# 2013 Federal Election:  7 September 2013



## Julia (4 August 2013)

Hope it's OK to start a new thread now that we have an election date.

This is a start:


> TONY Abbott's Coalition have begun the election campaign slightly ahead of Labor and with the Opposition Leader also the preferred prime minister, according to a poll.
> 
> A Seven News/Reachtel poll tonight put the Coalition's two-party preferred vote on 52 per cent compared to 48 per cent for Labor.
> 
> ...




I don't know anything about the methodology employed by Seven News/Reachtel.

The first Newspoll of the campaign will be interesting.


----------



## sails (4 August 2013)

*Re: 2013 Federal Election:  7 August 2013*



Julia said:


> Hope it's OK to start a new thread now that we have an election date.
> 
> This is a start:
> 
> ...




Michael Kroger said tonight on Paul Murray Live that Reachtel got the Qld election extremely close - even a few months out. Lets hope they are right this time!


----------



## Country Lad (4 August 2013)

*Re: 2013 Federal Election:  7 August 2013*



Julia said:


> .................now that we have an election date.




Wrong month in the heading Julia, not on this Wednesday, but in September.  I wonder if I can vote at the Birdsville races.

Cheers
Country Lad


----------



## wayneL (5 August 2013)

*Re: 2013 Federal Election:  7 August 2013*



Country Lad said:


> Wrong month in the heading Julia, not on this Wednesday, but in September.  I wonder if I can vote at the Birdsville races.
> 
> Cheers
> Country Lad




I just changed the title to Sept.


----------



## Tink (5 August 2013)

I am glad that the election has finally been set, though not far off what was predicted.
I dont think Rudd had intentions of setting this date but was pressured to do so.


Abbott ahead as Rudd calls Sept 7 election
http://au.news.yahoo.com/election/a/-/article/18350647/abbott-ahead-as-rudd-calls-sept-7-election/


----------



## qldfrog (5 August 2013)

it is probably too late for the PM.
Had Rudd chosen to ask for "immediate" election when taking power, he probably would have won!
 7th of september will give more time for desastrous economic news to pop up, [and for people to realise that the PNG plan will never be applied and so will fail /the invasion carry on] and that is the chance of Tony A. (in my opinion only....) wait and see


----------



## dutchie (5 August 2013)

Laurie Oakes said Rudd decided election because he missed out as the new Dr. Who.

Everyone laughed but knowing Rudd's narcissism ( he's worse than Shorten) there's probably some truth in it.

Just kidding.

I think.


----------



## Calliope (5 August 2013)

*A NEW WAY!!!* You have to give Rudd credit. He can think up many new ways to root the country.


----------



## Julia (5 August 2013)

Country Lad said:


> Wrong month in the heading Julia, not on this Wednesday, but in September.  I wonder if I can vote at the Birdsville races.
> 
> Cheers
> Country Lad



So terribly sorry, CL.  Utter crassness on my part, of course.  Even, perhaps, a deliberate attempt to mislead.

Thanks, Wayne, for simply adjusting the title as I knew you or another moderator would, when I woke up to what I'd typed too late to edit it.



Calliope said:


> View attachment 53685
> 
> 
> *A NEW WAY!!!* You have to give Rudd credit. He can think up many new ways to root the country.



This is pretty funny, isn't it.  They've had six years to get it all right, yet apparently we still need a new way.
Remember Julia Gillard's "a good government that has lost its way".


----------



## Aussiejeff (5 August 2013)

Julia said:


> This is pretty funny, isn't it.  They've had six years to get it all right, yet apparently we still need a new way.
> Remember Julia Gillard's "a [good]* crap* government that has lost its way".




....never to be found again.

Labor 2013 - R.I.P. (Rudd Is Poison)


----------



## dutchie (5 August 2013)

The three (G) R's

1. Incompetent Government - get rid of Rudd - a bad government still losing it's way -    Good Riddance!
2. Incompetent Government - get rid of Gillard - an even worse government really losing its way - Good Riddance!
3. Incompetent Government - get rid of Rudd - still a woeful government, can't find any way - Good Riddance!!!!!


----------



## Julia (5 August 2013)

RN this morning announced that the latest Newspoll, out today, gives 2PP 52 - 48 in favour of the Coalition.
Also said there was a change re some of the other questions.  I can't find it on the ABC website or via Newspoll itself.  Does anyone have this?  Expect it will be published in The Australian tomorrow.


----------



## So_Cynical (5 August 2013)

Refreshing to see that the Murdoch media has done away with any pretence of impartiality...Today's Sydney Telegraph front page.
~


----------



## banco (5 August 2013)

Well Murdoch has his investment in Foxtel to protect.  He's going to need the money after divorcing gold digger number 3.


----------



## noco (5 August 2013)

Julia said:


> RN this morning announced that the latest Newspoll, out today, gives 2PP 52 - 48 in favour of the Coalition.
> Also said there was a change re some of the other questions.  I can't find it on the ABC website or via Newspoll itself.  Does anyone have this?  Expect it will be published in The Australian tomorrow.




Yes Julia, try this link.

www.abc.net.au/votecompass


----------



## Calliope (5 August 2013)

So_Cynical said:


> Refreshing to see that the Murdoch media has done away with any pretence of impartiality...Today's Sydney Telegraph front page.




Never mind, you still have Fairfax and the ABC and the Canberra press gallery on your side.


----------



## Julia (5 August 2013)

noco said:


> Yes Julia, try this link.
> 
> www.abc.net.au/votecompass



Thanks, noco, but that just goes to the ABC's Compass link.  What I was looking for was the Newspoll result which comes out early am Monday but is usually only published on Tuesdays in The Australian.
I expect The Australian jealously guards its prerogative to be the first to publish.

Did anyone see 7.30 this evening, specifically Leigh Sales interviewing together Penny Wong and Mathias Corrman?
I hope this isn't setting the tone for the election campaign.  She allowed Wong to continually interrupt Corrman, and failed to give Corrman right of reply to some quite outrageous comments by Wong.
Disappointing, in that my impression of Leigh Sales over the last year or so has been that she has been pretty fair and objective.  Certainly wasn't on this occasion.

To those who are distraught about the stand taken by the Murdoch media, maybe try to remember that it's a private company which is absolutely entitled to publish whatever it likes.
Rupert Murdoch seems to have decided, along with many, many Australians and people outside of Australia, that the Labor government has set this great country back hugely, and as a result they are pretty obviously going to campaign hard for a change.  Ditto other private organisations like 2GB et al.
That's their right.  If people don't want to read or hear what they're offering, then they simply won't buy their papers or listen to their radio stations.

It's a whole different situation from the taxpayer funded ABC which is still allowed to get away with outrageously biased presentations in some of its outlets.


----------



## Macquack (5 August 2013)

Julia said:


> To those who are distraught about the stand taken by the Murdoch media, maybe try to remember that it's a *private company which is absolutely entitled to publish whatever it likes.*.




You forgot about Murdoch's former rag "The News of the World". The Brits took a very dim view of Murdoch publishing "*what ever he liked".*

The best thing that has happened to Murdoch is that the internet has made his newspapers obsolete. I must shed a tear for the old bastard.


----------



## Zedd (5 August 2013)

Julia said:


> Did anyone see 7.30 this evening, specifically Leigh Sales interviewing together Penny Wong and Mathias Corrman?



http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2013/s3818711.htm
This the clip? Obviously not getting much coverage here in Manchester...



> I hope this isn't setting the tone for the election campaign.  She allowed Wong to continually interrupt Corrman, and failed to give Corrman right of reply to some quite outrageous comments by Wong.
> Disappointing, in that my impression of Leigh Sales over the last year or so has been that she has been pretty fair and objective.  Certainly wasn't on this occasion.



Wong was certainly interrupting regularly but I don't think she was completely out of order, and I don't think Sales handled it all too badly. She tried to steer the interview to a productive course rather than let either member continue dribbling spin.

- - - Updated - - -



Macquack said:


> You forgot about Murdoch's former rag "The News of the World". The Brits took a very dim view of Murdoch publishing "*what ever he liked".*




Actually they loved it, just like they prefer The Sun, over any reputable news source...


----------



## Julia (5 August 2013)

Macquack said:


> You forgot about Murdoch's former rag "The News of the World". The Brits took a very dim view of Murdoch publishing "*what ever he liked".*



It's very disingenuous of you to imply that News Ltd in Australia has ever or would ever engage in anything remotely like what happened with the News of the World.
The organisation here is entirely separate.  You know that.


----------



## Tink (6 August 2013)

Julia said:


> To those who are distraught about the stand taken by the Murdoch media, maybe try to remember that it's a private company which is absolutely entitled to publish whatever it likes.
> Rupert Murdoch seems to have decided, along with many, many Australians and people outside of Australia, that the Labor government has set this great country back hugely, and as a result they are pretty obviously going to campaign hard for a change.  Ditto other private organisations like 2GB et al.
> That's their right.  If people don't want to read or hear what they're offering, then they simply won't buy their papers or listen to their radio stations.
> 
> It's a whole different situation from the taxpayer funded ABC which is still allowed to get away with outrageously biased presentations in some of its outlets.




Agree, Julia.

After six years, if Labor doesnt know what they are doing, be it, the new way or the lost way, time to move out.  
Our country cant afford this. 
They were lucky they had money in the coffers to start with otherwise God knows how big our debt would be. 

I noticed Tasmania has taken to the Coalition, after 8% unemployment and rising.

The public are waking up to this farce.


----------



## noco (6 August 2013)

It did not take long for voters to take the shine off Kevin Rudd which the link indicates.

People have become tired of the old boring Labor rhetoric..........coalititon negativity.......$70 billion black hold (mind you that was 3 yeras ago)..............the coalitions three word slogan..........the coalitions slash and burn.

But upon listening to variuos Labor Party interviews by the media they all have their lines written for them by the Kevin with emphasis on.....THE FUTURE........A NEW WAY......AND WHERE WILL THE COALITION FIND THE MONEY.

I watched Kim Carr being interviewed on Sky News and he mentioned...........THE FUTURE 10 times and ........WHERE IS THE MONEY COMING FROM........ 5 times in about 6 minutes flat. 


http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...honeymoon-fades/story-fn53lw5p-1226691691742#


----------



## sydboy007 (6 August 2013)

I'm yet to hear either party mention the fact that Howard and Rudd pretty much gave away all the ToT boom in tax cuts and increases in middle class welfare.  So little of it was actually put towards increasing the productivity and efficiency of the country.

Now the ToT has turned negative, real income growth has stalled and soon to turn negative, real GDP growth has stalled and will start to turn negative, per capita GDP growth has been negative for at least the last few qtrs, where does the money come from?  There wont be another private sector debt binge producing 8% annual growth in GST revenue and historically high business tax and CGT.  We're already at historical highs of 150%+ of debt to income.  Australia has barely deleveraged since the GFC.

How about cutting $20B of wasteful spending and pump that into infrastructure that will generate some economic returns for the country, maybe even gearing up that money to really start whittling away at the infrastructure deficit we have.  Borrowing money to build an asset that is designed to pay itself off should be welcomed.

Why can't we have public toll roads designed to break even over a 30 year period, instead of the 20% rates of return the private sector needs?

Considering the mining investment cliff will cut around 2% pa off GDP for the next 3 years I'd say the engineering firms are probably pretty desperate about now, so the Govt should in theory be able to get pretty keen pricing for any construction work under taken.

Too big a spike in unemployment and underemployment and I fear the near 300% of private debt to GDP will become difficult to service.  How that plays out for a country with a nation of negatively geared landlords I don't know, but I can't see it being good for house prices, though it may be beneficial to first home buyers if they're luck enough to be employed.


----------



## Julia (6 August 2013)

noco said:


> I
> I watched Kim Carr being interviewed on Sky News and he mentioned...........THE FUTURE 10 times and ........WHERE IS THE MONEY COMING FROM........ 5 times in about 6 minutes flat.




There are going to be a few phrases, probably on both sides, which will drive us nuts.
The one that's already getting to me is "because it's the right thing to do".  Grr!


----------



## Aussiejeff (6 August 2013)

Julia said:


> There are going to be a few phrases, probably on both sides, which will drive us nuts.
> The one that's already getting to me is "because it's the right thing to do".  Grr!




There's only one "right thing to do" come polling day...vote that Mob *OUT!!* :bbat:
_(Spoken and authorized by aussiejeff on behalf of the* A*ussiejeff* F*or *P*resident *P*arty) _


----------



## sptrawler (6 August 2013)

sydboy007 said:


> I'm yet to hear either party mention the fact that Howard and Rudd pretty much gave away all the ToT boom in tax cuts and increases in middle class welfare.  So little of it was actually put towards increasing the productivity and efficiency of the country.
> 
> Now the ToT has turned negative, real income growth has stalled and soon to turn negative, real GDP growth has stalled and will start to turn negative, per capita GDP growth has been negative for at least the last few qtrs, where does the money come from?  There wont be another private sector debt binge producing 8% annual growth in GST revenue and historically high business tax and CGT.  We're already at historical highs of 150%+ of debt to income.  Australia has barely deleveraged since the GFC.
> 
> ...




Agree 100% and on top of it they are talking about another heap of spending on out of school care. 
That will help with the babysitting, while couples are working, to pay stupid prices for houses.


----------



## drsmith (6 August 2013)

More boats, more debt and more taxes.

At least now we finally have a firm date on when before we can boot Labor from office.

Where do I get the Liberal balloons ?


----------



## noco (6 August 2013)

I would like to see all voters read the comments made by Henry Ergas and Judith Sloan about Kevin Rudd who once said he was a fiscal conservative. Read this before voting.

I received a cartoon today showing two tailban line up Kevin Rudd in the cross hairs of their rifle. One called to the other............"Stop wait!!!!!!!!!!.....This indifel is of use to us....... He is destroying their democracy and economy for us".

Can we really afford another 3 years of hard labour (Labor).

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...&utm_content=cost+of+kev&utm_campaign=hppromo


----------



## Miss Hale (6 August 2013)

Well I'm glad the election is to be sooner rather than later but am baffled as to why Rudd has chosen 7th September  If he was going to change the date it would have been better to move it to either before or after the footy finals


----------



## noco (6 August 2013)

Miss Hale said:


> Well I'm glad the election is to be sooner rather than later but am baffled as to why Rudd has chosen 7th September  If he was going to change the date it would have been better to move it to either before or after the footy finals




Rudd selected the 7th September so he could strut around the G20 meeting on the 5/6th September in Russia to big note himself with world leaders. That is why he selected the 7th. I am sure he would liked to have gone earlier while his popularity was high but Rudd is like a peacock who likes to show off his feathers and that may well  be his undoing.

He could have waited until as late as 21th September but by then his popularity would have dwindled even more.


----------



## Julia (6 August 2013)

Anyone see Joe Hockey's interview with Leigh Sales oon 7.30 this evening?
Relentless questioning from Sales, which is fair enough.  Imo Joe Hockey has grown enormously.
Gone is the ineffectual buffoon.  Tonight he was confident, self assured and credible imo.

I'm sure the Labor disciples will view it differently.


----------



## Miss Hale (6 August 2013)

noco said:


> Rudd selected the 7th September so he could strut around the G20 meeting on the 5/6th September in Russia to big note himself with world leaders. That is why he selected the 7th. I am sure he would liked to have gone earlier while his popularity was high but Rudd is like a peacock who likes to show off his feathers and that may well  be his undoing.
> 
> He could have waited until as late as 21th September but by then his popularity would have dwindled even more.




Surely he is not going to be at the G20 meeting on the other side of the world the two days before the election leaving the field clear for Abbott to do all the last minute baby kissing, that would be political suicide!

What about the month of October, or November or December etc. etc. Believe me, having an election during footy finals in Victoria is annoying a lot of people.


----------



## drsmith (6 August 2013)

Two clanger interviews today, one each on either side of the political fence.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/sp...tes-on-smooth-fm/story-fnho52jj-1226692048149


----------



## noco (6 August 2013)

Miss Hale said:


> Surely he is not going to be at the G20 meeting on the other side of the world the two days before the election leaving the field clear for Abbott to do all the last minute baby kissing, that would be political suicide!
> 
> What about the month of October, or November or December etc. etc. Believe me, having an election during footy finals in Victoria is annoying a lot of people.




If he had called an election after the 21st September, then he would have had to recall parliament under the constitution rules and I am sure he would not want that under any circumstances.

If Rudd delayed the call until October or November, his popularity would have plumited even further.


----------



## Miss Hale (6 August 2013)

Then he should have acted sooner and had it in August or just left it at the 14th of September.  Just seems weird to bring it forward a week


----------



## noco (6 August 2013)

noco said:


> I would like to see all voters read the comments made by Henry Ergas and Judith Sloan about Kevin Rudd who once said he was a fiscal conservative. Read this before voting.
> 
> I received a cartoon today showing two tailban line up Kevin Rudd in the cross hairs of their rifle. One called to the other............"Stop wait!!!!!!!!!!.....This indifel is of use to us....... He is destroying their democracy and economy for us".
> 
> ...




Peter Costello explains Rudds talents as a show pony. Rudd is very clever in deed but the average "Joe Blow" have the ability to see right through his tactics.


http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/op...ats-all-for-show/story-fni0ffsx-1226691660870


----------



## Miss Hale (6 August 2013)

Did anyone else cringe when Rudd tweeted about the cricket? He's such a try hard


----------



## noco (6 August 2013)

Miss Hale said:


> Then he should have acted sooner and had it in August or just left it at the 14th of September.  Just seems weird to bring it forward a week




Rudd is only clever by half. He called the election on the 7th so he could mingle with the worlds greats before he is put out of office. The 5/6th of September G20 meeting is irrelevant for Rudd as by that time voters would have made up their minds which way they would want to vote any way.

