey ol boy, how about dropping it for 24 hours or so? Sit back have a brandy, it is Christmas after all. And just remember, nothings really changed, there were reds under beds 60 years ago and they are still there today but I haven't ever met any.

I bought the Aussie Tiger Prawns this year and also bought the Vannamei Prawns from Vietnam............ sorry but those Vietnamese ones taste better, they win again. Merry Christmas!!!


----------



## noco (24 December 2016)

Bill M said:


> Hey ol boy, how about dropping it for 24 hours or so? Sit back have a brandy, it is Christmas after all. And just remember, nothings really changed, there were reds under beds 60 years ago and they are still there today but I haven't ever met any.
> 
> I bought the Aussie Tiger Prawns this year and also bought the Vannamei Prawns from Vietnam............ sorry but those Vietnamese ones taste better, they win again. Merry Christmas!!!


----------



## noco (24 December 2016)

Sorry to disappoint you Bill but I will pound my message no matter what time of the year it is...People have a right to know the truth as they are having the wool pulled over their eyes.......The true spirit of Xmas is being eroded by the likes of Kate Ellis who is wishing every one a happy holiday instead of a Merry Xmas.....Some left wing school teaches have changed the words in Xmas carols.

You say you have not met any REDS, well my dear friend you do not have to go far as I have recently published a list of Labor MPs who are members of the Fabian society including Labor's fearless leader Bill Shorten......The Fabians are an offshoot of the Communist Party and Labor take their instructions from the Fabians.

Be careful eating those Vietnamese prawns as I recently read where they are injected with chemical made in China to inflate their size and make them taste better.....They increase the size by 50%.....Nobody knows what is in the chemical...It could be carcinogenic......But if you don't believe me, do your own research.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ows-prawns-injected-jelly-substance-sold.html

Actually, I was able to locate it within a minute.....Are you in shock and horror?
If not you should be....Enjoy your Vietnamese prawns and Merry Xmas Bill...Best you stick to Aussie prawns my friend.....I might have even saved your life.


----------



## Bill M (24 December 2016)

noco said:


> I might have even saved your life



I buy mine from Coles, now they wouldn't be doing anything dodgy would they? Cheers.


----------



## noco (24 December 2016)

Bill M said:


> I buy mine from Coles, now they wouldn't be doing anything dodgy would they? Cheers.


----------



## noco (24 December 2016)

Bill all the super markets sell Vietnamese prawns because they make a higher profit over Australian prawns, however they should be marked " A PRODUCT FROM VIETNAM".


----------



## Bill M (24 December 2016)

They do, by the way with this new forum outlook when you want to reply to someones post, just left click and highlight the sentence and click reply and it automatically quotes the article, saves a bit of time. OK, all the best.


----------



## noco (26 December 2016)

Bill M said:


> Hey ol boy, how about dropping it for 24 hours or so? Sit back have a brandy, it is Christmas after all. And just remember, nothings really changed, there were reds under beds 60 years ago and they are still there today but I haven't ever met any.
> 
> I bought the Aussie Tiger Prawns this year and also bought the Vannamei Prawns from Vietnam............ sorry but those Vietnamese ones taste better, they win again. Merry Christmas!!!




Did your fearless leader drop it for 24 hours?......no sirree....Bill Shorten had to bring politics into his Xmas message on Xmas day........What a hypocrite!!!!


----------



## Bill M (26 December 2016)

noco said:


> Did your fearless leader drop it for 24 hours?......no sirree....Bill Shorten had to bring politics into his Xmas message on Xmas day........What a hypocrite!!!!



I don't know, I don't follow any of them over the break, don't care and I don't know what any of them said. Mate the beer is cold, the ham was nice and the Vietnamese prawns were great. The Aussie ones were too salty.


----------



## luutzu (26 December 2016)

Bill M said:


> I don't know, I don't follow any of them over the break, don't care and I don't know what any of them said. Mate the beer is cold, the ham was nice and the Vietnamese prawns were great. The Aussie ones were too salty.




Not sure how the export prawns are farmed but if they're from small/family farm... well there's a toilet on top of every pond in the countryside. And the pond doubles as breeding pond for fisheries.

But they do have industrial-scale farming there now so it's unlikely that most exports would come from the mom and pop kind of operation - the logistics and quality control might not be economical. 

Hope I didn't ruin your Xmas memories Bill 

While we're at it... when I was about 5 I almost drown in one of those ponds trying to answer nature's call. Not sure how but I managed to walk a bouncy plank a few metres to the throne... with short down to me knees and feeding the fishies, I felt in somehow and all I remember was drinking a lot of "water" and my aunt grabbing my hand. 

I also got rich relatives there and the only thing they buy from the markets are tiny krill. For fish or pork, they actually got together, invest and fund a farm that breed food specifically for them. The dividends are meat that don't kill you.

The only thing I would consume from Vietnam are its coffee. But get those whole, not blended.