It has been a long ambition of Rudd to either be nominated for a seat on the UN or better still to become the UN Secretary General and the way to do it is to try and become popular with world leaders. When he was "KNIFED IN THE BACK" by Juliar Gillard in 2010, he demamded the position of foreign Minister so he could strut around the world to visit every counrty he could. At the time Banki-Ki-Moon was to have retired at the end of 2012 and Rudd needed 18 months to establish himself, however Ki-Moon applied for another 5 years as UN Secretary General which ended Rudds endeavour to replace Ki-Moon untill December 2017. Ki-Moon, who is a south Korean, was an unknown quantity in 2005 but he struted the world for 18 months to become popular among world leaders and became successful in 2007. Rudd has mirrored his strategy.

It is only my own opinion, and most will probably disagree with me, but I have always believed the replacement of Rudd with Juliar Gillard in 2010 was engineered to release Rudd to become foreign Minister in 2010 to establish himself for the UN Secretay General's job at the end of 2012. He would not have been able to take up such a position while being Prime Minister but everything went 'belly up' and Rudd was the loser on both counts; as Prime Minister and as UN Secretary General. But things went from bad to worse as Gillard established herself with the Labor Party leadership and the rest is history.


----------



## medicowallet (7 August 2013)

sptrawler said:


> Agree 100% and on top of it they are talking about another heap of spending on out of school care.
> That will help with the babysitting, while couples are working, to pay stupid prices for houses.




Yes, I think Syd has written a great post.

Since 2000, there has been a massive run of $$$ from mining etc into housing etc.   I think the worst thing was the cutting of marginal rates, and introduction of middle class welfare.

Then Labor came along and just blew even more money.

I think Australia needs a correction, and some miraculous leader who stops middle class welfare and offers incentives for people to work harder and smarter, not less.  

MW


----------



## noco (7 August 2013)

This is one interview I should imagin David Bradury (assiatant Treasurer)  would rather forget. I believe the pressure is starting take its toll on Bradbury who is normally a cool character.

I also read in yesterday's Courier Mail whereby Anna Bourke ( the parliamentry speaker) has wondered why she ever joined the Labor Party in the first place with the adverse events that have taken place in the Labor Party.


http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/sp...tes-on-smooth-fm/story-fnho52jj-1226692048149


----------



## Tink (7 August 2013)

Miss Hale said:


> Then he should have acted sooner and had it in August or just left it at the 14th of September.  Just seems weird to bring it forward a week




My opinion, I think he would have preferred the end of the year October/November so that he could go to the G20 meeting, as he said on the Saturday that he had no intentions yet, but I think he was told otherwise, now or never.
So much for him being in charge.

Thank God we didnt have to wait that long.


----------



## db94 (7 August 2013)

http://www.news.com.au/national-new...tes-on-smooth-fm/story-fnho52ip-1226692048149

this is a classic. The Labor party trying to take credit for low interest rates


----------



## boofhead (7 August 2013)

db94 said:


> http://www.news.com.au/national-new...tes-on-smooth-fm/story-fnho52ip-1226692048149
> 
> this is a classic. The Labor party trying to take credit for low interest rates




The coalition are happy to blame the Labor party for creating an economic crisis that requires the RBA to drop rates. At least it stopped their mantra that the interest rates will always be lower under a coalition government.


----------



## sptrawler (7 August 2013)

boofhead said:


> The coalition are happy to blame the Labor party for creating an economic crisis that requires the RBA to drop rates. At least it stopped their mantra that the interest rates will always be lower under a coalition government.




Yes talk about taking a statement out of context, what a joke.
The problem with that statement was, it was made when everyone expected the Australian economy to be growing. Which was a fair assumption, when you consider it is a large country with a small population and in a growth phase.

No one expected, in six short years of Labor, the economy could stall on most fronts. 
Mining has contracted due to prices, but was being affected and slowing down, due to concern of the MRRT and reduction in mining projects.
Manufacturing has contracted faster than ever before.
Consumer confidence is the lowest it has been for years, effecting retail and investment.
The carbon tax has accelerated the change over from cheap electricity production, to high cost generation. Which has increased the cost to value adding industry.

The housing sector is priced at all time highs and the government expects it to be the next growth area. Well if that is the case, the economy is in a bad way, because incomes will have to skyrocket to support it.

Labor have managed to change a thriving economy, to a basket case in two terms of office and it will be difficult to turn it around IMO

They talk of the 'new jobs' to pick up the slack of the mining slowdown. The problem is the skill set and fabrication industry required to supporting mining, has nothing to offer the housing sector.  
Once industries are shut down and the workforce laid off, it is usually uneconomical and it also takes a very strong business case, to re start them.
Talk about lost the plot, when the government is saying it is great people can borrow money at 60 year low interest rates. When the long term average is 3 times that rate, which it will return to.


----------



## Calliope (7 August 2013)

boofhead said:


> The coalition are happy to blame the Labor party for creating an economic crisis that requires the RBA to drop rates. At least it stopped their mantra that the interest rates will always be lower under a coalition government.




Yes, that was the good old days. Now a low interest rate is to try to prop up a faltering economy. If Rudd gets back in it will drop further, maybe 0.5% one day.



> The European Central Bank (ECB) left interest rates at a record low 0.5 per cent yesterday and affirmed they will remain there for some while to come and could yet fall further.
> 
> Meanwhile, the Bank of England also maintained interest rates at 0.5 per cent and opted not to revive its bond-buying programme, as expected.






> The benchmark interest rate in the United States was last recorded at 0.25 percent. Interest Rate in the United States is reported by the Federal Reserve. The United States Interest Rate averaged 6.14 Percent from 1971 until 2013, reaching an all time high of 20.00 Percent in May of 1981 and a record low of 0.25 Percent in December of 2008.


----------



## sptrawler (7 August 2013)

Calliope said:


> Yes, that was the good old days. Now a low interest rate is to try to prop up a faltering economy. If Rudd gets back in it will drop further, maybe 0.5% one day.




Well if they are pushing for a housing boom, in an already overheated market. What is going to stop us from having a property crash, like the U.K.


----------



## sails (7 August 2013)

boofhead said:


> The coalition are happy to blame the Labor party for creating an economic crisis that requires the RBA to drop rates. At least it stopped their mantra that the interest rates will always be lower under a coalition government.




boofhead- interest rates which are too low are not healthy.  Much like body temperature - go too low and you can die. Even a couple of degrees below normal is not a healthy state. 

Rudd himself declared that interest rates at 3% were at emergency levels and now the struggling economy is causing rates even lower.  

Under Howard low rates were within the healthy range - these abnormally rates under labor are signs of trouble.

Is that so hard to understand?


----------



## Zedd (7 August 2013)

sptrawler said:


> No one expected, in six short years of Labor, the economy could stall on most fronts.




Talk about taking context out of a statement... 



Calliope said:


> Yes, that was the good old days. Now a low interest rate is to try to prop up a faltering economy. If Rudd gets back in it will drop further, maybe 0.5% one day.






sails said:


> boofhead- interest rates which are too low are not healthy.  Much like body temperature - go too low and you can die. Even a couple of degrees below normal is not a healthy state.
> 
> Rudd himself declared that interest rates at 3% were at emergency levels and now the struggling economy is causing rates even lower.
> 
> ...




Does anyone on this forum honestly think our domestic policies are having a more significant effect on our exchange and cash rates then the global macroeconomic picture?

It's posturing on both parties behalf in a situation in which they have very little control. 

While major economies around the world have a near 0% cash rate, not to mention QE, our exchange rate will be pushed higher, and that has driven a slow down in our sectors, not a couple of $$$ here or there on bank levies, carbon taxes, pink bats, MRRT, etc. If it wasn't for the significant demand for one our sectors our exchange rate and cash rate would have fallen along with everyone else's.

Irrespective of who takes us forward into 2014, if the slow down in mineral demand continues we will continue to see a fall in our cash rate and exchange rate. Period. Care to suggest a policy that either party could take forward that would drive global mineral demand?

Instead of focusing on the unavoidable roller coaster ride in monetary policy we're in for while the global picture stabilises/improves, the real focus should be on fiscal policy, and how much we want government spending to be driving our economy. Because when things turn, and they will, it will be fiscal policy that will determine how high the rates spike while controlling the spiralling inflation that will occur. This is what Howard was talking about those years back, it's when Liberal, pro-business policies shine, and it will be the catch-cry of another election in the near future.

It is a reality that we may need government spending (and yes the deficit gasp!) to increase in the short term to provide a smoothing effect while the exchange rate transition occurs, but measures such as improving productivity, business confidence and business conditions are the long term solution.

Abbott's on the right path (in this matter), and I couldn't care less where (if at all) he funds his company tax rate cut from in the short term. Pity he had to link it to the maternity scheme which although aimed at workforce participation, is more middle-class welfare IMO.


----------



## boofhead (7 August 2013)

sails said:


> boofhead- interest rates which are too low are not healthy.  Much like body temperature - go too low and you can die. Even a couple of degrees below normal is not a healthy state.
> 
> Rudd himself declared that interest rates at 3% were at emergency levels and now the struggling economy is causing rates even lower.
> 
> ...




I have no idea what you think I'm having trouble understanding. I didn't state an opinion on rates. I made an observation about some comments from two parties at different times.

My opinion is I dislike rates being below 4%.


----------



## sydboy007 (7 August 2013)

sptrawler said:


> Well if they are pushing for a housing boom, in an already overheated market. What is going to stop us from having a property crash, like the U.K.




Considering it was Howard and Costello who bequeathed on tax payers the halving of CGT on assets over 12 months and leaving negative gearing against all income, once can clearly see one of the main causes of the bloated property prices in this country.

Factor in that property "investors" have made aggregate losses for the last 13 years since the CGT change came about one has to wonder how much longer the $4-5 billion in rental property losses every year can be subsidised??

We're around the $60B in cumulative losses since the Howard Govt CGT changes (in real terms)


----------



## sydboy007 (7 August 2013)

sails said:


> boofhead- interest rates which are too low are not healthy.  Much like body temperature - go too low and you can die. Even a couple of degrees below normal is not a healthy state.
> 
> Rudd himself declared that interest rates at 3% were at emergency levels and now the struggling economy is causing rates even lower.
> 
> ...




Howard had a mining capex boom from 2-8% of GDP

Labor is facing a capex decline of 8-2% - hence the decline in interest rates.

Whoever wins next month is going to have to try and manage a MASSIVE decline in the ToT and mining capex, while also dealing with the slow and steady worsening of the dependency ratio.  Factor in providing above average increase on the pension with every increasing levels of people applying for it, and I really don't see how we are going to cope.

Too many powerful voting blocks will squeal to the MSM and any reforms that are good for the country will pretty much be watered down so much they wont achieve much.  That's the pathetic democracy we have at present.  Politicians more worried about seeking power than actually providing the policies that will help up cope with the massive structural changes that we can't avoid.


----------



## sptrawler (7 August 2013)

Zedd said:


> Does anyone on this forum honestly think our domestic policies are having a more significant effect on our exchange and cash rates then the global macroeconomic picture?
> .




The short answer, is they both are having a major effect on rates, but domestic policy is driving down interest rates.

Our domestic policies have brought about a drop in consumer and business confidence. This in turn has caused a major contraction in consumer and business spending. This in turn has forced the RBA to drop interest rates, to stimulate spending and drive employment in the construction, retail and service sectors.

With the dropping of interest rates and the resultant drop in exchange rates, it makes our product cheaper in global terms. However that does very little to stimulate employment as our export sectors are not the major employers.

So I think the main driver is domestic and rising unemployment is the main worry. The global macroeconomic picture is improving, ours is worsening.
But hey, everyone has their own ideas.


----------



## sptrawler (7 August 2013)

sydboy007 said:


> Factor in providing above average increase on the pension with every increasing levels of people applying for it, and I really don't see how we are going to cope..




With rates at what they are currently, that pension blowout is going to accelerate.




sydboy007 said:


> Too many powerful voting blocks will squeal to the MSM and any reforms that are good for the country will pretty much be watered down so much they wont achieve much.  That's the pathetic democracy we have at present.  Politicians more worried about seeking power than actually providing the policies that will help up cope with the massive structural changes that we can't avoid.




+1


----------



## banco (7 August 2013)

noco said:


> It is only my own opinion, and most will probably disagree with me, but I have always believed the replacement of Rudd with Juliar Gillard in 2010 was engineered to release Rudd to become foreign Minister in 2010 to establish himself for the UN Secretay General's job at the end of 2012. He would not have been able to take up such a position while being Prime Minister but everything went 'belly up' and Rudd was the loser on both counts; as Prime Minister and as UN Secretary General. But things went from bad to worse as Gillard established herself with the Labor Party leadership and the rest is history.




Seems like you've been smoking the good stuff.


----------



## drsmith (7 August 2013)

banco said:


> Seems like you've been smoking the good stuff.



The images from that time paint a telling picture.


----------



## Julia (7 August 2013)

Zedd said:


> Does anyone on this forum honestly think our domestic policies are having a more significant effect on our exchange and cash rates then the global macroeconomic picture?



Difficult to determine whether a 'more significant' effect or not.  But undoubtedly a very clear significant effect imo.


> It's posturing on both parties behalf in a situation in which they have very little control.



Ah, a true disciple of the Labor mantra.  The Coalition has not suggested, afaik, that it's not possible for Australia to control its own destiny, irrespective of global situation.



> Irrespective of who takes us forward into 2014, if the slow down in mineral demand continues we will continue to see a fall in our cash rate and exchange rate. Period. Care to suggest a policy that either party could take forward that would drive global mineral demand?



You might like to have a look at an interview due to be broadcast on "7.30" tomorrow evening, an interview with the new CEO of BHP.  He directly contradicts the government's insistence that the mining boom is over.
(A brief excerpt was played this evening in order to put BHP's view to Kevin Rudd in his interview.)



> Abbott's on the right path (in this matter), and I couldn't care less where (if at all) he funds his company tax rate cut from in the short term. Pity he had to link it to the maternity scheme which although aimed at workforce participation, is more middle-class welfare IMO.



Agree, as does pretty much everyone who has expressed an opinion on this, apart from Mr Abbott himself.
The Coalition avoided confirming this policy in interviews today.  I wonder if they are actually finally considering deferring it, if not actually dropping it?  If they did, there would be a collective sigh of relief throughout Coalition supporters.




sydboy007 said:


> Howard had a mining capex boom from 2-8% of GDP
> 
> Labor is facing a capex decline of 8-2% - hence the decline in interest rates.
> 
> Whoever wins next month is going to have to try and manage a MASSIVE decline in the ToT and mining capex, while also dealing with the slow and steady worsening of the dependency ratio.  Factor in providing above average increase on the pension with every increasing levels of people applying for it, and I really don't see how we are going to cope.



On this latter point, today we have the esteemed Clive Palmer telling us we need to be putting in place a rise in the age pension of $150 p/f.  Sadly, he didn't explain how this could be funded.



> Too many powerful voting blocks will squeal to the MSM and any reforms that are good for the country will pretty much be watered down so much they wont achieve much.  That's the pathetic democracy we have at present.  Politicians more worried about seeking power than actually providing the policies that will help up cope with the massive structural changes that we can't avoid.



And that's the truth.


----------



## noco (7 August 2013)

banco said:


> Seems like you've been smoking the good stuff.




Actually I have not smoked anything since the 1st May 1976 and most likely that was before you were born.

Seems like I DO know one thing and that is how the Labor Party works. I have seen so many back door deals done including listening to Vince Gair and his mate Walsh where I rubbed shoulders with those two blokes in the Bell Vue Hotel on Geroge st Brisbane many years ago.

So please don't insult my intelligents. You are obviuosly very ignorant and naive of what goes on in the Labor Party.


----------



## Zedd (7 August 2013)

Julia said:


> Ah, a true disciple of the Labor mantra.  The Coalition has not suggested, afaik, that it's not possible for Australia to control its own destiny, irrespective of global situation.




I like to think I'm a true disciple of macro-economics, specifically in this case the International Fisher Effect. In the same way that I don't give Labour sole, even majority, credit for 'saving' us from recession, I don't give Labor majority blame, for the decreasing rates.

The more intertwined our economy becomes within the global arena, the less control we have. My comments on fiscal policy were regarding how we can control our destiny with the tools available.


----------



## noco (7 August 2013)

Zedd said:


> I like to think I'm a true disciple of macro-economics, specifically in this case the International Fisher Effect. In the same way that I don't give Labour sole, even majority, credit for 'saving' us from recession, I don't give Labor majority blame, for the decreasing rates.
> 
> The more intertwined our economy becomes within the global arena, the less control we have. My comments on fiscal policy were regarding how we can control our destiny with the tools available.




We can control our destiny with a Government that has good policies not like the era in the past 6 years nor Rudd's 3 word slogan " A NEW WAY" to take us down the same track for the next 3 years. 

I for one do not want to see more waste of tax payers dollars like we have seen in the past 6 years by the worst government in history.


----------



## Calliope (8 August 2013)

News Ltd media will surely be suppressed if Rudd wins.


----------



## Julia (8 August 2013)

Much jubilation in the Labor camp today, it seems, with the re-emergence of media tart, Peter Beattie (for non-Queenslanders, the premier of Qld before Anna Bligh, and responsible for much of the running up of debt and electricity prices.)

Following a pattern for the Labor Party, we'll all recall Mr Beattie's promise that his political career was over, finished, dead for ever.  Further he strongly supported Julia Gillard against Kevin Rudd.

But allegiances seem to be but temporary conveniences for Labor, as they throw out the pre-selected candidate for the electorate Mr Beattie has chosen to represent.  The rationale offered by ABC Radio on this exciting change of events is that Mr Beattie will take over the campaigning for all of Qld, freeing Mr Rudd up to cover the rest of the country.  ABC asserts that this 'will be an absolute game changer for Labor'.  Perhaps.

Or perhaps plenty of Queenslanders still retain bitter memories of an oh so plausible, 'butter wouldn't melt in my mouth' premier.  