----------



## luutzu (26 December 2016)

noco said:


> Bill all the super markets sell Vietnamese prawns because they make a higher profit over Australian prawns, however they should be marked " A PRODUCT FROM VIETNAM".




When the TPP comes into effect, there's no longer a need to label where these kind of products comes from. 

Not sure if the TPP is a Communist or a Capitalist idea. It's not going to be good.


----------



## noco (26 December 2016)

Bill M said:


> I don't know, I don't follow any of them over the break, don't care and I don't know what any of them said. Mate the beer is cold, the ham was nice and the Vietnamese prawns were great. The Aussie ones were too salty.




I trust you are drinking 4xxxx and not *V*ery *B*itter beer from Vic.
I also hope you enjoy the excreta feed Vietnamese prawns as explained by Luuzu.


----------



## luutzu (26 December 2016)

noco said:


> I trust you are drinking 4xxxx and not *V*ery *B*itter beer from Vic.
> I also hope you enjoy the excreta feed Vietnamese prawns as explained by Luuzu.




That was the olden days though and most of those farms are for local/poor people. So I don't know how they farm Export-quality prawns.

Much like chickens there now. Used to be that it's at the back of some farmer's yard. Now they open factories and produce really poor quality stuff - all the anti-biotics and shades a chicken needs.


----------



## luutzu (26 December 2016)

Seems alright


----------



## Bill M (26 December 2016)

noco said:


> I trust you are drinking 4xxxx and not *V*ery *B*itter beer from Vic.
> I also hope you enjoy the excreta feed Vietnamese prawns as explained by Luuzu.



I must be commo traitor, I've been drinking the German beer. When that is not available I drink the VB.


----------



## Tisme (27 December 2016)

luutzu said:


> That was the olden days though and most of those farms are for local/poor people. So I don't know how they farm Export-quality prawns.




The ponds are certainly still there. In Malaysia they are a little more upbeat and  have a constant fountain going on in the sewer ponds that line the highways that service the associated suburb. They put fish in them for the table.


----------



## Logique (27 December 2016)

Bill M said:


> I must be commo traitor, I've been drinking the German beer. When that is not available I drink the VB.



Compare Becks or Bitburger to 'Victor Bravo'.  Reinheitsgebot, best in the world mate. 

As for seafood, I won't touch it unless certain it's domestic, or otherwise red salmon.


----------



## explod (1 January 2017)

This was posted on my facebook page today and sums up the lefty commo idea well,  we care about each other.  Those well off care only for themselves and making more money and do not care if they hurt others to do it.

And this statement too:

"


----------



## noco (1 January 2017)

explod said:


> This was posted on my facebook page today and sums up the lefty commo idea well,  we care about each other.  Those well off care only for themselves and making more money and do not care if they hurt others to do it.
> 
> And this statement too:
> 
> "




Yeah, just like Paul Keating cared about the 11% unemployed in 1992 and how Bob Hawke stated there would be no child  living in poverty by 1990..

Just like Bill Shorten cared about the workers at Cleanevent and Chiquita.

Don't talk to me about the commos caring for each other.....They could not care less......What utter hypocrisy.


----------



## SirRumpole (1 January 2017)

noco said:


> Don't talk to me about the commos caring for each other.....They could not care less......What utter hypocrisy.




You seem to lurch from one extreme to another. If unions go on strike to protect their members pay and conditions then you say they are somehow anti Australian to stand up for workers rights. If moderate unionists like Shorten don't make large pay demands in order to ensure more employment then you say they don't care about their members.

That's pretty typical of someone who has a blinkered and myopic outlook. See everything in black and white and stick it to the class enemy whenever you can. 

Fine if you want to go trolling, but it doesn't do a lot for your credibility in a nuanced debate.


----------



## noco (1 January 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> You seem to lurch from one extreme to another. If unions go on strike to protect their members pay and conditions then you say they are somehow anti Australian to stand up for workers rights. If moderate unionists like Shorten don't make large pay demands in order to ensure more employment then you say they don't care about their members.
> 
> That's pretty typical of someone who has a blinkered and myopic outlook. See everything in black and white and stick it to the class enemy whenever you can.
> 
> Fine if you want to go trolling, but it doesn't do a lot for your credibility in a nuanced debate.




No Rumpy you have got it all wrong again......I am not lurching from one extreme to the other at all....You are twisting things around to suit yourself which typical of your tactic..

I was replying to a post showing up how Bill Shorten and his Fabian comrades work.

Bill Shorten didn't make large pay claims for Cleanevent and Chiquita because he received $25,000 per year for 3 years  from them to fill the union coffers.....The workers missed out by some $400,000,000 and the companies involved had a win win situation....You know what went on without me having to elaborate....In simple terms it is called distortion, bribery or what ever you like to call it.

He didn't make large claims so to create more employment???????..What utter BS...If he is legitimate in creating more jobs why doesn't he cut excessive penalty rates on Sundays and public holidays...Now that is more likely to create more jobs but Shorten wants to have his cake and eat it too.