I had to laugh at Christopher Pyne's comments today:


> Well Kieran, we have already got one narcissistic egomaniac from Queensland in the Federal Parliament in Kevin Rudd, we hardly need two.  And if Peter Beattie who is self-confessed media tart, addicted to spending, debt and deficit when he was Premier, if he comes to Canberra, it is just more old Labor, more old Labor that supports debt, that supports deficit, that doesn’t invest in infrastructure spending, that leaves the state bankrupt but loves being in the press so I don’t know how Kevin and Peter Beattie will be able to elbow each other out of the way for the camera. *The truth is that Peter Beattie and Kevin Rudd despise each other – it* *is like the mongoose and the cobra.*  And we will have two narcissistic egomaniacs splitting the Labor caucus yet again.  The only reason Peter Beattie wants to come to Canberra, Kieran, is that he wants to be leader of the Labor Party. So the chaos and dysfunction and division in the Labor Party will just continue and that’s why they need time out in the next three years.  They don’t need to be rewarded for the last six years of dysfunction with being re-elected so they can be repeat it all again on the people’s time.




He might be absolutely right about Mr Beattie - anticipating Rudd's inability to hold it together as leader, given the antagonism from his own people - now missing the limelight in which he thrives, seeing an opportunity to walk the leader's walk once again.


----------



## noco (8 August 2013)

Beattie's campaign did not get off to a very good start today after being heckled in South Brisbane.

Rudd said, he and Beattie had more in common than they had differences. The only thing I can recall them being the same is their poor econmic managing. Beattie had a boom decade and had nothing to show for it except a heap of debt which he left as a legacy for Anna Bligh

 Rudd and Beattie hate each others gutz.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...orde-in-election/story-fnihsrf2-1226693267301


----------



## noco (8 August 2013)

noco said:


> Beattie's campaign did not get off to a very good start today after being heckled in South Brisbane.
> 
> Rudd said, he and Beattie had more in common than they had differences. The only thing I can recall them being the same is their poor econmic managing. Beattie had a boom decade and had nothing to show for it except a heap of debt which he left as a legacy for Anna Bligh
> 
> ...




Andrew Bolt is of the opinion that if Rudd loses the election, Labor really does not have anyone capable of leading the Party when in opposition.


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


----------



## moXJO (8 August 2013)

noco said:


> Andrew Bolt is of the opinion that if Rudd loses the election, Labor really does not have anyone capable of leading the Party when in opposition.
> 
> 
> http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...peter_beattie_rushed_in_as_a_labor_candidate/




I think beattie can see a chance of leading if labor loses this election. Labor will quickly dump Kev once they lose imo. Labor must be desperate bringing this media tart back into the fold.


----------



## drsmith (8 August 2013)

moXJO said:


> I think beattie can see a chance of leading if labor loses this election. Labor will quickly dump Kev once they lose imo. Labor must be desperate bringing this media tart back into the fold.



Perhaps Labor's internal polling in Qld is showing the same results as the Coalition's.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...on-polling-shows/story-fn9qr68y-1226693600968


----------



## IFocus (8 August 2013)

sptrawler said:


> The short answer, is they both are having a major effect on rates, but domestic policy is driving down interest rates.




Ummm......no the strength of the AUD is driving down interest rates currently even under Howard global issues determined interest rates rather than any thing politicians did.

Our economy is not big enough on the global scale to have any say in our AUD value or interest rates levels.


----------



## Julia (8 August 2013)

drsmith said:


> Perhaps Labor's internal polling in Qld is showing the same results as the Coalition's.
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...on-polling-shows/story-fn9qr68y-1226693600968



Interesting.  Hence Kevin Rudd being desperate enough to phone Beattie and ask him to come and save them.
I doubt the voters of Qld will have sufficiently short memories to do this.


----------



## sptrawler (8 August 2013)

IFocus said:


> Ummm......no the strength of the AUD is driving down interest rates currently even under Howard global issues determined interest rates rather than any thing politicians did.
> 
> Our economy is not big enough on the global scale to have any say in our AUD value or interest rates levels.




There you go, and I thought it was the Reserve Bank driving down interest rates, to stimulate the economy.
I'm sure I heard they were trying to create growth in the small business and housing sector, to create employment, as mining construction drops off.
Thanks for putting me straight.


----------



## sptrawler (8 August 2013)

IFocus said:


> Ummm......no the strength of the AUD is driving down interest rates currently even under Howard global issues determined interest rates rather than any thing politicians did.
> 
> Our economy is not big enough on the global scale to have any say in our AUD value or interest rates levels.




Oh by the way, what was holding the dollar and interest rates up then?

How come the dollar has only dropped, since the RBA dropped rates?

Also it has dropped against NZ, which isn't a major economy on a global scale.

Probably starting to drift, it all sounds like KRudd spin to me.


----------



## Tink (9 August 2013)

Desperation for Rudd. 

He also rang Gillard to help with the campaign, can you believe this man, I dont see her saying yes and who would. 
After saying what a bad government she was, he has the gall to offer her an olive branch.
He was a bad government too, just as he is showing now, and was tossed out.

We may have had our opinions but all the removing has been done by their own, come the 7th, it will be our turn to say exactly what we think of this dysfunctional rubble.


----------



## noco (9 August 2013)

Rudd's next phone call might be to Hawke and Keating. 

Help Bob, help Paul I am going down the gurgler.


----------



## noco (9 August 2013)

Although both Rudd and Beattie are media tarts, they are both tarred with the one brush when it comes to managing the economy.

Beattie in his reign had to borrow money to pay public servants. A public service that been increased ftom 140,000 to over 200,000 during his term as premier...Almost an incresae of 50% and all in the name of creating more jobs to keep the unemployment down.

Beattie is an absolute joke but like Anna Bligh people seem to fall for those toothing smiles. Of course Beattie was extremely clever in admitting his mistakes by saying he would fix it. Like Rudd he is all talk and no action and just continued to faulter with every thing he touched.

I just hope voters have long memories.


http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...rn-sour-for-rudd/story-fnihsr9v-1226693875733


----------



## noco (9 August 2013)

And this is what Beattie thinks of Ruidd.

It is a case of the pot calling the kettle black

I wonder how long the rewed freindship will last??????? Perhaps until the 7th September if they are lucky!!!!!!!!!!!



http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...te-peter-beattie/story-fnho52jo-1226693837430


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (9 August 2013)

No matter what Beattie thinks of Rudd, and voicey verser, the ALP are well ahead at present and may be able to perform another hungee in parliament.

gg


----------



## noco (9 August 2013)

Rudd and his henchmen have been raving on for weeks that Abbott would mirror Campbell Newman by slashing and burning the public service which would create massive unemployment.

Although Newman has reduced the public service by 14,000 to a more efficient level, 18,500 jobs were created in the private sector, reducing the unemployment in Queensland and making it the best performong state in Australia. So Mr Rudd, Campbell Newman must be doing something right!!!!!!!!

A case of "EGG ON FACE" for Rudd.


http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...nsland-jobs-jump/story-fn9qr68y-1226693897611


----------



## drsmith (9 August 2013)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> No matter what Beattie thinks of Rudd, and voicey verser, the ALP are well ahead at present and may be able to perform another hungee in parliament.
> 
> gg



Good heavens GG.

Have the drinks been spiked at the Ross Island Hotel ?

Poor Pete is just another from Qld with delusions of grandeur.


----------



## Calliope (9 August 2013)

Two Bufoons for the price of one.  This picture emphasises Rudd's prissy little mouth and tiny chin.





http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...elp-rescue-labor/story-fnihsrf2-1226693889409


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (9 August 2013)

drsmith said:


> Good heavens GG.
> 
> Have the drinks been spiked at the Ross Island Hotel ?
> 
> Poor Pete is just another from Qld with delusions of grandeur.




Sadly mate, the ALP are so far ahead, I am advising all my ALP mates to stop campaigning and prepare for victory.

I do like Peter Beattie's American teeth, so much better than his Queensland Health ones. Were they paid for by government?

gg


----------



## drsmith (9 August 2013)

[







Garpal Gumnut said:


> Sadly mate, the ALP are so far ahead, I am advising all my ALP mates to stop campaigning and prepare for victory.



That's good advice. They can then at least be happy for the next few weeks.



Garpal Gumnut said:


> I do like Peter Beattie's American teeth, so much better than his Queensland Health ones. Were they paid for by government?



He might have to go back for more if the smack in the mouth from the following poll is replicated at the election.

http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/...-shows-beattie-trailing-behind-lnp-candidate/


----------



## bunyip (9 August 2013)

noco said:


> Rudd and his henchmen have been raving on for weeks that Abbott would mirror Campbell Newman by slashing and burning the public service which would create massive unemployment.
> 
> Although Newman has reduced the public service by 14,000 to a more efficient level, 18,500 jobs were created in the private sector, reducing the unemployment in Queensland and making it the best performong state in Australia. So Mr Rudd, Campbell Newman must be doing something right!!!!!!!!
> 
> ...




Campbell Newman understands what the ALP never can – that the key to competent economic management is to trim the fat and create an environment that encourages business investment, and hence job creation.
This is what will happen under an Abbot government, in stark contrast to continued incompetence and stupidity, and more business-killing taxes, if Rudd gets back in.


----------



## noco (9 August 2013)

drsmith said:


> [
> That's good advice. They can then at least be happy for the next few weeks.
> 
> 
> ...




+1 Doc. I would like see them both get a smack in the teeth wit a base ball bat. I am sure that would take away their perky smiles.

BTW Doc, do you have the lastest boat arrival figures for the week?


----------



## IFocus (9 August 2013)

sptrawler said:


> Oh by the way, what was holding the dollar and interest rates up then?
> 
> How come the dollar has only dropped, since the RBA dropped rates?
> 
> ...




My post wasn't well worded, the RBA is dropping rates yes in part to help a flagging eastern sea board economy but its major concern is dropping the AUD so manufacturing can at least have a chance and to slow the inflow of goods attractive to local consumers. Manufacturing is where the RBA wants to see jobs increase not drop off.

The AUD rise is due to a number of reasons, one being the pursuit of yield by foreign investors in pretty much a safe haven. 

But regardless no political policy by either party has an immediate or even midterm influence on interest rates, Howards claim interest rates would always be lower under a Coalition government was and always will be complete hubris.


----------



## Julia (9 August 2013)

noco said:


> Beattie is an absolute joke but like Anna Bligh people seem to fall for those toothing smiles. Of course Beattie was extremely clever in admitting his mistakes by saying he would fix it. Like Rudd he is all talk and no action and just continued to faulter with every thing he touched.



Indeed.  Watching and listening to him on 7.30 last night, he reminded us how well he does the mea culpa - remorseful smile, synthetic embarrassment, hands outstretched in supplication. 

He attempted to paint Mr Rudd as a person of courage because he was 'man enough' to reach out to him, Beattie, who of course was decent enough to accept the olive branch.  Not for any personal aggrandisement, mind you.  Definitely not.  Just in the interests of avoiding wall to wall Liberal governments.   

 It will be just what he deserves if loses.

If Rudd has really contacted Julia Gillard and asked her to campaign for him, I can't think of anything more insensitive.  I doubt she'd be silly enough. 



Garpal Gumnut said:


> No matter what Beattie thinks of Rudd, and voicey verser, the ALP are well
> ahead at present



Basis for this assertion?????


----------



## drsmith (9 August 2013)

noco said:


> BTW Doc, do you have the lastest boat arrival figures for the week?



I haven't for a while as I was away from the forum for a bit over a week.

In relation to recent numbers, the SMH ran the following story yesterday,

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit.../dropoff-in-boat-arrivals-20130807-2rgur.html



> Boat arrivals have been down about a quarter since Mr Rudd announced the PNG plan. But that includes a massive spike in the week after the plan was announced, with about 1250 arrivals in those seven days, including six boats with nearly 500 passengers in one day.
> 
> The following week there were fewer than 400 arrivals and in the six days since then there have been about 360 arrivals.




That equates to about 2000 since Kevin Rudd's PNG announcement. While we have seen a reduction in the past two weeks to around 400 per week (according to the above figures), this still equates to over 20000 per year which is more than what arrived in all of 2012. 

Julie Bishop has also made some interesting comments a couple of nights ago on Lateline in relation to the detail of the PNG agreement. This is linked in the asylum seeker thread.

I'll do another weekly update to the end of Friday either over the weekend or early next week when I'm confident all the announcements for boat arrivals for the week to Friday are all on Jason Clare's site. There can sometimes be a delay of a few days between arrival and announcement.


----------



## Calliope (9 August 2013)

Julia said:


> Basis for this assertion?????




GG is just playing his favourite game of Devil's Advocate.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (9 August 2013)

Julia, 

I reckon with Rudd and Beattie, two of the greatest bull**** artists in Australian political history, and the skew bell-curved IQ and dependence on handouts of the undecided voters, the latter will be swayed by spin and a circus to vote ALP.

I am encouraging my ALP mates to spend more time drinking and less campaigning, to prepare for the inevitable victory of the ALP, albeit in a hung parliament.

gg


----------



## bunyip (9 August 2013)

Here’s something for Rudd and anyone else who is critical of Abbot’s plan to tow back the boats.

Pity we can’t bring back Downer, Howard, Costello and some others who gave us such stable and competent government. But never mind, many of the current opposition served in the Howard government, so if they win the election we can expect them to bring back the same common sense, competent government that characterized the Howard years. 

http://www.2gb.com/audioplayer/10285


----------



## Julia (9 August 2013)

bunyip said:


> Here’s something for Rudd and anyone else who is critical of Abbot’s plan to tow back the boats.
> 
> Pity we can’t bring back Downer, Howard, Costello and some others who gave us such stable and competent government. But never mind, many of the current opposition served in the Howard government, so if they win the election we can expect them to bring back the same common sense, competent government that characterized the Howard years.
> 
> http://www.2gb.com/audioplayer/10285



Alexander Downer had it right.  Indonesia must be laughing themselves silly at how they can manipulate Australia under Rudd/Gillard/Rudd.


----------



## bunyip (9 August 2013)

Here’s another one for Kevin Rudd and anyone fool enough to think that this incompetent moron deserves another term in office. 

http://www.2gb.com/audioplayer/10933


----------



## noco (9 August 2013)

bunyip said:


> Here’s another one for Kevin Rudd and anyone fool enough to think that this incompetent moron deserves another term in office.
> 
> http://www.2gb.com/audioplayer/10933




+ 1. I can vouch for for what David is saying. I did business with PNG and the Torres Shire Council for 20 odd years. I had 240 air flights around PNG over 18 years. I know the PNG culture well and there is no way middle East refugees will stay in PNG. They would not be able to blend into the PNG culture. All it will be is a stepping stone to the Torres Straight Island. As David said, Horn Island is not an international airport and anybody can just board an air craft there and fly to Sydney. No Immigration checks required. I would love to know how many illegal PNG Nationals are now living in Australia.

You see there are PNG Nationals crossing over every week for medical attention and it has been going on for years.. Rudd knows it too.


----------



## sptrawler (9 August 2013)

IFocus said:


> My post wasn't well worded, the RBA is dropping rates yes in part to help a flagging eastern sea board economy but its major concern is dropping the AUD so manufacturing can at least have a chance and to slow the inflow of goods attractive to local consumers. Manufacturing is where the RBA wants to see jobs increase not drop off..




Manufacturing is already stuffed, there has been massive loss since Labor have been in. 
Whether this loss has been solely due to the high dollar is debatable, poor government policy and policy implimentation has contributed greatly. 
Just the other week Rudds changes of the car leasing system was add hock as usual, apparently they didn't even model the effect on car sales.
From reports I've read, the RBA is banking on the housing and commercial construction, to save the day. To me it seems they are pouring petrol on a fire.
What's happening in Europe isn't affecting our interest rates.IMO



IFocus said:


> The AUD rise is due to a number of reasons, one being the pursuit of yield by foreign investors in pretty much a safe haven. .



Agree



IFocus said:


> But regardless no political policy by either party has an immediate or even midterm influence on interest rates, Howards claim interest rates would always be lower under a Coalition government was and always will be complete hubris.




Of course political policy has an effect on interest rates.
Interest rates are used to stimulate or dampen public spending. If the government federal and state increase taxes, this reduces disposable income which dampens demand.
If the government bring in policy that makes people less confident about their position, be that financial or tenure of employment, that dampens spending. 
This is the problem the reserve bank has, people aren't spending, so the RBA is dropping interest rates. Otherwise there will be more businesses shutting down and more unemployment.

The interst rate claim just shows how much of a dick Rudd is.
He is using the fact, that he has stuffed the economy so much, that drastic and unhealthy low interest rates are required.
Then somehow he tries to make out it is an achievement, he's one sick puppy.IMO


----------



## db94 (9 August 2013)

'Kevin Rudd says he takes responsibility for insulation scheme deaths'

Read more: http://www.news.com.au/national-new...hs/story-fnho52ip-1226694490123#ixzz2bSo9qQaX
http://www.news.com.au/national-new...on-scheme-deaths/story-fnho52ip-1226694490123

So if he's responsible is he more than happy to be charged for the deaths he caused? or maybe he's doing it for show to try and con voters to vote for him


----------



## drsmith (9 August 2013)

If the betting odds are any guide, The Coalition has got it's nose a bit further in front during the first week of the campaign.

Sportsbet has the Coalition at $1.21 and Labor at $4.50. A few days ago it was $1.25/$4.00 or thereabouts.


----------



## drsmith (10 August 2013)

The latest Fairfax-Nielsen poll has 2PP at 52%/48% in favour of the Coalition.

A number of other personal ratings are also on the improve for Tony Abbott relative to Kevin Rudd.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-08-...-of-labor-election-campaign-continues/4877908


----------



## sptrawler (10 August 2013)

drsmith said:


> The latest Fairfax-Nielsen poll has 2PP at 52%/48% in favour of the Coalition.
> 
> A number of other personal ratings are also on the improve for Tony Abbott relative to Kevin Rudd.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-08-...-of-labor-election-campaign-continues/4877908




Exactly the same as happened to Gillard, as soon as the election date was announced, Labors rating started sliding.