You seem to have forgotten their are over 100 union thugs on 1000 charges of corruption, distortion and bribery....Some have already gone to jail.


----------



## Tisme (3 January 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Fine if you want to go trolling, but it doesn't do a lot for your credibility in a nuanced debate.




I hope it's trolling, otherwise it ranks up there as a severe case of compulsive, albeit irrational behaviour. Even I get called a socialist as if it is filthy word and I'm a fricken facist by and large LOL


----------



## Tisme (3 January 2017)

noco said:


> Bill Shorten didn't make large pay claims for Cleanevent and Chiquita because he received $25,000 per year for 3 years from them to fill the union coffers.....The workers missed out by some $400,000,000 and the companies involved had a win win situation....You know what went on without me having to elaborate....In simple terms it is called distortion, bribery or what ever you like to call it.





It's called what it is and if it's bribery every honest businessman and politician in the country is criminally accountable for staying within the boundaries of the law by that measure.

Greg Combet, who by the way is highly regarded by all sides of the argument said it well about Bill Shorten being witchhunted by the Abbott inquisition over his role as a union leader : " it was the first time I have seen a union official grilled for not being sufficiently militant at a royal commission".

Noco, it's not the pursuit of criminology that is of concern, it's the constant use of witchhunts by the LNP to silence their opponents through slur and inuendo. It is an unhealthy preoccupation by the players and their adoring fans that makes it and ugly stain on our country ... and I for one would rather see those who think it good sport on any side of the equation to pack their bags and go to some soviet style state where they can find similar state inspired and nurtured hate and vitriol for their fellow citizens.


----------



## noco (27 January 2017)

It is now evident that comrade Lee Rhiannon with her communist influence is showing her muscle in the Greens Party and are imploding....She even has Bob Brown worried and who has entered the fray...Their is a bitter taste in the Greens Party......Communism is far from being dead and buried.

*Bob Brown has intervened in a growing war over the future of the Greens, calling a sitting senator a 'wrecker' who was behaving like Tony Abbott.
The factional fight within the Greens is escalating into an all-out public brawl, with a senior member of Richard Di Natale's team now openly questioning the party's direction and prospects under his leadership.

 NSW senator Lee Rhiannon has told Fairfax Media the party is at a "crossroads" and should channel the radical worker-driven policies of US presidential candidate Bernie Sanders to re-energise supporters - but her comments have drawn fire from party elder Bob Brown, who has re-entered the political fray to label her a wrecker and the "Greens version of Tony Abbott".

 Far-left group call for Australia Day flag burns
Greens leader Richard Di Natale has distanced himself from a new far-left faction wanting to burning the national flag on January 26. Vision courtesy Seven News Melbourne.
Other Greens figures say they are worried the party is losing votes to Labor and other minor parties under Senator Di Natale, as he attempts to steer it away from its protest roots and into the mainstream. There are concerns too from Greens in and outside Parliament the party has become "invisible" under Senator Di Natale's less media-driven approach.

 But Senator Di Natale's supporters say the mostly NSW-based dissenters are just bitter about losing power and influence.

 Greens senator Lee Rhiannon addresses the crowd at a Sydney University event.
Greens senator Lee Rhiannon addresses the crowd at a Sydney University event. Photo: James Alcock
The public fight comes after the formation last month of a new far-left, anti-capitalist faction within the NSW Greens called Left Renewal. Senator Rhiannon says she is not a part of the faction, but she is closely linked to a number of its members and has publicly defended its right to exist.

 "The Greens are at a crossroads, with Labor appearing to move left on some issues and minor parties also pulling our votes away," Senator Rhiannon told Fairfax Media this week.

 "We need to be able to inspire people and demonstrate that the Greens can challenge ruling elites and end the obscene and growing inequality both at home and abroad.

 "The Bernie Sanders experience in the US shows that people with radical and anti-establishment policies can win mass support. How the Greens inspire people to join with us and vote for us is our challenge in 2017."

 Greens leader Richard Di Natale addresses the party room at Parliament House in Canberra last year.
Greens leader Richard Di Natale addresses the party room at Parliament House in Canberra last year. Photo: Alex Ellinghausen
New polling analysis - commissioned by Senator Di Natale's critics and obtained by Fairfax Media - suggests the party's vote has been sliding since the July 2 election.

 Based on data from every published opinion poll in 2016, the analysis finds the mean first-preference support for the party in the first half of the year was 11.23 per cent, compared to 10 per cent by the end of it.

 Senator Lee Rhiannon and Greens leader Richard Di Natale have an uneasy relationship.
Senator Lee Rhiannon and Greens leader Richard Di Natale have an uneasy relationship. Photo: Wolter Peeters

 "Many are waiting to see if Di Natale has the ability to put the spark and courage back into the Greens," a source connected to the polling said.