As we've said before, people have already made their minds up, now they are just waiting to get it over with.


----------



## drsmith (10 August 2013)

sptrawler said:


> Exactly the same as happened to Gillard, as soon as the election date was announced, Labors rating started sliding.



The ABC article linked above doesn't mention it directly, but Kevin Rudd's rating as preferred prime minister has fallen 5%. (ABC radio news).


----------



## Julia (10 August 2013)

Thinking across the parties, who are the people you most want to see gone and why?

Mine are:
Kevin Rudd   for being the archetype of insincerity, narcissism, and without any apparent conscience, given his multiple positions on everything.  Most recently for his utterly deceptive scare campaign holding a jar of Vegemite, where he is asserting - with absolutely no basis - that the Coalition will raise the GST. 

Doug Cameron   because he typifies all that represents the Union movement at its worst.  Plus I can't stand his accent.  (Yes, I know that's a shallow reason.)

Penny Wong   because she proclaims herself to be highly principled but when it came to the crunch, she chose self interest in terms of political survival over loyalty to the sisterhood as it related to Julia Gillard, even though she had mightily criticised Rudd in the past.
(NB  I'm not especially for the dreaded sisterhood, but if you're going to espouse it in one breath, you can't go dumping it in the next.)

Sarah Hanson-Young   because if I hear her say 'vulnerable people' once more I will do her in.  Because she so utterly ignores any pragmatic or rational considerations, and just wants to open our borders to everyone who feels disposed to live a life on social security courtesy the Australian taxpayer, one of whose ranks they have no desire to be.

Chris Bowen   Sad to say this because when he had the Immigration p/f I saw him as a decent person hampered by the restrictions of his role.  Since he has become Treasurer, however, he has much more freedom to express what he really believes, and has shown himself to be yet another tedious mouthpiece for the government.


People I hope will be re-elected:

Tony Abbott as PM.  Hopefully he will surprise us with his competence.  Cannot possibly be worse than what we have endured over the last six years.

Nick Xenophon.  Seems to actually have some principles.  Hallelujah!.

Joe Hockey.  Seems to be growing in confidence and competence.

Andrew Wilkie.  Essentially because the option seems to be him or a Labor candidate.  Also because he has seemed to have done his best to stick to his principles, even if not always successfully.

In a perfect world, I'd bring back John  Howard, Alexander Downer, Peter Costello.  If they were actually in the running now, Rudd wouldn't even have the temerity to put up his hand.

What are your choices?


----------



## Tink (10 August 2013)

Kevin Rudd and Penny Wong are the two that stand out for me, for the same reasons you mentioned, Julia. I also find Penny Wong very vicious in her approach. 
They are both as bad as each other.

I like Doug Camerons accent, but I do see why you dislike him, he has a very strong personality.

I would like to see Tony Abbott as PM, I think he will do well, and we need the Coalition to get this country back on track.

Also agree that Joe Hockey has grown alot of confidence


----------



## medicowallet (10 August 2013)

I am not going to waste my time formulating a reply to Julia's post, as it pretty much sums up my position exactly.

MW


I so very much prefer the politicians of both parties from 10-20 years back. So much more talent back then.   It has really been going downhill since then.


----------



## MrBurns (11 August 2013)

medicowallet said:


> I am not going to waste my time formulating a reply to Julia's post, as it pretty much sums up my position exactly.
> 
> MW
> 
> ...




Politics has become a media event along the lines of Big Brother, I hope some time down the track it changes but I doubt it.


----------



## Calliope (11 August 2013)

Julia said:


> Chris Bowen   Sad to say this because when he had the Immigration p/f I saw him as a decent person hampered by the restrictions of his role.  Since he has become Treasurer, however, he has much more freedom to express what he really believes, and has shown himself to be yet another tedious mouthpiece for the government.




Chris Bowen on Insiders this morning, with the connivance of Barrie Cassidy, gave one of the most boring, repetitious, negative and duplicitous interviews I have heard for a long time.:bad:


----------



## noco (11 August 2013)

Rudd's Muslim Minister Ed Husic disagrees with with Rudd over Rudd's claim relating to Rupert Murdoch.

Rudd must be eating too much Vegemite. 



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


----------



## sails (11 August 2013)

Anyone wanting to use the worm in the debate tonight can do so by downloading Roy Morgan Reactor from either Apple or Android app stores - and it's free.

It's easy to do and pretty cool we can now participate from home instead of this being limited to the studio audience...


----------



## dutchie (11 August 2013)

noco said:


> Rudd must be eating too much Vegemite.




Only rich people can afford it now, with that darn 12.5% GST.


----------



## Julia (11 August 2013)

Really disappointing to see that the Coalition has committed to returning the budget to surplus in its first term "if the figures from Treasury are correct'.  Surely, given the relatively poor condition of the economy, rising unemployment etc, this is unnecessary, leaves them open to a charge of failure, or if it actually is achieved, probably necessitating such vicious cuts that recession will be a real possibility, not to mention loss of confidence in the electorate.

Or can they actually make cuts to spending which will not have this result?


----------



## dutchie (11 August 2013)

This will be Rudd's mantra tonite in regard to the LNP costings.







Rudd, "I demand to know your costings, even though I have not released mine and even though you don't have a clue on how we have screwed up the current budget position!!!!!"


----------



## noco (11 August 2013)

Julia said:


> Really disappointing to see that the Coalition has committed to returning the budget to surplus in its first term "if the figures from Treasury are correct'.  Surely, given the relatively poor condition of the economy, rising unemployment etc, this is unnecessary, leaves them open to a charge of failure, or if it actually is achieved, probably necessitating such vicious cuts that recession will be a real possibility, not to mention loss of confidence in the electorate.
> 
> Or can they actually make cuts to spending which will not have this result?




I am of the opinion that Abbott's committment to lowering company tax to 28.5%, the removal of the Carbon and mining tax together with many red and green tape regulations, he will give a boost to business confidence which will encourage investment in new projects resulting in a reduction of unemployment which in turn will increase revenue in personal and company tax.

His policy makes a lot of sense but as you say he may well have a battle on his hands to return to surplus in the designated time frame.

I would like to see Abbott scrap his "DIRECT ACTION PLAN" on green house emmissions and defer his paid parental scheme until the economy picks up. In the meantime Abbott should utilize the existing paid parental scheme put in place by Labor.


----------



## Julia (11 August 2013)

noco said:


> I would like to see Abbott scrap his "DIRECT ACTION PLAN" on green house emmissions and defer his paid parental scheme until the economy picks up. In the meantime Abbott should utilize the existing paid parental scheme put in place by Labor.



Agree.


----------



## sydboy007 (11 August 2013)

Julia said:


> Really disappointing to see that the Coalition has committed to returning the budget to surplus in its first term "if the figures from Treasury are correct'.  Surely, given the relatively poor condition of the economy, rising unemployment etc, this is unnecessary, leaves them open to a charge of failure, or if it actually is achieved, probably necessitating such vicious cuts that recession will be a real possibility, not to mention loss of confidence in the electorate.
> 
> Or can they actually make cuts to spending which will not have this result?




Chris Pyne says budget surpluses are easy.  He's stated that the Coalition would have run surpluses right through the GFC.  Last year he said "Well if there had been a Coalition government for the last five years, Kieran, I think most people accept that we would have had continuing surpluses."

Cut back benefits to anyone from the 4th income decile up and use the funds saved to invest in the infrastructure this country needs.  Will help the budget in the short term by minimising the rise in unemployment, and over the long term should improve the NAIRU of the economy by increasing productivity, while allowing lower interest rates for the same level of economic growth.

it ain't rocket science, just requires a lot of fortitude to go up against the MSM and the shrieking vested interests that "lose" out to the change in priorities.

I also don't think Abbott has any idea of what a ToT down trend does to Govt revenue.  Then again neither does treasury.  All the current forecast are far too positive, unless the USA really does start firing on all cylinders and drag world growth along with it (similar odds to Australia's top order scoring some runs)


----------



## sptrawler (11 August 2013)

Well I don't know about you, but I thought Abbott did better, than I expected.

I thought Rudd was just slipping into panic mode occasionally.

Just my thoughts, may be biased, but Rudd looked flustered.


----------



## IFocus (11 August 2013)

Julia said:


> Really disappointing to see that the Coalition has committed to returning the budget to surplus in its first term "if the figures from Treasury are correct'.  Surely, given the relatively poor condition of the economy, rising unemployment etc, this is unnecessary, leaves them open to a charge of failure, or if it actually is achieved, probably necessitating such vicious cuts that recession will be a real possibility, not to mention loss of confidence in the electorate.
> 
> Or can they actually make cuts to spending which will not have this result?




Abbott says he has $17 bil of savings worked out which he has spent in pet give a ways treasury says there is a short fall of $30 bil in revenue beyond reason the Coalition can return to surplus.


----------



## So_Cynical (11 August 2013)

Not much of a debate, just slogans from both sides, Tony must of said 'stop the boats' 3 or 4 times...amazing how close they are on policy.


----------



## Calliope (11 August 2013)

sptrawler said:


> Well I don't know about you, but I thought Abbott did better, than I expected.
> 
> I thought Rudd was just slipping into panic mode occasionally.
> 
> Just my thoughts, may be biased, but Rudd looked flustered.




It's all over. Rudd is finished. Abbott did him off a break even though neither of them answered the questions. Rudd was using notes even though this was against the rules. Rudd's bottom lip was trembling in anger and frustration. I wonder who he will take it out on tonight?


----------



## moXJO (11 August 2013)

So_Cynical said:


> Not much of a debate, just slogans from both sides, Tony must of said 'stop the boats' 3 or 4 times...amazing how close they are on policy.




Not another me too election
I didn't watch the debate, did they mention anything on small business or was it just one long election ad from either side?


----------



## Tink (11 August 2013)

Yes, I thought Abbott did well too.
He seemed alot more relaxed than Rudd, and definitely pulled him up on a few of his lies - making sure people realised that he was a part of the government for all the six years so its not a new way.
He delivered his speeches well 

Bring it home, Tony


----------



## explod (11 August 2013)

The result of the worm says Rudd won at 59% to Abbott 41%

As a Green, and therefore impartial, it was clear to me that Rudd won hands down.

So stand by my prediction of a month ago:

ALP 55% , LIB/C/P two party preferred 45%


----------



## sptrawler (11 August 2013)

Well Abbott must have done o.k. 
So-Cynical and IFocus are talking about Tony, and not talking up Rudd.


----------



## db94 (11 August 2013)

so they promised on 'no notes' and surprise surprise, Rudd takes notes during the debate. What a slimy arrogant person.

There is no way Rudd won that

Rudd now trying to take the moral high ground and promise gay marriage within 100 days. He gets more desperate as the days go by


----------



## sptrawler (11 August 2013)

explod said:


> The result of the worm says Rudd won at 59% to Abbott 41%
> 
> As a Green, and therefore impartial, it was clear to me that Rudd won hands down.
> 
> ...




Well you should get yourself down to the TAB and make a killing. lol


----------



## dutchie (11 August 2013)

I am biased.

I thought Abbott won this debate outright.

Neither of them answered some of the questions.

Abbott pulled up Rudd on a number of points, especially the $70 billion and GST lies.

Rudds answer regarding aged care was much better than Abbott's.

Abbott did much better than I thought he would. Quite prime ministerial, indeed.

Rudd looked nervous.


----------



## MrBurns (11 August 2013)

The worm is rubbish, Abbott won, Rudd was just a replay of every other time he opens his mouth, zero credibility.


----------



## noco (11 August 2013)

dutchie said:


> I am biased.
> 
> I thought Abbott won this debate outright.
> 
> ...




On the poll results Abbott won 68 to 32%.

Rudd also cheated by having to refer to notes which was against the rules of debate.


----------



## sptrawler (11 August 2013)

dutchie said:


> I am biased.
> 
> I thought Abbott won this debate outright.
> 
> ...




I think Rudd expected to have a lot more control over the tempo and direction of the debate.

When he couldn't talk over or control the direction, he panicked slightly.

The debate format definately assisted Abbotts presentation style, he may have been lucky.


----------



## drsmith (11 August 2013)

noco said:


> Rudd also cheated by having to refer to notes which was against the rules of debate.



But, is that rule is silly ? 

The Fairfax press asks that question.



> 7:47pm: Was Mr Rudd reading from notes?
> 
> Yes, say people inside the venue.
> 
> ...




http://www.theage.com.au/federal-po...ction-live-august-11-2013-20130811-2rpx1.html

Kevin Rudd has been exposed as a cheat.


----------



## sails (11 August 2013)

noco said:


> On the poll results Abbott won 68 to 32%.
> 
> Rudd also cheated by having to refer to notes which was against the rules of debate.




Yes channel 72 had Abbott as the  clear winner with around 18,000 votes. 

Very poor form for Rudd to front up with notes.


----------



## drsmith (11 August 2013)

explod said:


> As a Green, and therefore impartial, .............



A parasite will always cling to a willing host.

That's hardly impartial.


----------



## sails (11 August 2013)

drsmith said:


> But, is that rule is silly ?
> 
> The Fairfax press asks that question.
> 
> ...




Silly or not, it was still the rule and Rudd thumbed his nose at it.  The electorate expect leaders to been top of the issues.

Rules are there for fair debate - but trust Fairfax to try and make excuses for Rudd...


----------



## drsmith (11 August 2013)

Kevin Rudd's notes was noticed by the debate moderator, David Speers.



> On a controversial note, Mr Rudd was accused of breaching the rules by reading notes.
> 
> The debate's moderator, Sky News political editor David Speers, revealed following the debate that Mr Rudd had used the notes and that was not allowed.
> 
> ...




http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...lection-campaign/story-fnho52jo-1226695080195


----------



## Tink (11 August 2013)

Exactly right sails, they are the rules.

But I suppose if you tell as many lies as he does, he needs them in note form.
How can he remember them ?


----------



## sails (11 August 2013)

drsmith said:


> Kevin Rudd's notes was noticed by the debate moderator, David Speers.
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...lection-campaign/story-fnho52jo-1226695080195




I don't know why David Speers didn't pull him up on it...


----------



## sails (11 August 2013)

Tink said:


> Exactly right sails, they are the rules.
> 
> But I suppose if you tell as many lies as he does, he needs them in note form.
> How can he remember them ?




Yes Tink - we said the same thing here during the debate (not knowing then that notes were not allowed).  When someone continually lies it is easy for them to slip up so perhaps he was afraid of being caught out. 

I think Rudd was crazy to lie about the GST and the percentages of people resettled in Aus as Abbott quickly corrected him with the facts.  IMO,  it helped Abbott who had a chuckle at Rudd and then seemed more relaxed and confident.


----------



## Julia (11 August 2013)

noco said:


> On the poll results Abbott won 68 to 32%.
> 
> Rudd also cheated by having to refer to notes which was against the rules of debate.



What poll was that, noco?  Could you give us a link to it?



sails said:


> I don't know why David Speers didn't pull him up on it...



Exactly.  Not much point commenting on it after it's all over.  He was the facilitator.  It was up to him to call Rudd on it at the time, surely?

For me, I got what I expected from Rudd.  Glib stuff which will appeal to his devoted audience but I can't see winning over too many who are undecided.  I might be quite wrong here.

Tony Abbott:  I was so hoping for some real substance, some genuine feeling, something to persuade me that this is a PM who will advance Australia.  I didn't get that.  In the first quarter, Mr Abbott seemed nervous, hesitant.  He did much better in answering the questions than in making the introductory and final statements imo.

I thought a voter interviewed on News 24 summed it up well.  He said "I was looking for heart.  I didn't get it from either of them".  Agree with him entirely.  Australia deserves better.


----------



## noco (11 August 2013)

Tink said:


> Exactly right sails, they are the rules.
> 
> But I suppose if you tell as many lies as he does, he needs them in note form.
> How can he remember them ?




To be a good liar you must have a good memory so hence the reason Rudd had to have notes.

- - - Updated - - -



noco said:


> On the poll results Abbott won 68 to 32%.
> 
> Rudd also cheated by having to refer to notes which was against the rules of debate.




Julia, I noted the 68 to 32 % on Austar 601 while they were analysing the debate.


----------



## db94 (11 August 2013)

drsmith said:


> But, is that rule is silly ?
> 
> The Fairfax press asks that question.
> 
> ...




I can't wait to see how the daily telegraph purports his cheating in tomorrow's newspaper, it'll be we'll worth a laugh. Rudd will get slammed


----------



## sptrawler (11 August 2013)

Julia said:


> What poll was that, noco?  Could you give us a link to it?
> 
> 
> Exactly.  Not much point commenting on it after it's all over.  He was the facilitator.  It was up to him to call Rudd on it at the time, surely?
> ...




What we need is to get Pauline Hansen up there, she will give you some heart and passion.
But as was shown last time she ran, nobody really wants heart and passion, they just want to talk about it.


----------



## IFocus (11 August 2013)

sptrawler said:


> Well Abbott must have done o.k.
> So-Cynical and IFocus are talking about Tony, and not talking up Rudd.





Abbott will be PM and all the pain that comes with it................for any one who doesn't have a political voice in Canberra.


----------



## drsmith (11 August 2013)

sails said:


> I don't know why David Speers didn't pull him up on it...



Perhaps he didn't want to be in any way held responsible for deciding the election outcome then and there.

EDIT:

David Speers claims he didn't notice the notes during the debate itself.



> But Speers said he had not noticed during the showdown as he was focusing on his own job moderating and asking questions.




In the same article I also note,



> Footage of Mr Rudd shows he was holding a pile of papers and he appeared to repeatedly reference them while talking.




Perhaps all this explains his initial nervousness.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/sp...es-during-debate/story-fnho52jj-1226695152852


----------



## sptrawler (11 August 2013)

IFocus said:


> Abbott will be PM and all the pain that comes with it................for any one who doesn't have a political voice in Canberra.




Agree. But you and I are old enough to know, the longer you leave the pain, the more severe it is.