 People say two things to me: what a good fellow Richard is and when is Lee going

 Another senior Green, who did not want to be named but is not part of the NSW factionalism, agreed the party's media profile had diminished under Senator Di Natale - partly because of the crossbench had taken the focus in the Senate but also because of a "culture" at the top.

 "We're pretty invisible at the moment," the source said.

 However, those aligned with Senator Di Natale say any decline in national polling numbers can largely be blamed on the "radical agenda" of the NSW branch dragging them down.

 Mr Brown, who led the party from 1996 to 2012, believes the NSW branch is holding the party back, saying Senator Rhiannon and "her Left Renewal" are determined to destabilise the party.

 "People say two things to me: what a good fellow Richard is and when is Lee going. NSW voters have often told me they won't vote Green until Lee goes. That's why Labor loves her," Mr Brown said.

 "When it comes to political white-anting, Lee is the Greens' version of Tony Abbott."

 One of Senator Di Natale's deputies, Scott Ludlam, urged an end to the divisions, saying progressives must unite to "overcome the hate and fear being peddled by people like Pauline Hanson and Donald Trump".

 "Let's stop wasting energy squabbling and continue to work to advocate serious alternatives to unfettered, crony capitalism. That's what Richard and our Greens team are doing."

 The party's performance at the election was a mixed bag. While there was a small swing towards them in the lower house they failed to pick up any new seats.

 Their vote in the Senate was similar to 2013 - 8.65 per cent nationally - but they lost one senator from South Australia. They failed to replicate their 2010 success - when they garnered 13.1 per cent of the Senate vote - despite the public's palpable anger with the major parties.

 NSW was among the worst-performing states. In an official, internal post-election analysis obtained by Fairfax Media, the Greens acknowledge the NSW result was disappointing. It concludes that with equivalent resources in NSW and Victoria, "there must be other reasons why the party continues to go backwards in NSW".

 Fairfax Media has also obtained Greens membership data that shows there has been a small but steady increase in member numbers in most states since Senator Di Natale took over. However, the number of members in NSW has declined from 4689 in July 2015 to 4098 today, leaving overall national numbers stagnant.

 And a membership survey conducted in November of last year suggests 85 per cent of Greens members want the party to be a party of government, rather than one of protest - a figure seen as a strong endorsement of Senator Di Natale's more mainstream approach.

 About a quarter of members nominated NSW tensions - unprompted - as a key challenge holding the party back.

 Left Renewal is seen as an escalation in the long-running factional battle between the heavily socialist so-called "eastern bloc" of the Greens and the middle-class environmentalists they dismiss as "tree Tories". Senator Di Natale has described the group's anti-capitalist agenda as "ridiculous" and has called on its members to consider joining another party.
*




Greens descend into public brawl amid doubts over Richard Di Natale's leadership
*A senior member of Richard Di Natale's team has openly questioned their…
canberratimes.com.au|By Adam Gartrell
*


----------



## SirRumpole (27 January 2017)

noco said:


> Bob Brown has intervened in a growing war over the future of the Greens, calling a sitting senator a 'wrecker' who was behaving like Tony Abbott.
> The factional fight within the Greens is escalating into an all-out public brawl, with a senior member of Richard Di Natale's team now openly questioning the party's direction and prospects under his leadership.




Rhiannon should go. She's an old school Marxist who is better off running as an Independent if she's not happy instead of undermining Natalie. Same principle as Bernadi, Christensen and Abbott.


----------



## luutzu (27 January 2017)

Tisme said:


> I hope it's trolling, otherwise it ranks up there as a severe case of compulsive, albeit irrational behaviour. Even I get called a socialist as if it is filthy word and I'm a fricken facist by and large LOL




No, you no fascist McGee. You're just a half Scot/Irish/Pom with full Irish humour.


----------



## noco (27 January 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Rhiannon should go. She's an old school Marxist who is better off running as an Independent if she's not happy instead of undermining Natalie. Same principle as Bernadi, Christensen and Abbott.




On the other side, Turnbull should do the right and resign...He is destroying the Liberal Party for Bill Shorten.


----------



## SirRumpole (27 January 2017)

noco said:


> On the other side, Turnbull should do the right and resign...He is destroying the Liberal Party for Bill Shorten.




Have you considered that it might be Turnbull's critics who are out on a limb not him ?


----------



## bellenuit (27 January 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Rhiannon should go. She's an old school Marxist who is better off running as an Independent if she's not happy instead of undermining Natalie. Same principle as Bernadi, Christensen and Abbott.




When it comes to the far left, they know they are more likely to be successful (in influencing policy) if they tag on to a more acceptable party or organisation than if they go it alone. That's why I don't see Rhiannon creating a rift in The Greens to the extent that the party splits. Going it alone would drop them out of mainstream focus. They are far more effective when they exist as power blocks within The Greens, Labor, Unions, ABC and The Guardian.