----------



## sails (11 August 2013)

drsmith said:


> Perhaps he didn't want to be in any way held responsible for deciding the election outcome then and there.
> 
> EDIT:
> 
> ...




David Speers would have been concentrating on his own performance and, to be fair,  he may not have actually seen the notes from where he was standing.  It was easy for us viewers to see Rudd's head bobbing up and down and it was most pronounced in his closing summary, IMO. 

Apparently both leaders have to agree to the rules prior to the debate so it seems pretty foolish of Rudd to break that agreement when he's waffling about trust.


----------



## Tink (11 August 2013)

Agree sails.

*Leaders go head-to-head in first debate*


> Prime Minister Kevin Rudd stood up for his party's record in government, saying Australia had weathered the global financial crisis better than almost any other nation, and that his party was better prepared to lead the nation during the end of the mining boom.
> 
> Mr Abbott pledged his party would provide stable government and get the budget under control after six years of Labor's 'waste and mismanagement', and leadership chaos.
> 
> ...



http://au.news.yahoo.com/election/a/-/article/18453916/leaders-debate-election-2013/


----------



## Zedd (12 August 2013)

Quick comment on Rudd's notes - Did anyone see him walk on stage with them? If he was allowed pen and paper what's to say he didn't scribble some notes while waiting for the debate to kick off? Certainly a recognized strategy in most debates and exams.

If he did take notes with him he did a pretty average job of preparing them, as the opening remarks weren't very well scripted, and he only had some figures to refer to.


----------



## Tightwad (12 August 2013)

Only saw a bit of it.. seemed Rudd had more detail in his answers.  I found some comments by Abbott to be cringeworthy, appealling to patriotism and slogans.


----------



## Zedd (12 August 2013)

Wow! Exceptional performance from Abbott versus my expectations. 

Rudd's constant comments on the GST were ridiculous; I imagine we'll see that dropped soon as he's not doing himself any favours. I don't think Abbott nailed the GST accusation though so it may keep cropping up. Rudd's nit-picking and talking over the host showed his arrogance come through.

Rudd's reply on productivity was great as was his answer on aged care, climate change and marriage equality.

Abbott's points were light on policy as usual, but I was impressed with his opening remarks on the economy. His closing statement was a bit scripted, but overall you can't argue with - "you should never be pessimistic about our great country", although the little dig of "almost nothing at all wrong with Australia now that wouldn't be improved by a change in government" was a bit cheeky. 

I felt Abbott offered less spin than Rudd tonight, and when someone tried to back him into a corner he answered responsibly without being drawn in to silly comments or commitments. Kudos.

Overall I felt Rudd had more substance on the night, but no different to what he's been saying for a while. I think it was a win for Rudd in terms of the debate, but this was a pitch for voters, rather than point scoring and the improvement in Abbott's demeanor was mind-blowing, from someone who has appeared scripted and stilted for the better part of the last 3 years, and I think he'll be taking away more votes from this debate then Rudd.

One of my biggest concerns regarding Abbott has been that he wasn't prepared to look down a camera and say something without using rehearsed lines, as has become his norm. He obviously had a number of lines memorised, but overall he has never looked more like a leader than tonight and my concerns regarding his ability to represent the nation on the world stage have been allayed. Still disturbed by the fact that his great plan for the nation - build the economy, get in the black, scrap the carbon tax, build new roads, turn back the boats - is the most populist piece of crap in the whole campaign.


----------



## Tink (12 August 2013)

Agree Zedd, I thought Abbott was exceptional, even though I am biased and have admitted, I dont like Rudd one iota. He has damaged this country enough with his spin and I found Abbott way more honest last night in his approach, even to the point of following the rules and coming in with no notes. 
The arrogance of Rudd, showing his true colours.

Abbott zoned in on exactly how I felt, that this government has destroyed the opportunity for all, especially the young ones, as there is no limits on what you can achieve in Australia. Its a lucky country and its a young country.

I thought he looked like a PM, was very confident in his approach, and determined to deliver for our country.
I also noticed Abbott kept saying, we, the Coalition and I.  

Rudd, on the otherhand had no confidence and how could he, when he is the master of destruction, watching our country go down the gurglar and only worrying about himself and his sons on the payroll.


----------



## noco (12 August 2013)

Zedd said:


> Wow! Exceptional performance from Abbott versus my expectations.
> 
> Rudd's constant comments on the GST were ridiculous; I imagine we'll see that dropped soon as he's not doing himself any favours. I don't think Abbott nailed the GST accusation though so it may keep cropping up. Rudd's nit-picking and talking over the host showed his arrogance come through.
> 
> ...




Lots of laugh Zedd, You are a comic.


----------



## Logique (12 August 2013)

Hi everyone.

The Worm - they must have got the Q&A balanced audience to run the worm. It dipped down before Abbott got a sentence out, whereas Rudd's waffle and blarney saw the worm go ballistic.

Notes - it's all about Trust, said Rudd, and then proceeded to read from pre-prepared notes, in breach of the agreed rules.

The final Handshake - I thought watch it Tony, we saw Rudd's 'handshake' on that little schoolkid at the weekend. The poor little tacker went '..ouch!'.


----------



## MrBurns (12 August 2013)

Logique said:


> Hi everyone.
> 
> The Worm - they must have got the Q&A balanced audience to run the worm. It dipped down before Abbott got a sentence out, whereas Rudd's waffle and blarney saw the worm go ballistic.
> 
> ...




Yes the worm was a joke they shouldn't use it at all, it's misleading, anyone who saw it knows that Abbott won the day.


----------



## chiff (12 August 2013)

After the hyena was heard during the debate Rudd should have made some bird calls.Hard to comment seriously on that debate.I had to channel surf during that tedium.
Liven up and loosen up!


----------



## explod (12 August 2013)

I watched the worm against the content of the speakers throughout and it was clear that Rudd won the debate hands down.

The bias is so great on here that most of you are blind to reality.

Some of the comments in the Age today are laughable and there were the results of five polls on the debate published and the descrepancies are are so great as to be a complete joke.

Trying to make the people think that Abbott is winning is clearly not going to work (witness the worm) and the continued ploy is only going to make the vote for the ALP stronger.  Things are tough out here for people and the glossy garbage of the Libs with no promise or content is just not going to crack it.

The real poll.  ALP 55%, Coalition 2 party preferred on both 45%

The Greens look like getting two more in the lower house with consolidation in the Senate.


----------



## dutchie (12 August 2013)

explod said:


> The bias is so great on here that most of you are blind to reality.
> 
> The real poll.  ALP 55%, Coalition 2 party preferred on both 45%




I'll bet you a $20 scratchie that the coalition win the election.


----------



## Tink (12 August 2013)

Channel 7, 9 and 10 said Abbott won
ABC said Rudd
So I wonder which one is true.

The polls are saying 52 to 48 in favour of the Coalition, we are just saying what is said, even on the ABC.
A few more weeks and we will all know the outcome.
I say the Coalition will win.


----------



## MrBurns (12 August 2013)

Coalition will win decisively and Abbott will be a good PM , pragmatic and just do what has to be done.


----------



## sptrawler (12 August 2013)

Zedd said:


> Wow! Exceptional performance from Abbott versus my expectations.
> 
> Rudd's constant comments on the GST were ridiculous; I imagine we'll see that dropped soon as he's not doing himself any favours. I don't think Abbott nailed the GST accusation though so it may keep cropping up. Rudd's nit-picking and talking over the host showed his arrogance come through.
> 
> ...




Good objective summary zed, well untill your bias broke through in the last paragraph.lol 
I must admit I thought the debate could possibly be Abbotts undoing. But as you say, he came over measured but not stilted.
Rudd I thought, got caught up in repeating the commercials currently running on t.v, rather than improvising.
Also I felt Rudd expected less from Abbott and this got him flustered, therefore he looked as though he was playing catchup footy and reacting to Abbott.
He really should have gone unscripted, wasted oppurtunity. IMO

IMO this round Rudd was blind sided and lost on points, the next round should be better as stratergies improve.


----------



## Gringotts Bank (12 August 2013)

Anyone who watched a station with a worm graphic was *manipulated.*

I was so stunned by what I saw with channel 90's worm that I switched to 72 and had a look at their worm.  They were exact opposites of each other.  Watching the two stations on split screen, you could see this as plain as day.

Channel 90's worm swung to '+' whenever Rudd spoke and swung to '-' whenever Abbot spoke.
Channel 72's worm did the *exact opposite*.

So...

What we have is *media big shots trying to manipulate their audiences* through use of the worm.  It was *so obvious* I can't imagine how anyone would not have noticed this.   If you watched either 7 or 9, you were manipulated.  Media heavy weights on 7 and 9 treated its viewers as complete idiots last night.  F##K them.  Manipulative pricks.


----------



## waza1960 (12 August 2013)

> What we have is media big shots trying to manipulate their audiences through use of the worm. It was so obvious I can't imagine how anyone would not have noticed this. If you watched either 7 or 9, you were manipulated. Media heavy weights on 7 and 9 treated its viewers as complete idiots last night. F##K them. Manipulative pricks.




 Maybe or it could be the fact that Ch9's worm is represented by hand picked swinging voters
  Whereas Ch7's worm was an app where anybody could contribute.


----------



## Julia (12 August 2013)

Tink said:


> Channel 7, 9 and 10 said Abbott won
> ABC said Rudd
> So I wonder which one is true.



It's a subjective evaluation, Tink.  Not actually measurable.  
As GB points out, the worm thing is just silly and demeans the whole debate.  Like the studio audience for Q & A, there will be built in bias even just according to the normal viewer demographic for those channels.



> The polls are saying 52 to 48 in favour of the Coalition, we are just saying what is said, even on the ABC.
> A few more weeks and we will all know the outcome.
> I say the Coalition will win.



More worryingly for Labor, their primary vote in today's Newspoll is down to 35%.

Explod, you're living in some sort of dreamworld.


----------



## Gringotts Bank (12 August 2013)

waza1960 said:


> Maybe or it could be the fact that Ch9's worm is represented by hand picked swinging voters
> Whereas Ch7's worm was an app where anybody could contribute.




The problem was that as soon as Abbott or Rudd opened his mouth, the worm would swing to the 70:30 or 30:70 position.  And it happened *every single time*.  There was no deliberation on the part of the audience as they considered the message being delivered, it would just happen predictably and automatically.   Channel 9 in one direction, channel 7 in the other.  It's just the big wigs' version of putting tape on the cricket bat.


----------



## Calliope (12 August 2013)

From _The Australian_ editorial;



> After a week of the campaign it is no surprise that they should play a cautious and, at times, defensive game. *None of that excuses, however, the refusal of either leader to acknowledge the historical challenge the next administration faces: to check and then reduce the size and cost of government*.




Any debate is worthless when neither party is prepared to tackle this issue. It is the overwhelming problem, and the election winner will have no choice but to tackle it head on like Qld premier Newman.


----------



## Julia (12 August 2013)

Agree.  It was also disappointing last night not to hear either of them make any comment about homelessness, entrenched poverty and long term unemployment.  It's as if both sides try to pretend these very real concerns don't exist.

One real plus was that the PM finally was called on his (and his party's) repetitive and quite untrue assertion that under the Pacific Solution "70% of the people on Nauru ended up in Australia anyway".  Good to see Tony Abbott jump on him here and correct the figure to the reality of 43%, the remainder either going back to where they came from or settled in other countries.

Mr Abbott let himself down on Aged Care where he didn't appear to have any sort of policy or thought at all.
Lot of potential consumers voting on this, Tony.


----------



## sydboy007 (12 August 2013)

Julia said:


> Mr Abbott let himself down on Aged Care where he didn't appear to have any sort of policy or thought at all.
> Lot of potential consumers voting on this, Tony.




It's a lose situation for both parties.  Any changes will cost the aged, so neither party is willing to do what's necessary for fear of alienating a very powerful, and increasing in size, voting block.

I cannot understand how people with million dollar properties complain about the cost of aged care, AND how they expect the rest of us to pay for them.


----------



## db94 (12 August 2013)

Gringotts Bank said:


> The problem was that as soon as Abbott or Rudd opened his mouth, the worm would swing to the 70:30 or 30:70 position.  And it happened *every single time*.  There was no deliberation on the part of the audience as they considered the message being delivered, it would just happen predictably and automatically.   Channel 9 in one direction, channel 7 in the other.  It's just the big wigs' version of putting tape on the cricket bat.




Couldn't agree more! i noticed this when watching some of the highlights yesterday and today.

Regardless of the worm I think Abbott won. He spoke without notes and actually sound truthful, although I must add when it came to the budget financing he lost


----------



## Julia (12 August 2013)

sydboy007 said:


> It's a lose situation for both parties.  Any changes will cost the aged, so neither party is willing to do what's necessary for fear of alienating a very powerful, and increasing in size, voting block.
> 
> I cannot understand how people with million dollar properties complain about the cost of aged care, AND how they expect the rest of us to pay for them.



Can you tell us what proportion of the population actually live in million dollar properties and yet receive a government pension?

How can a policy be developed which treats all PPORs equally when someone living in inner city Sydney may have a barely livable home for $1M compared to someone in a regional area who could own a mansion for the same amount?


----------



## chiff (13 August 2013)

sydboy007 said:


> It's a lose situation for both parties.  Any changes will cost the aged, so neither party is willing to do what's necessary for fear of alienating a very powerful, and increasing in size, voting block.
> 
> I cannot understand how people with million dollar properties complain about the cost of aged care, AND how they expect the rest of us to pay for them.




I can see what you are getting at OK.The family home is sacrosanct in our society,and what maybe required is some additional form of inheritance tax to make the system more equitable.
Many make windfall gains,others do not.But as you say,we are dealing with a powerful lobby that seems to have governments at their mercy.
A member of my family deals with assets etc when people go into nursing homes,and it is mainly the relatives or inheritors that are worried about the financial outcomes-not  those that are going into care.


----------



## Logique (13 August 2013)

noco said:


> ......I would like to see Abbott scrap his "DIRECT ACTION PLAN" on green house emmissions and defer his paid parental scheme until the economy picks up. In the meantime Abbott should utilize the existing paid parental scheme put in place by Labor.



Good thinking Noco.


----------



## Judd (13 August 2013)

chiff said:


> ....The family home is sacrosanct in our society............




Unless the boffins at Treasury get this up as floated by Ken Henry:

http://brookesnews.com/102604rent.html



> *Ken Henry's dangerous fallacy of taxing "imputed rent"*
> 
> Gerard Jackson
> BrookesNews.Com
> ...


----------



## MrBurns (13 August 2013)

Judd said:


> Unless the boffins at Treasury get this up as floated by Ken Henry:
> 
> http://brookesnews.com/102604rent.html




That proves beyond doubt that Ken Henry hasn't a clue.


----------



## Judd (13 August 2013)

MrBurns said:


> That proves beyond doubt that Ken Henry hasn't a clue.




To be fair to Dr Henry, I had heard rumours of this concept being bandied about in Government during the early 2000's.  Not much surprises me now in this regard.  Some 25 to 30 years ago when a GST was first mooted, the pundits said it would never happen.  And now?

Apologies for polluting a thread on politics with tax issues.  I'll cease this instant.


----------



## drsmith (13 August 2013)

The family home (live in residence) is of course purchased with post-tax income.

On matters of the election, it would seem that The Coalition has decided to do what it can to simply shut down Kevin Rudd's GST scare campaign.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...coalition-on-gst/story-fn9qr68y-1226696098066


----------



## MrBurns (13 August 2013)

The more I see of Rudd the worse he looks.

Considering he will be up front more often now Labors vote will only decline between now and Sept 7


----------



## bunyip (13 August 2013)

drsmith said:


> On matters of the election, it would seem that The Coalition has decided to do what it can to simply shut down Kevin Rudd's GST scare campaign.
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...coalition-on-gst/story-fn9qr68y-1226696098066




Scare campaigns are about all poor old Rudd has left in his election campaign.

He talks about a ‘new way’. He talks about forging necessary links with business to make Australia successful. 
All of which is pretty damned laughable to anyone who stops and thinks about it for just a few seconds.
Rudd’s ‘new way’ apparently includes continuing to let the boast people keep coming, simply diverting them to our close neighbor PNG from where they’ll just hop across the few km of Torres Strait into Queensland or any other Australian destination of their choosing.
That isn’t a ‘new way’, Kev – it’s just more of the same, packaged up to look a little different, another example of policy on the run that keeps costing us piles of money and fails to address the problem. 

Rudd’s new way of ‘forging necessary links with business’ include keeping business-stifling imposts such as the carbon tax and the mining tax. In his typically tricky style, he’s stated his intention to get rid of the carbon tax and replace it with an ETS. But it will still be a business-stifling tax, no matter what name he gives it.
That’s not a ‘new way’, Kevvie, it’s just more of the same dumb old policy that will continue to choke the geese that lay the golden eggs. It’s hardly the sort of thing that will inspire business investment, and hence job creation. 

When Julia Gillard took over from Rudd, she described the government as_ ‘A good government that’s lost its way’._
Well Gillard was certainly correct about the government having ‘lost its way’. But if it was a good government, as Gillard claimed, then it wouldn’t have lost its way in the first place, and secondly, she would have quickly made the changes necessary to steer the government back on track. But she didn’t, and Rudd is showing no sign of doing so either now that he’s back in the top job.

Rudd will quite likely lose the election because enough voters have woken up to him to realize that his ‘new way’ is pretty much just more of the same old debacle we’ve had for the last six years of Labor.
Except for his plans to raid our bank accounts – maybe that’s the ‘new way’ he was referring to!
Friend Kevvie appears to have run out of ideas – scare campaigns are about the only election strategy he’s got left to fall back on. I doubt if it will be enough to get him over the line in September.

Crikey, won’t the drinks will be flowing at my place if the bastard gets kicked out!


----------



## noco (13 August 2013)

Scrap the carbon tax says our Kevvie. We will go to an ETS a year earlier at $6.00 a tonne but what is he does not reveal is the ETS price will rise to $18 in three years and $38 per tonne in 6 years.