You don't often see members from far left groups such as the Socialist Party being interviewed or asked to participate in Q & A. Leaving The Greens would drop Rhiannon into obscurity.


----------



## SirRumpole (27 January 2017)

bellenuit said:


> When it comes to the far left, they know they are more likely to be successful (in influencing policy) if they tag on to a more acceptable party or organisation than if they go it alone. That's why I don't see Rhiannon creating a rift in The Greens to the extent that the party splits. Going it alone would drop them out of mainstream focus. They are far more effective when they exist as power blocks within The Greens, Labor, Unions, ABC and The Guardian.
> 
> You don't often see members from far left groups such as the Socialist Party being interviewed or asked to participate in Q & A. Leaving The Greens would drop Rhiannon into obscurity.




Basically the same reason why Bernadi and Christensen won't leave the Libs.


----------



## SirRumpole (4 February 2017)

Is public transport socialist ?

After all it allows the masses to be controlled by the few (train drivers etc) and competes with struggling entrepreneurs called taxi drivers.

Should we be ripping up train lines and replace them with motorways so individuals can go where they want when they want thereby exercising their individual freedoms ?

Or is it just an efficient way of moving people around from place to place ?

I'm really struggling with this question.


----------



## luutzu (4 February 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Is public transport socialist ?
> 
> After all it allows the masses to be controlled by the few (train drivers etc) and competes with struggling entrepreneurs called taxi drivers.
> 
> ...




Public transports, like roads and rail, when the taxpayers funded, built, maintain and carry the people and goods for a very reasonable price and own it, that's Socialism and that's bad and inefficient.

When these same infrastructure are funded, built, maintain then offloaded to private entrepreneurs for peanuts . That's Capitalism. When these entrepreneurs cut costs and staff, when they do not maintain the system but jack up prices to increase profit and margin... that's efficiency and ingenuity.


----------



## noco (13 March 2017)

This is from a young girl who escaped Communist North Korea to tell her story of what it is really like living in North Korea...They all live in fear.


----------



## Logique (16 March 2017)

Communism dead and buried?

Our country will be one of the last hold-outs. They used to sell The Tribune on street corners, but they're online bloggers now, although their aims are the same.


----------



## noco (16 March 2017)

Logique said:


> Communism dead and buried?
> 
> Our country will be one of the last hold-outs. They used to sell The Tribune on street corners, but they're online bloggers now, although their aims are the same.




Like hell it is dead and buried......You are deluding yourself if you think that way........The Green/Labor coalition following the Fabian society ideology to the letter.......It is called Socialism.


----------



## SirRumpole (16 March 2017)

noco said:


> Like hell it is dead and buried......You are deluding yourself if you think that way........The Green/Labor coalition following the Fabian society ideology to the letter.......It is called Socialism.


----------



## Jorgensen (17 March 2017)

There is a  view that there has never been any such thing as communism...these countries rapidly become oligarchies.
The worse of all worlds- muslim fabians!


----------



## dutchie (21 December 2020)

Logique said:


> Communism dead and buried?
> 
> Our country will be one of the last hold-outs.




We will be one of the last hold-outs, but it is inevitable. Your children will live under it.


----------



## dutchie (21 December 2020)

I was going to post this under the Joke thread. But it has a lot of truth in it.

How To Survive The Coming Socialist Regime
November 22nd, 2020





6.3kShares
4.9kSHARE
656SHARE
SHARE
If Biden and Harris are in office, that can mean only one thing: get ready for socialism! You know these no-good socialists are gonna socialize everything in sight. That's why we compiled these helpful tips to help you prepare for the coming socialist darkness! If you follow these 10 pointers, you'll be great!


*Tip #1: Watch Sesame Street videos on sharing*
Sharing is basically the same thing as socialism. The makers of Sesame Street know this well and have been quietly brainwashing kids to become socialists for decades. Spend a night binge-watching songs from Sesame Street and Daniel Tiger that encourage sharing and get yourself in the socialist spirit! Hey -- it's not so bad!

*Tip #2: Repent of your sin of capitalism*
We all know Jesus was a socialist because he fed people and cared about the poor and stuff. You are just a lowly capitalist pig, but he is ready to forgive you for your capitalism if you repent. For good measure, grab yourself a cat o' nine tails and do some self-flagellation. That oughta do it.

*Tip #3: Emotionally distance yourself from your dog*
We hate to break it to you, but food is going to be a little scarce from now on. If you don't have a dog, get one just in case. If you already have a dog, start to emotionally distance yourself from that thing. Also, stock up on cats.

*Tip #4 Get ready for universal healthcare by standing in line at the DMV*
An important part of being a socialist is standing in lines like a good citizen. As a greedy capitalist used to instant gratification, you'll need some practice. Get yourself a comfy pair of shoes and go practice standing in line for hours at the DMV. When you're ready for the next level, stand in line at the county fair for a funnel cake, and then don't buy one!