Another con job by Labor.


http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...ents/rudds_terminated_tax_will_actually_soar/


----------



## noco (13 August 2013)

Abbott wants to debate Rudd on Sky News at the Brisbane Broncos Leagues Club and let the people ask the questions.

Rudd has refused. Why is he so scared to face the people?



http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...eraldsun/comments/rudd_rejects_peoples_forum/


----------



## MrBurns (13 August 2013)

noco said:


> Abbott wants to debate Rudd on Sky News at the Brisbane Broncos Leagues Club and let the people ask the questions.
> 
> Rudd has refused. Why is he so scared to face the people?




Because he's weak and worthless..........but the best Labor has to offer


----------



## bunyip (13 August 2013)

noco said:


> Scrap the carbon tax says our Kevvie. We will go to an ETS a year earlier at $6.00 a tonne but what is he does not reveal is the ETS price will rise to $18 in three years and $38 per tonne in 6 years.
> 
> Another con job by Labor.
> 
> ...



Which of course would suit Rudd down to the ground, as his tax on carbon was always just a pure money grab to try and claw back some cash to compensate for all his crazy spending. It never had anything to do with his supposedly noble reasons for introducing it, such as saving the planet from climate change.



noco said:


> Abbott wants to debate Rudd on Sky News at the Brisbane Broncos Leagues Club and let the people ask the questions.
> 
> Rudd has refused. Why is he so scared to face the people?
> 
> ...



And just a week or two ago the old Kevvie was running around beating his chest as he loudly proclaimed that Abbot wasn' t game to debate him! LOL


----------



## Tink (14 August 2013)

Liberals to preference Labor over Greens



> Tony Abbott will today announce the Coalition will preference Labor above the Greens in every Lower House seat at the election.
> 
> The Opposition Leader's move is designed to rule out the chances of the September 7 election resulting in a minority government.



With the cuts Labor are doing to University, this will be interesting.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-08-14/liberal-party-to-preference-labor-over-greens/4885182


----------



## bunyip (14 August 2013)

Here’s some more info on the looming problem of illegal immigration through Torres Strait to Australia that will potentially result from Rudd’s policy of mass diversion to PNG of boat people seeking asylum in Australia.

The Torres Straight region is comprised of some 270 islands surrounded by fifty thousand square km of ocean. We currently have just two customs boats, two helicopters and thirteen staff to patrol this vast area.

Home Affairs minister, Jason Clare, in typical Labor style attempted to gloss over the potential problem by stating that there were only ten illegal crossings of Torres Strait last year, and ten so far this year. 
This is the sort of ‘head in the sand’ attitude we’d expect from Labor, and it highlights the inability of your average Labor politician to look past the end of his or her nose to see and plan ahead for problems that could arise as a result of their short-sighted policies.

ABC’s 7.30 program tonight will feature Labor’s immigration minister Tony Burke taking on shadow immigration minister Scott Morrison over the asylum seeker issue – it should be worth watching.

http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2013/s3824892.htm


----------



## MrBurns (14 August 2013)

This sex appeal "gaffe" as they call it is a prime example of media gone mad.
That was a harmless remark but everyone with an agenda has tried to turn it into something including the ABC

It wasn't a gaffe, it wasn't sexist, all this carry on in BS.


----------



## dutchie (14 August 2013)

MrBurns said:


> This sex appeal "gaffe" as they call it is a prime example of media gone mad.
> That was a harmless remark but everyone with an agenda has tried to turn it into something including the ABC
> 
> It wasn't a gaffe, it wasn't sexist, all this carry on in BS.




Absolutely right there Burnsie. What a crock. 

If that's the best the media and Labor can concentrate on then they have lost the plot (again).

Wong has been on TV and radio saying how Abbott is a sexist, yadda yadda yadda.

Most women wake up every day, and spend some of the day, trying to improve and display, their "sex appeal".

Most women would take it as a huge compliment if a man said they had "sex appeal".

The media itself see's the advantage in having female presenters who have "sex appeal".

What a joke beating this up.


----------



## MrBurns (14 August 2013)

dutchie said:


> Absolutely right there Burnsie. What a crock.
> 
> If that's the best the media and Labor can concentrate on then they have lost the plot (again).
> 
> ...




You can tell them what you think on here dutchie - 

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-08-14/hockey-defends-abbott-over-sex-appeal-remarks/4885442


----------



## chiff (14 August 2013)

What do you think would have been the reaction if Julia Gillard had said that a male candidate had sex appeal?
A very minor event by TA but the media will make something of it.


----------



## dutchie (14 August 2013)

Now here is a candidate with sex appeal

Before putting on her makeup in the morning:






After putting on her make up:






http://blogs.news.com.au/dailyteleg.../comments/two_more_elections_and_shes_a_teen/


Her campaign posters use the after makeup photos.


----------



## sptrawler (14 August 2013)

Here we go again, the SMH and AGE trying to make a mountain of a molehill.
I bet Rudd doesn't get caught up in it, he saw how well Gillards misogyny speach, went for her political career.

Penny getting involved is a good idea, shows she has what it takes.lol

This will end up another stupid Labor move, that allienates more voters. Evveryone is over it, is there any wonder they can't run a country, when they are running around after Abbott to catch him saying something, that they deem incorrect.

Absolute bloody losers, they should all be thrown out, wasting good oxygen.IMO:1zhelp:


----------



## wayneL (14 August 2013)

Wong is nothing but a bitter and twisted warthog, the epitome of what is wrong with socialist politics. Jayzuz this whole "you should be ashamed"/sorry industry politics is wearing very thin.


----------



## dutchie (14 August 2013)

The $250bn cost of Kevin Rudd: a tale of waste and spending

    by: HENRY ERGAS AND JUDITH SLOAN
    From: The Australian
    August 03, 2013 12:00AM


THE era of Kevin, interrupted by the Julia interlude, has been a roller-coaster ride. Having promised Howard-lite and fiscal conservatism, the excuse of the global financial crisis unleashed a period of rapid growth in government spending, successive budget deficits and mounting public debt under Kevin Rudd's guidance.

Now, with Rudd's return, Labor has launched a charm offensive that seeks to whitewash the past: it is as if aliens from Mars, fortunately departed, had been in charge. But the damage of that era cannot be wiped out so easily.

And that damage is steep indeed: in the 935 days between becoming prime minister on December 3, 2007, and Julia Gillard's coup of June 24, 2010, Rudd left Australians with at least $153 billion in unfunded fiscal burdens while wasting $100bn of the community's resources.

The time has come to count those costs, and to assess their implications for the man who would be king.

By far the most visible component of the costs was the shift from a budget cash surplus, averaging 0.9 per cent of gross domestic product during the Howard years to a cash deficit that exceeded 4 per cent of GDP in 2010. Associated with a succession of economic stimulus measures, that deterioration proved difficult to reverse, with the commonwealth's balance sheet shifting from $44.8bn in net assets when Rudd took office to $161.6bn in net debt this year.
Digital Pass $1 for first 28 Days

Clearly, part of that $206bn deterioration in Australia's fiscal position reflected the global financial crisis. After all, the US business cycle peaked the month Rudd came into office, with an initially moderate downturn intensifying into a major international recession in the second and third quarters of 2008, as the American slowdown spread to Europe.

The bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers on September 15, 2008, then highlighted the severity of the problems in financial markets, plunging those markets into turmoil and precipitating three quarters in which the G7 economies' GDP shrank by nearly 7 per cent.

The risks these developments posed to Australia were obvious. But it was also obvious that we were relatively well-placed to weather the storm: the banking system was fundamentally sound; labour market flexibility had not yet been undermined by the Fair Work Act; and China seemed likely to ensure its rapid growth continued, fuelling strong demand for our resource exports.

Moreover, a flexible exchange rate, the very considerable scope for monetary easing provided by then high real interest rates and the strength of the fiscal position Rudd had inherited meant that should conditions deteriorate, there was ample capacity to respond.

All that ought to have encouraged an approach that was cautious and incremental, relaxing fiscal policy enough to prevent the economy from falling below "stall speed" while retaining the ability to adjust as circumstances changed.

In the event, the response was anything but careful and deliberate. Instead, Rudd unleashed a torrent of public spending that took federal outlays per man, woman and child from $12,658 in 2007-08 to $15,609 in 2010-11, with an 11.7 per cent rise in real per capita terms in 2008-09 alone.

That surge was extraordinary by any standard: spending growth had not seen double digits since Gough Whitlam's 1975-76 budget; and in absolute terms, Rudd's per-capita increases in commonwealth outlays were almost three times Whitlam's. But Rudd justified them by reference to Treasury forecasts that pointed to a collapse in output that was sudden, severe and sustained.

Nowhere was Treasury's pessimism more stark than in the May 2009 budget, for which Treasury estimated that even factoring in Rudd's stimulus packages, the unemployment rate would surge from 5.5 per cent in mid-2009 to 8.5 per cent by late 2010, with no improvement in unemployment until mid-2011.

Yet those estimates always seemed implausible: they ignored the lessons of the 1997 Asian financial crisis and the 2001 "tech wreck", which had shown the efficacy of the exchange rate and of interest-rate cuts as shock absorbers for the Australian economy; and they were not easily reconciled with well-specified macro-economic models.

No surprise, then, that they soon proved wildly inaccurate, with the unemployment rate increasing by less than one-tenth of Treasury's forecast.

A prudent, conservative government would have pushed back on Treasury's estimates, much as John Howard and Peter Costello resisted alarmist calls for greater fiscal stimulus in 1997 and in 2001. But Rudd was neither prudent nor conservative. Lacking any understanding of economic policy and given to delusions of grandeur, he proclaimed the end of "extreme capitalism" and approvingly quoted Nicolas Sarkozy's "Le laissez-faire, c'est fini".

Social democracy, he said, would have to "save capitalism from itself"; but salvation never comes cheap, particularly when Rudd is the saviour.

Labor therefore locked in outlays that were not reversed even when the economy returned to trend growth. And that return was speedy indeed. On the back of a 30 per cent fall in the exchange rate - the largest in our post-war history - and a 4.25 percentage point cut in interest rates, growth was at trend by December 2009, while by June 2010 the resource boom had pushed the economy to the limits of its capacity.

Yet the stimulus packages rolled relentlessly on, with the Gillard government merely replacing Rudd's programs by new expenditures as they expired. The result was deficits that could not possibly be justified by the need to protect jobs and avoid recession.

Calculating the precise extent of the excess outlays is inherently complex and controversial. What is clear, however, is that budget outcomes under Labor departed from the historical pattern. In the past, faster growth translated relatively rapidly into improvements in the commonwealth's fiscal position, as governments moved to plug budget holes. But under Labor the deficits continued long after growth resumed.

The difference between those deficits and the budget outcomes that would have occurred had the historical relationship between economic growth and budget outcomes persisted provides a first indicator of the excess spending. For the period to 2011-12, where the momentum in public spending came from decisions that were Rudd's, that difference amounts to $157bn.

An alternative estimate can be derived from Treasury's review of Australia's long-run budget position. To assess that position, Treasury decomposes the change in actual budget outcomes into a component due to cyclical fluctuations in economic activity and a structural component that reflects changes in taxing and spending.

Even assuming all the stimulus spending was cyclical, Treasury's estimates imply that by 2011-12 the structural deterioration under Labor cumulated to 9 per cent of GDP, equivalent to $124bn.

Finally, a third estimate can be derived by comparing Australia's post-GFC fiscal performance with that of other advanced economies. This requires calculating a statistical relationship between national budget outcomes, on the one hand, and economic activity and public debt on the other.

So as not to bias the results against Rudd, the European economies, which have had little choice but to cut back drastically on budget deficits, should be excluded; applying the resulting relationship to Australian data then shows what our budget outcomes would have been had Labor been no more fiscally restrictive than governments in countries such as the US and Canada.

Here, too, the conclusions are damning. Given our growth rate and the terms of trade windfall, Labor's cumulated deficits to 2011-12 should have been $98bn smaller than they were.

In short, out of accumulated budget deficits of $172.3bn attributable to Rudd, between $98bn and $157bn reflected profligacy rather than adverse circumstances.

That amount will eventually need to be repaid through additional taxes. Given that raising each dollar in taxes causes inefficiencies that reduce taxpayers' incomes by an additional 20c to 30c, even the smallest of those estimates translates into a per capita burden of $5294, while the larger amounts to $8482.

Yet that is merely part of the first Rudd government's economic legacy. For it was not only the shortfall between spending and taxing that was an issue; it was also the quality of the spending and of the new taxes themselves.

Doubtless, opinions will differ on the merits of individual outlays, but it is beyond dispute that there was far-reaching waste in programs such as school halls and pink batts, with the latter also involving the tragic loss of young lives.

Nor is there much argument that the dismantling of Howard's Pacific Solution, and Labor's subsequent reluctance to address the surge in boat arrivals, has left a trail of high costs, to which must again be added unnecessary deaths.

And the fiasco associated with the carbon tax, which damaged Australia's competitiveness and led Labor to sprinkle around compensation payments it could not afford and can no longer justify, has been all but admitted by the government itself.

To those errors, Rudd added the mistake of thundering into areas that traditionally have been the preserve of the states. Childcare is a striking case in point, where the net effect of imposing an expensive national regulatory framework and upping the subsidies paid to parents using formal childcare centres has been an explosion of commonwealth spending.

But while outlays have risen threefold and are expected to hit $7bn in 2016-17, use of childcare services has increased only 20 per cent to 25 per cent. Instead of delivering added services, the higher spending has been captured by childcare workers in wage increases and frittered away in ever greater administration and compliance costs.

As a result, childcare fees are rising by more than 10 per cent annually, while daily fees of more than $100 are now common. Far from increasing labour-force participation, the employment rate of mothers with children under the age of one has actually fallen, going from 25 per cent in the 2006 census to 24 per cent in the 2011 census.

That outcome, in which taxpayers spend a lot but receive little in return, has been paradigmatic of public policy under Rudd. On a plausible estimate, the overall waste thus caused amounts to between $74bn and $88bn. But even that number is hardly comprehensive, as it excludes spending that is off-budget. And no program looms larger in that respect than Rudd's brainchild, the National Broadband Network, with its commitment to deploy fibre optic connections to 93 per cent of the population.

The government's chronic lack of transparency makes assessing NBN Co's economics difficult, as it presumably is intended to do. But a careful analysis issued this week by Australia's leading telecommunications analyst, Ian Martin of investment bank CIMB, details the problems plaguing the NBN's rollout.

Martin emphasises NBN Co's politically driven decision to spread deployment thinly, with the resulting "wide dispersal of resources" and "difficulty with achieving scale" greatly increasing the venture's costs and compounding its delays.

No less importantly, however, Martin provides the data needed to calculate the pain those inefficiencies will inflict on consumers and taxpayers.

That pain is anything but trivial: Martin's results imply that at NBN Co's 7 per cent discount rate, the losses the NBN is likely to incur to 2027 have climbed to more than $30bn, a $6bn increase since NBN Co's most recent corporate plan.

But Rudd not only mortgaged the future with unfunded costs and obligations; he also slashed the economy's capacity to bear the burdens he was imposing. For even as Treasury was forecasting a dramatic increase in unemployment, the Rudd government was introducing the Fair Work Act, reducing the labour market's ability to absorb the shocks to which a commodity exporter such as Australia inevitably is exposed.

The FWA's effects, since it became fully operational on July 1, 2010, are strikingly visible: despite the past 15 quarters of economic growth, and a once-in-a-century investment boom, the unemployment rate appears to be stuck at about one percentage point above its level under WorkChoices.

And that figure, which yesterday's increased unemployment forecast merely confirms, is an underestimate, as it does not explicitly account for the 0.5 percentage point decline in the participation rate that cannot be explained by the ageing of the population, or for the rising rate of underemployment - that is, the growing number of workers unable to work as many hours as they would want.

The social toll of unemployment that is persistently 1 per cent to 1.5 per cent higher than it has to be is as severe as it is difficult to express in monetary terms. What can be said, however, is that cumulated across the past three years, forcing 1.25 per cent of the labour force into needless unemployment reduces national income by $18.2bn.

But higher unemployment, and the dashed hopes and lost income that go with it, are not the only damage caused by FWA. Rather, the number of claims for unfair dismissal and employment termination has nearly doubled since the FWA came into operation. And so has the incidence of industrial disputes and the extent of the ugly violence that accompanies them.

According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics, in 2007 there were 135 disputes that resulted in a strike, with 49,700 working days lost. By this year the number of disputes had reached 218 with 289,500 working days lost. As Macquarie University's Paul Gollan concludes, the FWA "is achieving neither a harmonious nor a conflict-free industrial relations environment. This is despite the fact that the majority of workplaces are not unionised and only 13 per cent of the workforce in the private sector belong in a union".

At least $120bn in needlessly accumulated debt; about $100bn in waste from poor quality spending and taxing; $30bn in losses from the NBN alone; and an industrial relations system that reduces national income by at least $6bn a year and creates an adversarial climate in the workplace: all that makes Rudd the costliest prime minister in Australian history.

But that he should have proven so is fundamentally unsurprising. For like bad art, poor policy does not happen by accident. On the contrary, it is born of choice: in this case, the choice of a political outlook in which managing the optics of announcements and pandering to the public pressure of the day invariably counts for far more than slow, steady policy formulation based on consultation and a full understanding of the facts.

It is ironic that the cabinet handbook, which supposedly guides government decision-making, explicitly notes that "the principle of collective responsibility can only operate if all members of the cabinet are well informed and well advised: good policy requires informed decisions". But as the resource super-profits tax saga showed, no Australian prime minister has displayed less interest in implementing that guidance than has Rudd.

Putting a dollar value on that disdain for sensible decision-making is impossible. But ask most businesspeople about their experience since 2007 and they will simply shake their heads. Many are struggling with the change to monthly payment of company taxation, lobbed on them without any consultation, and myriad other twists and turns in regulation and taxation that have been sprung without even the semblance of proper process. As Reserve Bank governor Glenn Stevens noted last week, the costs of loss of confidence in the operation of government are large and potentially long-lasting.

Yet the frightening fact is that there is no sign whatsoever that Rudd has learned from the past five years' experience.

Rather, in just 37 days since returning to office, spending commitments have rained like confetti, ranging from greater funding for schools to the PNG Solution, and encompassing everything from a "jobs program" for Tasmania to stadium upgrades in Townsville, a "transformational plan" for the Cairns CBD, a beef industry exhibition in Rockhampton and more money to promote live music performances. Yesterday's economic statement makes the consequences clear: the increase in spending next year is the greatest since Rudd had his hand on the levers in 2008-09.

Tax hikes have proliferated too, including the poorly conceived and even more poorly implemented changes to the fringe benefits tax, the increase in tobacco excise and a levy on bank deposits. But, even so, the budget deficit has blown out and net debt with it: so much for fiscal consolidation, Rudd-style.

That then is Rudd: uninterested in economics, contemptuous of process, the most recent incarnation of "whatever it takes" man in a party tainted by corruption and cronyism. Yes, the Rudd circus may rise to new heights; but the costs it inflicts will only rise with it.



Judith Sloan is Contributing Economics Editor at The Australian. She holds degrees from the University of Melbourne and the London School of Economics. She has held a number of government appointments, including Commissioner of the Productivity Commission; Commissioner of the Australian Fair Pay Commission; and Deputy Chairman of the Australian Broadcasting Corporation.

Henry Ergas is Senior Economic Adviser, Deloitte, and inaugural Professor of Infrastructure Economics at the University of Wollongong’s SMART Infrastructure Facility. He headed the Secretary-General’s Task Force on Structural Adjustment at the OECD. He has taught at the Ã‰cole nationale de la statistique et de l'administration Ã©conomique in Paris and the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard. He is a lay member of the New Zealand High Court.


----------



## sails (14 August 2013)

Now Rudd being rude to a reporter before trying to dig himself out of it (bold is mine):



> Instead of answering journalist Latika Bourke's serious question about *why his flagging leadership is 'in crisis'*, the Labour leader gazed up and down at her clothing before giving a bizarre response.
> 
> *He said: 'Well, that's a point of language which you have used which is dramatically consistent with the dress which you have chosen today.'*
> 
> 'It's a great tie, it's a nice hat, I like it a lot,' he quickly added.






From the UK Dailymail: Australian PM Kevin Rudd in sexism row after critiquing journalist's dress sense


----------



## bunyip (14 August 2013)

dutchie said:


> Wong has been on TV and radio saying how Abbott is a sexist, yadda yadda yadda.
> 
> Most women would take it as a huge compliment if a man said they had "sex appeal".




Not Penny Wong – she’d only feel complimented if a *woman* told her she had sex appeal!


----------



## sptrawler (14 August 2013)

sptrawler said:


> Here we go again, the SMH and AGE trying to make a mountain of a molehill.
> I bet Rudd doesn't get caught up in it, he saw how well Gillards misogyny speach, went for her political career.
> 
> Penny getting involved is a good idea, shows she has what it takes.lol
> ...




Well I was wrong Rudd has jumped on the band wagon.lol

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/fed...-over-sex-appeal-comments-20130814-2rv7n.html

I thought he would have been smarter than that, it will end up another shot in the foot moment for Labor.


----------



## pixel (14 August 2013)

dutchie said:


> Most women would take it as a huge compliment if a man said they had "sex appeal".




*If it's someone close, maybe. But their would-be Boss?*
I don't think so...

That aside, Tony should be aware of sensitivities in that area.
It might have been a deliberate gaffe to get some publicity - possibly in a bizarre attempt to sway people who consider the ensuing criticism as "PC gone mad". I would however find it more likely that people thinking that way would already be favouring him.
If it was a lapse of concentration, kind of "let's say something funny", I'd be even more worried about a future PM dropping his guard at some meeting at International level, where "Saving Face" is of utmost importance. At that level, Malcolm T would present a far more civilised Australia.

e.g. Dr Merkel may have been flustered by KRudd's "specificity", but she'd be utterly unimpressed by MistaRabbit's "jokes".


----------



## tech/a (14 August 2013)

sptrawler said:


> Well I was wrong Rudd has jumped on the band wagon.lol
> 
> http://www.canberratimes.com.au/fed...-over-sex-appeal-comments-20130814-2rv7n.html
> 
> I thought he would have been smarter than that, it will end up another shot in the foot moment for Labor.




Your kidding me.
Why the hell is this even getting reported!

Small minded stupidity.
The troops in Afghanistan are being issued orders from these peanuts.

Hair flicking/lemon sucking/buffoon.
Toughen up blouses.


----------



## Calliope (14 August 2013)

pixel said:


> If it was a lapse of concentration, kind of "let's say something funny", I'd be even more worried about a future PM dropping his guard at some meeting at International level, where "Saving Face" is of utmost importance.




I suppose you mean this sort of thing? Not a "future PM" but an actual one.


The Prime Minister of Australia (Kevin Rudd) famously described the behaviour of the Chinese Delegation to the 2009 Copenhagen World Climate Summit, using this explicit term.(ratf--k) The published quote from a recorded conversation is in an essay written by journalist, biographer and leading left-wing intellectual David Marr, 'Power Trip: The Political Journey of Kevin Rudd'.* The quote was "Those Chinese f---ers are trying to ratf--- us," Rudd told journalists and aides.*Wikipedia


----------



## drsmith (14 August 2013)

This is the kind of sex appeal I like from the Coalition.



> TONY Abbott says the Liberal Party will put the Greens last in every seat because of the party's "fringe economic policies" and its belief in "open borders".




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...eens-preferences/story-fn9qr68y-1226696768473


----------



## drsmith (14 August 2013)

dutchie said:


> Now here is a candidate with sex appeal
> 
> Before putting on her makeup in the morning:
> 
> ...



Someone's finally convinced her to have something other than that rats nest she often has on top of her head.

What happens though if she changes her facial expression ?


----------



## noco (14 August 2013)

tech/a said:


> Your kidding me.
> Why the hell is this even getting reported!
> 
> Small minded stupidity.
> ...





I would have been extremely disappointed if our HARE BRAIN  Prime Minister had not jumped on the band wagon over Abbotts remark of the Candidate for Lindsay Fiona Scott. 

That just goes to show the mentality of Rudd, Carr and Wong.

Did anyone hear of a complaint from Fiona Scott? If she was offended then it is up to her to make such a complaint.

What a BEAT UP by Rudd and the media. Anything to discredit Abbott. Labor is so desperate to come out with this crap.



http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...x-appeal-comment/story-fn9qr68y-1226696802846


----------



## wayneL (14 August 2013)

IIRC, Tammy Fraser remarked on Bob Hawkes purported sex appeal... or words to that effect.

Not a peep from the pinks.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (14 August 2013)

noco said:


> I would have been extremely disappointed if our HARE BRAIN  Prime Minister had not jumped on the band wagon over Abbotts remark of the Candidate for Lindsay Fiona Scott.
> 
> That just goes to show the mentality of Rudd, Carr and Wong.
> 
> ...






wayneL said:


> IIRC, Tammy Fraser remarked on Bob Hawkes purported sex appeal... or words to that effect.
> 
> Not a peep from the pinks.




In 2010 The ALP Caucus voted Kate Ellis , Sexiest MP in Parliament.

http://m.heraldsun.com.au/news/kate-ellis-sexiest-mp/story-e6frf7jo-1111117914866

Rudd was probably at Church or in Scores Nightclub when the vote was taken.

gg


----------



## sptrawler (14 August 2013)

Touche, GG. 
Shame the crappy press is so hell bent on bagging Abbott, that it wipes it's memory of Rudds indescretions.
Also shame on Rudd, being so self centred, that he forgets his past.lol

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/ke...club/story-e6frewt0-1111114215510#mm-breached

As the old saying goes, 'best you clean up your own backyard, before commenting on someone elses'.

Like I said it will end up a blow your own foot off occassion for Labor.

I just didn't think Rudd would be dumb enough to stick his oar in, obviously I give him too much credit.


----------



## AAA (14 August 2013)

sptrawler said:


> Touche, GG, shame the crappy press is so hell bent on bagging Abbott, that it wipes it's memory of Rudds indescretions.
> Also shame on Rudd, being so self centred, that he forgets his past.lol
> 
> http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/ke...club/story-e6frewt0-1111114215510#mm-breached




I read Rudd saying that an employer could get into serious strife saying things like that. 

I wonder what strife an employer could get in for bullying. Remember that RAAF attendant that you reduced to tears, Rudd - You two faced turd.


----------



## sptrawler (14 August 2013)

AAA said:


> I read Rudd saying that an employer could get into serious strife saying things like that.
> 
> I wonder what strife an employer could get in for bullying. Remember that RAAF attendant that you reduced to tears, Rudd - You two faced turd.




Yep, really dumb politics by Rudd.

Watch it backfire.


----------



## noco (14 August 2013)

sptrawler said:


> Yep, really dumb politics by Rudd.
> 
> Watch it backfire.




That is the mentality of Rudd.........What ever he says or does, he always overlooks the repercussions.


----------



## noco (14 August 2013)

Wong has been branded the $106 billion dollar woman.

How could Labor possibly have managed such discrepancies year after year.


http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...-the-106bn-woman/story-e6frg7bo-1226696601848


----------



## drsmith (14 August 2013)

sptrawler said:


> Yep, really dumb politics by Rudd.
> 
> Watch it backfire.



I think Tony Abbott and the Coalition are baiting Labor with this stuff. 



> CHRISTOPHER PYNE: And Kevin Rudd is in no position to lecture anybody; anyone who wants to watch his expletive laden video would get a very idea of how he treats his staff.




http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2013/s3825667.htm

As for Kate Ellis and sexy politicians, she's not as sexy as Natasha Stott Degoodsort was in her day, in my view.


----------



## noco (15 August 2013)

drsmith said:


> I think Tony Abbott and the Coalition are baiting Labor with this stuff.
> 
> 
> 
> ...





I have been watching ABC this morning and they have flogged this "SEX APPEAL" comment by Abbott to the death.

Andrew Bolt exposes some past history of Kevin Rudd.


http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...their-own-malice/story-fnj45fvb-1226697357646


----------



## db94 (15 August 2013)

Will someone please explain to me why saying a woman has sex appeal is wrong? isnt that a compliment? 

Feminists surely wont turn on him, they're all about embracing their sexualities. It sure as hell isnt sexist and im sick of a politically correct society


----------



## bunyip (15 August 2013)

drsmith said:


> Someone's finally convinced her to have something other than that rats nest she often has on top of her head.
> 
> What happens though if she changes her facial expression ?




Reminds me of that old poem.....

Little smears of powder
Little dobs of paint
Make some women look like
What they surely ain’t


----------



## Tink (15 August 2013)

Yes, thats all they seem to zone in on, rubbish, nothing to do with how they have put this country in $250 billion debt with this buffoon on the wheel.
We have already seen this lot in action and its not pretty. 

Here we go again down the same road, shows they dont learn from their past - same old choices all over again.
They saw way too much confidence in Abbott at the debate, which he won going by the ABC polls. 

Good on Abbott for saying about preferences and telling Rudd to step to the plate and think of the country first.


----------



## noco (15 August 2013)

db94 said:


> Will someone please explain to me why saying a woman has sex appeal is wrong? isnt that a compliment?
> 
> Feminists surely wont turn on him, they're all about embracing their sexualities. It sure as hell isnt sexist and im sick of a politically correct society




The female (Fiona Scott) who is at the centre of attraction is not complaining, so what is the big deal?

The big deal is to discredit Tony Abbott where ever possible.

Kevin Rudd says he is over negativity until it comes to smearing Tony Abbott. It is all about Votes, votes and more votes. Rudd is so desperate he will do and say anything for votes.


----------



## Calliope (15 August 2013)

db94 said:


> Will someone please explain to me why saying a woman has sex appeal is wrong? isnt that a compliment?
> 
> *Feminists surely wont turn on him, they're all about embracing their sexualities*. It sure as hell isnt sexist and im sick of a politically correct society




Not all of them. But there is no doubt former Greens leader Bob Brown didn't have sex appeal for some.


----------



## dutchie (15 August 2013)

Abbott is going to cut, cut, cut

Rudd will continue to waste, waste, waste

Which will be best for our economy/finances?


----------



## drsmith (15 August 2013)

Sportsbet now has the Coalition at $1.12 and Labor at $6.00.

Perhaps that's why the policy promises from Labor are now getting a little far fetched.



> KEVIN Rudd has pledged to create a special economic zone in the Northern Territory, with a company tax rate up to a third lower than elsewhere in Australia.






> Mr Rudd failed to provide costings for the pledge, which would not be delivered until 2018.




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...ry-economic-zone/story-fn9qr68y-1226697739374


----------



## Bushman (15 August 2013)

noco said:


> I have been watching ABC this morning and they have flogged this "SEX APPEAL" comment by Abbott to the death.
> 
> Andrew Bolt exposes some past history of Kevin Rudd.
> 
> ...




Lol, KRudd is the guy that was busted going to the strippers in New York City, was he not? 

It would be sexist if Abbott was discriminating against her because she was a woman. To say she has 'sex appeal', while a bit odd and cringe worthy, isn't sexist or discriminatory. He probably won't say it again.  

The good news is the KRudd surge in the polls was just a 'sugar rush'. Abbott now has his measure. I was a bit worried that KRudd's presidential-style campaign might work. But he is not presidential; he is uncle psycho!  

Good bye and good riddance to this rabble. I cannot wait for election day ... :


----------



## sptrawler (15 August 2013)

drsmith said:


> Sportsbet now has the Coalition at $1.12 and Labor at $6.00.
> 
> Perhaps that's why the policy promises from Labor are now getting a little far fetched.
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...ry-economic-zone/story-fn9qr68y-1226697739374




It wouldn't be Rudd trying the old me too politics, in response to Abbotts developing the North, would it?

Is there any wonder the coalition is playing its cards close to the chest.

Just another backflip by Labor, six months ago they were slagging off at Abbott about the idea. 
Labor still the goon show of old. 
Same crap, different day.


----------



## noco (15 August 2013)

sptrawler said:


> It wouldn't be Rudd trying the old me too politics, in response to Abbotts developing the North, would it?
> 
> Is there any wonder the coalition is playing its cards close to the chest.
> 
> ...




You just took the words right out of mouth...... I thought exactly the same thing........So Rudd must now consider Abbott has a good idea which is gaining approval of the north....

What a cad.


----------



## moXJO (15 August 2013)

sptrawler said:


> It wouldn't be Rudd trying the old me too politics, in response to Abbotts developing the North, would it?
> 
> Is there any wonder the coalition is playing its cards close to the chest.
> 
> ...




Proves the Labor party is nothing but a wank. They stole a lot of lib policies in 2007 in a me too grab and then proceeded to stuff them up in grand fashion. 
Stealing the upper end taxation zone has just gone beyond desperate. I'm sure a lot of the labor supporters were poo pooing the idea and now we have yet another Rudd backflip and to top it off he steals another lib idea. No wonder libs didn't want to release anything too early.
Seriously does Rudd want to turn the labor party into the liberal party, because they are looking very similar.


Just a special mention to the fairfax journalists who bagged out the idea to no end in support of labor. Time to backflip yet again you pack of leftie scum.


----------



## drsmith (16 August 2013)

Oh Dear!

The gamble that started as a happy marriage to then be followed by a lovers tiff. 

Now the gloves between Andrew Wilkie and Labor are well and truly off.

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?...x720/1185780_711345665545984_2146502518_n.jpg


----------



## Julia (16 August 2013)

Most of us will have received a letter in the mail offering registration of postal votes and including a reply paid envelope.  The format replicates that of the AEC.  What is not made clear, however, is that if you fill out the form with all the obvious personal info, it first goes to the political party who mailed it out to you.  Apparently both sides are doing this.  It's not illegal, but imo it's pretty misleading.


----------



## Calliope (16 August 2013)

*Schadenfreude* 



> PETER Beattie is facing a shock annihilation in his Queensland marginal seat battle, according to a new poll.
> 
> The former Queensland premier has secured a two-party preferred vote of only 40 per cent to 60 per cent against the Liberal National Party MP for Forde, Bert Van Manen.
> 
> ...




http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/sp...-of-the-campaign/story-fnho52jj-1226698151691


----------



## drsmith (16 August 2013)

Calliope said:


> *Schadenfreude*



Labor's election campaign is now listing badly and the punters know it.

The Coalition is now $1.11 on Sportsbet and Labor has blown out to $6.00.

The Betfair graphic below also shows where the money is going.


----------



## Calliope (16 August 2013)

Just in case you can't get the above heraldsun link, you won't want to miss this bit. 



> The news about Mr Beattie comes as Prime Minister Kevin Rudd has said he is the underdog in this election campaign - while Opposition Leader Tony Abbott earlier today said the vote could go either way.
> 
> *Mr Rudd's admission came on a visit to Perth, where he was heckled by a man shouting "you're a f...ing idiot."*
> 
> ...


----------



## drsmith (16 August 2013)

Calliope said:


> Just in case you can't get the above heraldsun link, you won't want to miss this bit.



This little piece in one of the comments I found interesting,



> RUDD TAKES A NANDO'S CHIP FROM ABBOTT VOTER
> 
> Jessica Marszalek and Gemma Jones
> 
> ...



If he keeps doing that, he might find himself wearing the whole meal.


----------



## moXJO (16 August 2013)

drsmith said:


> If he keeps doing that, he might find himself wearing the whole meal.




Or a 'suppository of wisdom' in chip form.


----------



## drsmith (16 August 2013)

moXJO said:


> Or a 'suppository of wisdom' in chip form.



In Kev's case the application would be at the right end as it would stem the flow of what's been coming out, even if only very briefly.