*Tip #5: Watch classic Obama speeches to get yourself pumped up*
It's widely accepted that Obama is the most inspiring and uplifting speaker in all of human history. Watch his inspiring speeches over and over again to get yourself totally pumped up! If you're short on time, just play a looped recording of Obama saying "that's not who we are" over and over again.

*Tip #6: Withdraw all your money in one-dollar bills so you'll have plenty of toilet paper*
Let's face it: money is an obsolete relic of capitalism and you don't need it anymore because The State will take care of you! Also, due to hyperinflation, all that filthy mammon is no longer worth the paper it's printed on. Your best bet is to hoard all that paper to use as toilet paper and fuel for fires during the winter. Your butt will thank you!

*Tip #7: Memorize your favorite books*
Books are full of forbidden knowledge that may endanger The State, so you'll probably want to get rid of those. That said, if you want to hang on to your favorite Harry Potter story for old time's sake, you best memorize that thing.

*Tip #8: Fast at least 4 days a week to teach your body it doesn't really need food*
Food is for weak capitalists. You're not a capitalist, are you? Good socialists will never let themselves be tainted by delicious capitalist foods like bacon burgers and chimichangas. You're better than that, comrade. Train your body to go without food as long as possible so that your government protectors may have the nourishment they need!

*Tip #9: Wean yourself off sleeping on a bed*
Beds are for colonizers. Indigenous people have slept on the ground for years and so can you, bigot.

*Tip #10: Get rid of all religious books and imagery in your house*
Make sure to rid yourself of anything that may divide your loyalty, for your government is a jealous government. You must not let any real or imagined deities distract you. Get rid of all holy books, hymnals, and Chris Tomlin CDs. If, however, you were smart enough to purchase copies of _The Sacred Texts of the Babylon Bee, Volume 1_, you should keep those. They double as body armor. 

You are ready comrade! Go, and enjoy your glorious socialist future!


----------



## bellenuit (21 December 2020)

dutchie said:


> If Biden and Harris are in office, that can mean only one thing: get ready for socialism! You know these no-good socialists are gonna socialize everything in sight.




Because socialism was a failure in pretty much all countries in which it was implemented in in the twentieth century doesn't mean it has no place in the 21st century economy. Economies evolve and solutions to economic problems need to evolve with them. Trends are that less and less people are need to produce the economic output needed to satisfy requirements and a scenario where most production is in the hands of a few large companies with masses of people unemployed just won't work. Reduction of the work week to spread the workload over more people might need to be considered. Governments taking an interest either directly or indirectly (say through something like the future fund) in industry may have its place. A minimum wage for everybody should not be ruled out. It has had its failures, but it may only need fine tuning to make it work.

Whether this is socialism or not is not that important. What is important is that society needs to think outside the box as we move forward.


----------



## dutchie (21 December 2020)

Socialism / Communism have a very poor record. Each time they say "this time it will work".
Going by the number of deaths committed under socialism/communism we should not even consider it, irrespective of the box.


I believe *it is because socialism, as a system, is based upon using force against your fellow citizen that it also so happens the worst atrocities visited upon citizens by their own governments have been inflicted by socialist governments. * It is a matter of, as Friedman said, being true to the values socialism encourages in those living under that system.  Here is a list of the largest killings in the 20th century of citizens by their own governments:


40-70 million killed.  China under Chairman Mao.  Single Party Socialism.  1958-61 “The Great Leap Forward”.
20 million killed. USSR under Joseph “socialism in one country” Stalin.  1936-52 “The Great Purge”.
40 million killed. USSR under all other leaders.
4 million killed. Cambodia under Pol Pot.  Communist.  1975-79.
1.6 million murdered; 4 million killed in hard labor.  North Korea under Kim Il Sung.  Independent socialist State.
1.15 million killed.  Yugoslavia under Josip ” socialist federation President” Tito.  1945-65.
1 million total killed.  Ethiopia under Menghistu.  Communist.  1975-1978 “The Red Terror.”
1 million killed.  Indonesia under Suharto.  Communist. 1966.
1 million killed from genocide; this does not include war casualties.  Afghanistan under Brezhnev.  Communist.  1979 – 1981.
800,000 killed.  Rwanda under Jean Kambanda.  1994.  Socialist.
The old expression was that “Socialism Breeds Mediocrity, Capitalism Breeds Exceptionalism.”  As the numbers above show you socialism breeds a lot more than mediocrity.



			https://rickkelo.liberty.me/socialism-mass-murder/


----------



## IFocus (21 December 2020)

1 million killed. Indonesia under Suharto. Communist. 1966.


Really?


----------



## DB008 (21 December 2020)

*Deaths and imprisonment*​​Although the general outline of events is known, much is unknown about the killings,[48] and an accurate and verified count of the dead is unlikely ever to be known.[99] There were few Western journalists or academics in Indonesia at the time, the military was one of the few sources of information, travel was difficult and dangerous, and the regime that approved and oversaw the killings remained in power for three decades.[100] The Indonesian media at the time had been undermined by restrictions under "Guided Democracy" and by the "New Order's" takeover in October 1966.[101] With the killings occurring at the height of Western fears over Communism during the Cold War, there was little investigation internationally, which would have risked complicating the West's preference for Suharto and the "New Order" over the PKI and the "Old Order".[102]​​In the first 20 years following the killings, 39 serious estimates of the death toll were attempted.[72] Before the killings had finished, the Indonesian army estimated 78,500 had been killed,[103] while the PKI put the figure at two million.[72] The Indonesian army later[_when?_] estimated the number killed to be one million.[67] In 1966, Benedict Anderson had set the death toll at 200,000. By 1985 he concluded that a total of 500,000 to 1 million people had been killed.[72] Most scholars now agree that at least half a million were killed,[104] thus more than in any other event in Indonesian history.[1] An armed forces security command[_which?_] estimate from December 1976 put the number at between 450,000 and 500,000.[57] Robert Cribb suggests the most accurate figure is 500,000, though he notes it is incredibly difficult to determine the precise number of people killed.[105] However, Jan Walendouw, one of Suharto's confidants, admitted that about 1.2 million Indonesians were killed.[3]:121​​https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indonesian_mass_killings_of_1965–66#cite_ref-Vickers_2005,_p._159_67-0​


----------



## macca (21 December 2020)

The reason that Socialism and Communism do not work is that at least 50% of people are not ambitious.

They are quite happy to do "enough" work so that they have somewhere to live and food to eat but after that they really only want to have fun.

Ambitious people need to be rewarded for their higher productivity or they will soon slow down to the slower workers speed which effects the productivity of the whole enterprise and eventually, the whole country


----------



## satanoperca (22 December 2020)

macca said:


> The reason that Socialism and Communism do not work is that at least 50% of people are not ambitious.
> 
> They are quite happy to do "enough" work so that they have somewhere to live and food to eat but after that they really only want to have fun.
> 
> Ambitious people need to be rewarded for their higher productivity or they will soon slow down to the slower workers speed which effects the productivity of the whole enterprise and eventually, the whole country



Have you not been to China, don't see the population slowing down there.


----------



## IFocus (22 December 2020)

DB008 said:


> *Deaths and imprisonment*​​Although the general outline of events is known, much is unknown about the killings,[48] and an accurate and verified count of the dead is unlikely ever to be known.[99] There were few Western journalists or academics in Indonesia at the time, the military was one of the few sources of information, travel was difficult and dangerous, and the regime that approved and oversaw the killings remained in power for three decades.[100] The Indonesian media at the time had been undermined by restrictions under "Guided Democracy" and by the "New Order's" takeover in October 1966.[101] With the killings occurring at the height of Western fears over Communism during the Cold War, there was little investigation internationally, which would have risked complicating the West's preference for Suharto and the "New Order" over the PKI and the "Old Order".[102]​​In the first 20 years following the killings, 39 serious estimates of the death toll were attempted.[72] Before the killings had finished, the Indonesian army estimated 78,500 had been killed,[103] while the PKI put the figure at two million.[72] The Indonesian army later[_when?_] estimated the number killed to be one million.[67] In 1966, Benedict Anderson had set the death toll at 200,000. By 1985 he concluded that a total of 500,000 to 1 million people had been killed.[72] Most scholars now agree that at least half a million were killed,[104] thus more than in any other event in Indonesian history.[1] An armed forces security command[_which?_] estimate from December 1976 put the number at between 450,000 and 500,000.[57] Robert Cribb suggests the most accurate figure is 500,000, though he notes it is incredibly difficult to determine the precise number of people killed.[105] However, Jan Walendouw, one of Suharto's confidants, admitted that about 1.2 million Indonesians were killed.[3]:121​​https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indonesian_mass_killings_of_1965–66#cite_ref-Vickers_2005,_p._159_67-0​





Seen estimates of 50,00 to 100,000 communists or anyone thought to be a sympathisers killed in Bali to the point mobs lynched taxi drivers for giving rides to anyone named as a communists.

Its was messy and not talked about.

Many of the bodies were dumped in rivers on the east coast some areas the Balinese describe the area feeling with the word "anger" pronounced aunger it sort of hints at darkness.

Some of these areas old expats wont surf, I was knocked unconscious surfing at one and nearly drowned.......maybe there is some thing in it.


----------



## wayneL (22 December 2020)

satanoperca said:


> Have you not been to China, don't see the population slowing down there.



Ah yes... China... A pure Marxist society, completely devoid of any sort of profit motive... To each according to their need and from each their ability.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (22 December 2020)

wayneL said:


> Ah yes... China... A pure Marxist society, completely devoid of any sort of profit motive... To each according to their need and from each their ability.



I'd certainly prefer to be living in Shanghai presently rather than San Francisco, if I had to make the choice. 

The soda pop and brilliant teeth zeitgest of the USA has shown the superficiality of it's culture under Trump, and it's demise as a world power is imminent under Biden. 

The majority of China's population has done better under Communism than under any pre-existing system of rule in that country. 

Having said that, I'm happy to live in Townsville even with our system allowing the Green Party to run batty candidates .

gg


----------



## wayneL (22 December 2020)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> I'd certainly prefer to be living in Shanghai presently rather than San Francisco, if I had to make the choice.
> 
> The soda pop and brilliant teeth zeitgest of the USA has shown the superficiality of it's culture under Trump, and it's demise as a world power is imminent under Biden.
> 
> ...



Oh yes, San Francisco.... That last bastion of true capitalism, administered by true believers of the Austrian economic theory, mesdames Pelosi, et al.

If ever there was a classic example of true capitalism, it is San Francisco


----------



## macca (22 December 2020)

satanoperca said:


> Have you not been to China, don't see the population slowing down there.




China is a communist country only in as much no elections and those in power retain power with an iron fist.

Their city businesses are run as capitalists would run them with great personal rewards available for those that succeed.

Successful people do need to be careful who they offend or they are quickly reminded that others have unfettered power eg: wealthy people who have fallen foul of the rulers

Socialism in Australia would be never work as everyone would want a long weekend every weekend.

We only need to look around the world at what happens when a country removes reward for effort, think Cuba, Venezuela and it is obvious that it does not work


----------



## satanoperca (22 December 2020)

macca said:


> China is a communist country only in as much no elections and those in power retain power with an iron fist.
> 
> Their city businesses are run as capitalists would run them with great personal rewards available for those that succeed.
> 
> ...



What is your point?

Has China lifted 100's of millions of people out of poverty in a very short time.

Your narrative is short sighted, need to spend time in the country to understand the culture and history first.

I must also add, before you throw more insults (common place for those that are ......), China has to look after 1,300,000,000 people and the USA only 330,000,000 and they are doing a crap job, thanks to Chump man.


----------



## wayneL (22 December 2020)

satanoperca said:


> What is your point?
> 
> Has China lifted 100's of millions of people out of poverty in a very short time.
> 
> Your narrative is short sighted, need to spend time in the country to understand the culture and history first.



Yeah, via capitalism.

I remember them starving before they figured bout they have to produce and sell sh¹t.

Capitalism in in all but name.


----------



## satanoperca (22 December 2020)

wayneL said:


> Yeah, via capitalism.
> 
> I remember them starving before they figured bout they have to produce and sell sh¹t.
> 
> Capitalism in in all but name.



So China used Capitalism to pull people out of poverty and USA has used it to put people into poverty.

Is that what you are saying?


----------



## wayneL (22 December 2020)

satanoperca said:


> So China used Capitalism to pull people out of poverty and USA has used it to put people into poverty.
> 
> Is that what you are saying?



Disingenuous.

When you're ready to play properly, I'll be here.


----------



## satanoperca (22 December 2020)

You play with insults, did that in the playground 40 years ago.

I stand by my comments, USA has gone backwards and China forwards if you look at the mass of people in each country.

Given I have travelled to both many times, I stand by my comments.

We could look at it another way, which country out of the 2 has the highest imprisonment rate?

Which has a declining average life expectancy?

Which govnuts would tell the truth? This one is a little harder, but after the lies and bull**** from Chump man, maybe China govnuts have a little more integrity.


----------



## wayneL (22 December 2020)

satanoperca said:


> You play with insults, did that in the playground 40 years ago.
> 
> I stand by my comments, USA has gone backwards and China forwards if you look at the mass of people in each country.
> 
> ...



You have the observation correct but the attribution the wrong way around.

But I have pointed this out to this to you in several ways already.


----------



## grah33 (27 December 2020)

from what i hear the new suppression / modification bill seems very communist like , and most un-Australian.  we seem to be going back to Roman times, with all the kind of debating going on .  I'm hopeful this bill will fail.  in the end though, the good side has to win (philosophy will bring us to this conclusion).   the virus too has a purpose  (assuming reports are true).


----------



## moXJO (27 December 2020)

Taiwan does it better without the atrocities.

Enough said....


----------



## dutchie (1 January 2021)

As 2020 passes we get another year closer to 1984.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (1 January 2021)

Come on all you lazy "fat" bastards on the General Chat Thread and enter the stock picking competition. 

And post in the thread of your pick. Let us get to 100 entries in the January 2021 Comp.

gg


----------



## orr (3 January 2021)

To add to DB008's #358 wiki related entry  on the 1965-66 killings that cemented Suharto in power, Australia's is involment is also of worthy note, for those with an interest in the actual events of the past;









						Australia’s Role in the 1965-66 Communist Massacres in Indonesia - Australian Institute of International Affairs
					

Fifty years ago, on September 30, one of the worst atrocities of the 20th century took place on Australia’s doorstep. Following an AIIA and ANU



					www.internationalaffairs.org.au


----------