----------



## moXJO (16 August 2013)

drsmith said:


> In Kev's case the application would be at the right end as it would stem the flow of what's been coming out, even if only very briefly.




I don't think they make chips that big


----------



## drsmith (16 August 2013)

We know the Libs are preferencing the Greens last, but it will come as no surprise that Labor is still doing deals with the devil.



> The ABC's Rebecca Carmody reports that the WA Labor Party has done a preference swap with the Greens that it's hoping will sway the results in a number of marginal seats.
> 
> Two days ago, Tony Abbott challenged Kevin Rudd to follow his lead and put the Greens last in every seat, but Labor has decided to ignore the challenge.
> 
> ...




http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-08-16/election-live---campaign-day-12/4891004


----------



## Julia (16 August 2013)

Another of Labor's lies exposed:


> http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...ion-have-a-70b-black-hole-20130805-2r8po.html




Labor have been tossing around the figure of the Coalition's "$70 billion black hole" for months now.
The above (and I've seen the same on ABC's fact checker) shows it just another myth.
Shame, Labor.


----------



## noco (17 August 2013)

This ex Premier of Queensland, this cheshire cat, this wrecker of the Queensland economy has the audacity to blame Anna Bligh for the economic mess he left behind, not that Anna Bligh made it any better.

Beattie must think Queenslanders have short memories. Well, Mr Beattie I have got news for you and the current news is not looking too good.


http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...ecked-queensland/story-fnihsr9v-1226698747537


----------



## Calliope (17 August 2013)

> Mr Rudd described Mr Katter as "unique", adding: "You've got to understand Queensland to understand Bob's uniqueness.
> 
> *"Bob, for reasons which many of you may find odd, has been a longstanding friend of mine*."




Nothing odd about that. They are both f***ing idiots.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...rs-rural-chances/story-fn9qr68y-1226698747654


----------



## sptrawler (17 August 2013)

Apparently absentee voting opens on Tuesday, I will be off down there, to get it over and done with.
I wonder if there will be a record number of people voting early, it wouldn't suprise me.

They might have the result before election day.lol


----------



## dutchie (17 August 2013)

explod said:


> The real poll.  ALP 55%, Coalition 2 party preferred on both 45%






dutchie said:


> I'll bet you a $20 scratchie that the coalition win the election.




Are you still backing these losers.

Scratchie offer is still on the table. In fact I will give five seat start.


----------



## moXJO (17 August 2013)

SMH has now resorted to making up interviews with Abbott it seems, with serial dipsht Mike Carltons piece 'don't quote me.'


----------



## sptrawler (17 August 2013)

moXJO said:


> SMH has now resorted to making up interviews with Abbott it seems, with serial dipsht Mike Carltons piece 'don't quote me.'




He has obviuosly lost the plot, he must be upset his beloved Labor Party are on the nose.

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/comment/dont-quote-me-says-tony-but-maaate-8230-20130816-2s1zy.html

He should maybe run for Labor pre selection, there will be plenty of vacancies.


----------



## dutchie (17 August 2013)

Rudd on Abbott

"There is an alternative, I'm told, and the alternative is this: cut, cut, cut and cut to the bone. His name's Tony Abbott, he's got a three-word slogan. You heard his three-word slogans? Let me tell you what his new three-word slogan is: cut, cut and cut."

 cut (1), cut (2) and (3) cut (4)

No wonder we are so much in debt.


----------



## Calliope (17 August 2013)

The voters in Lindsay agree with Tony Abbott. For a woman to be told by Tony Abbott that she has sex appeal is a great vote booster. The sanctimonious PC crowd can stick that up their jumper.



> Tony Abbott’s “sex appeal” candidate, Fiona Scott, is poised for a landslide victory in the litmus-test western Sydney seat of Lindsay with a stunning 60% of the primary vote, according to a Guardian Lonergan poll.
> 
> Scott’s huge lead over the sitting member, the assistant treasurer, David Bradbury, who has held the marginal seat since 2007, surprised even the pollster.
> 
> “Given the size of the swing, we have triple-checked the data and we are very confident this poll is accurate. We asked respondents how they voted last federal election. When we model this historic data we would have predicted Bradbury to be elected over Scott with a two-candidate preferred vote of 52%, which is very close to the actual 2010 poll result of 51%,” Lonergan research managing director Chris Lonergan told Guardian Australia.




http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/15/western-sydney-poll-swing-coalition?CMP=twt_gu


----------



## Julia (17 August 2013)

moXJO said:


> SMH has now resorted to making up interviews with Abbott it seems, with serial dipsht Mike Carltons piece 'don't quote me.'



I don't believe for a moment that Tony Abbott said any of that.  How on earth can Carlton get away with printing this crap???

- - - Updated - - -



Calliope said:


> The voters in Lindsay agree with Tony Abbott. For a woman to be told by Tony Abbott that she has sex appeal is a great vote booster. The sanctimonious PC crowd can stick that up their jumper.



The people who made a fuss about this were those who would never have voted for Tony Abbott anyway.
He apparently has a strong following amongst adult males who, you'd have to think, would have identified with the comment.

In contrast, we had Rudd, at his most prissy, with primly pursed lips, declaring that any employer using such an expression would find himself in serious trouble.


----------



## noco (17 August 2013)

dutchie said:


> Rudd on Abbott
> 
> "There is an alternative, I'm told, and the alternative is this: cut, cut, cut and cut to the bone. His name's Tony Abbott, he's got a three-word slogan. You heard his three-word slogans? Let me tell you what his new three-word slogan is: cut, cut and cut."
> 
> ...




Yes dutchie.I watched the idiot on Sky News AM Agenda at 1,30pm today.

When he started raving on about this cut,cut,cut, I could not bear to watch as I thought he was about to blow a puffue valve. I turned the TV off because I thoght his head was about explode and I just can't stand the sight of blood.

He is a desperate man and the more he carries on like he does, the less voters will like him.


----------



## drsmith (17 August 2013)

Labor and the Greens still at it behind the bike shed with their preference deals.



> Labor's national executive has ordered the party to preference the Greens ahead of all others in every state except Queensland.
> 
> Labor has a deal with Bob Katter's Australian Party in Queensland, but in other states and in the ACT, Greens senate candidates have been given a boost to their electoral chances.
> 
> ...




http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...eens-before-all-in-senate-20130817-2s3er.html


----------



## Julia (17 August 2013)

Let's remember that preferences are still the choice of the individual voter.  From the way the issue is being reported, one would think that parties actually have the right to direct to whom preferences should flow.


----------



## drsmith (17 August 2013)

Julia said:


> Let's remember that preferences are still the choice of the individual voter.  From the way the issue is being reported, one would think that parties actually have the right to direct to whom preferences should flow.



It's unfortunate that many delegate that right to their party of choice.


----------



## Tink (18 August 2013)

_Labor strikes preferences deal with Greens, Katter to boost poll chances_
Abbott stands firm and Rudd runs scared....

And honestly, if Labor even thinks of doing any deals with the Greens or any of the minor parties, Australia couldnt deal with it.
Interestingly enough, Bob Brown has come out and said the Coalition will win.

I find it interesting all these people coming out, Howard etc from the Libs saying good things about Abbott, you dont see any of the Labor crew coming out supporting Rudd, they all despise him.
He definitely is a one man band.

To think part of the electorate would even contemplate voting for this fake.


----------



## sails (18 August 2013)

I posted this in the minor parties discussion but it is probably more applicable here. 
It seems a vote for Katter in Qld is a vote for labor:



> A Katter's Australian Party source confirmed the fledgling party ”” whose chances were best in Queensland ”” would preference the Coalition above Labor in most state Senate races.
> 
> But in Queensland, KAP and Labor have reached a deal to preference each other above the Liberal National Party in the Senate.




Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/federal-po...l-in-senate-20130817-2s3er.html#ixzz2cGBKtfEO


----------



## Aussiejeff (18 August 2013)

Lunatic KRudd promising AUS $2Billion to save Oz Car Industry (aka Holden)

Even Antony Green on the Drum the other day referred to the ABC's own Vote Compass results to explain how only 20% voters had any sympathy for bailing out the Oz car industry. Since many of the Vote Compass participants are sure to be ABC and tend to the left anyway and only 20% of these mainly Labour supporting particpiants think supporting the car industry is important, that is a damning statistic for anyone wanting to run this issue as a vote winner! KRudd, _you are just plain nuts!_  :bananasmi 



> A FIRED-up Kevin Rudd has told Holden workers and union officials he knows he is in a tough spot but is determined to "fight" his way out of his losing position in the polls to deliver a $2 billion package for the car industry.




http://www.news.com.au/national-new...rs/story-fnho52ip-1226698747935#ixzz2cGb1SdVz

Oh boy...just a couple more weeks, just a couple more weeks....tick, tock....


----------



## Ijustnewit (18 August 2013)

Aussiejeff said:


> Lunatic KRudd promising AUS $2Billion to save Oz Car Industry (aka Holden)
> 
> Even Antony Green on the Drum the other day referred to the* ABC's own Vote Compass results to explain how only 20% voters had any sympathy for bailing out the Oz car industry. Since many of the Vote Compass participants are sure to be ABC and tend to the left anyway and only 20% of these mainly Labour supporting particpiants think supporting the car industry is important, that is a damning statistic for anyone wanting to run this issue as a vote winner! KRudd, you are just plain nuts!  :bananasmi *
> 
> ...




Exactly, I was thinking the same thing. This example is typical of Labour's ability *not* to listen to the majority of the peoples wishes and the future direction and spendings of our taxes. Idiots


----------



## drsmith (18 August 2013)

The gloss is well and truly coming off now. At this rate, Labor might want Julia back as leader by polling day. At the very least, the generals in the Labor camp will be in a mild panic.

Also of interest, the Greens too have taken a hit.



> VOTER support for Kevin Rudd has sunk to its lowest level on record, leaving Labor headed for a large election loss with Tony Abbott now virtually equal as preferred prime minister.
> 
> After two weeks of presidential-style campaigning - in which the Prime Minister's personal support has continued to plummet and the Opposition Leader's has steadily risen - Mr Rudd is in a worse position than when he was removed as Labor leader in June 2010.
> 
> ...




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...rt-at-record-low/story-fn59niix-1226699554194


----------



## noco (19 August 2013)

This will rock the Forde electorate like a 6.5 Earth Quake.

And Merri Rose went to jail for Beattie when she never should have in the first place.


http://pickeringpost.com/story/the-diaries-of-peter-beatties-mistress/1842


----------



## MrBurns (19 August 2013)

drsmith said:


> The gloss is well and truly coming off now. At this rate, Labor might want Julia back as leader by polling day. At the very least, the generals in the Labor camp will be in a mild panic.
> ]




No wonder,  Rudd is truly hopeless, he just repeats mantra until e everyone roils their eyes and turns off.

"cut cut cut cut to the bone", does he really think the more he says it the more people will like him ?

and just stop asking yourself questions in the middle of a sentence ...... you know what ? you know why ?

He's a serious annoyance.


----------



## drsmith (19 August 2013)

MrBurns said:


> No wonder,  Rudd is truly hopeless, he just repeats mantra until e everyone roils their eyes and turns off.



Sportsbet now has the odds at $1.09/$7.25 in favour of the Coalition and the handicap has blown out to 17.5. 

I was originally thinking the election outcome would be in the range of 2PP in favour of the Coalition between 54% and 55%, but with Newspoll now at 54%, perhaps even a Gillard level of 57% is not out of the question for the Coalition. I'll now put the range at between 55% and 57% in favour of the Coalition on the assumption that Labor can't turn their campaign around and that the Coalition doesn't get to cocky.


----------



## drsmith (19 August 2013)

Two other polls out today have the race much closer than Newspoll. 

Roy Morgan is at 51/49% in favour of the Coalition although the recent trend like Newspoll is in favour of the Coalition. Essential Media is 50/50, but the most interesting aspect is the trend there is against the Coalition.


----------



## IFocus (19 August 2013)

drsmith said:


> Two other polls out today have the race much closer than Newspoll.
> 
> Roy Morgan is at 51/49% in favour of the Coalition although the recent trend like Newspoll is in favour of the Coalition. Essential Media is 50/50, but the most interesting aspect is the trend there is against the Coalition.




My read at the moment is Abbott at a canter none of the gaffs or bad news re coalition is sticking plus no serious questions are being asked, Rudd looks unsettled still some time to go but looks like coalition land slide.


----------



## sptrawler (19 August 2013)

IFocus said:


> My read at the moment is Abbott at a canter none of the gaffs or bad news re coalition is sticking plus no serious questions are being asked, Rudd looks unsettled still some time to go but looks like coalition land slide.




Yep, I think you are right.
Problem is, Rudd thinks everyone just needs more spending promises(he's rich). Whereas everyone is $hitting themselves about spending.

He has completely uncoupled from mainstream Australia, absolute FW.


----------



## moXJO (19 August 2013)

IFocus said:


> My read at the moment is Abbott at a canter none of the gaffs or bad news re coalition is sticking plus no serious questions are being asked, Rudd looks unsettled still some time to go but looks like coalition land slide.




Its a long way from over yet, libs have lost the unlosable election in the last weeks before.


----------



## Aussiejeff (20 August 2013)

Even the ABC's own brand spanking new FACT CHECK unit (who's organisers claim "We aim to be available to all audiences" ) can't find lots of green ticks for their Labor masters. No Red Lights for Coalition statements, Two glaring Red Lights for Labor claims. 

ABC bias even gives Tony an Amber Light for a statement about gay marriage the ABC sponsored site organisers say is _"mostly true"_. I would have thought _"Mostly true"_ deserving of a Green Light? Maybe if Kevvie Baby had made the statement it would have got a big Green Light? Ah well. Ya can't win 'em all if the organisers of the site are sponsored by the Labor Party...errr...public purse... 

http://www.abc.net.au/news/factcheck/


----------



## Tink (20 August 2013)

Agree Mr Burns, all the annoyances are showing, cut, cut,cut, and when he punches the right arm out the front, come on kids, spending way too much time with the children.
They dont vote..
What happened to the no negativity.

It didnt take long for the public to see there is no new way, its the same old Rudd.
On the run policies, nothing calculated and he is still doing it.
The public have woken up and dont want another 3 years of this.........


----------



## explod (20 August 2013)

And do not forget, I called it here on ASF first:

The winners 55%, the losers 45%, two party preferred.  

And yes I will bet all the scratchies you like on that


----------



## drsmith (20 August 2013)

explod said:


> The winners 55%, the losers 45%, two party preferred.



Who though now are you calling as the winners ?

Are you still calling Labor or are you now being inconsistent like Labor ?


----------



## Ves (20 August 2013)

It's pretty sad for the future of our country that the highlight of the election campaign so far has been Andrew Bolt getting trolled on Twitter (with Abbott trying to use automated bots to inflate his social media "friends" a close second), and subsequently trying to get angry and looking like an even bigger tossbag.


----------



## Calliope (21 August 2013)

Ves said:


> It's pretty sad for the future of our country that the highlight of the election campaign so far has been Andrew Bolt getting trolled on Twitter (with Abbott trying to use automated bots to inflate his social media "friends" a close second), and subsequently trying to get angry and looking like an even bigger tossbag.




It's pretty sad for the future of our country when tossbag Kruddites can't read the writing on the wall.


----------



## drsmith (21 August 2013)

The Australian's Peter Brent on election commitments.



> Abbott is planning a commission of audit. One of the chief purposes of these exercises is to enable the breaking of campaign promises.
> 
> New governments nearly always break campaign promises, using the commission of audit or traditional bureaucrats’ briefing about the state of the finances.
> 
> ...




http://blogs.theaustralian.news.com.au/mumble/index.php/theaustralian/comments/opp_leader_net_satis/


----------



## havaiana (21 August 2013)

"....Schubes says that Rupert Murdoch’s News Limited newspapers are lobbyists for the current opposition...

...Tony Abbott today announced his government would commit $5million dollars of taxpayer’s money to help with the redevelopment of a football club’s stadium....

...the football club is it is 68% owned by Rupert Murdoch’s News Limited."

source

http://www.forexlive.com/blog/2013/08/21/australian-election-whiff-of-a-scandal-in-the-making/


----------



## Calliope (21 August 2013)

drsmith said:


> The Australian's Peter Brent on election commitments.






> If the Coalition wins the election next month rest assured it will exercise the winner’s rights with energy and enthusiasm. Joe Hockey will shake his head in disbelief at the state of affairs revealed by the commission’s report. We knew the Labor government was bad (he’ll tell us) but not this bad.*
> Drastic action will be needed. Promises will need to be broken.




I certainly hope so Doc. They won't lose much popularity if they use this strategy to give the Direct Action Plan and the Paid Parental Scheme the boot.

A little more guts would be required to knock Gonski  and Stop the Boats on the head even though both are doomed to fail to achieve their stated goals and will waste billions.


----------



## Knobby22 (21 August 2013)

If you are a retiree or a share owner and you vote Liberal - you lose.  
As a friend said "this election is a choice between Dumb or Dumber."

Read below regarding how the parental scheme will be paid for.

The fact that retirees and those saving for retirement would pay a slice of the parental leave bill shows that the inter-generational game is not widely understood.

So a superannuation fund obtains a franking credit equal to the tax paid by the company. Those franking credits are currently calculated at a tax rate of 30 cents in the dollar. When the Abbott-Hockey plan is introduced the franking credits will be calculated on the basis of 28.5 cent in the dollar. They are worth less and so the retirees and those saving to pay for retirement cop the bill because Abbott and Hockey have simply swapped a tax for a levy aiming to lower the franking credit.

It is a clear attack on the older generation to benefit the up and coming generation.

Read more: http://www.businessspectator.com.au...-pay-paid-parental-leave-scheme#ixzz2cZNIVVk6


----------



## drsmith (21 August 2013)

Knobby22 said:


> Those franking credits are currently calculated at a tax rate of 30 cents in the dollar. When the Abbott-Hockey plan is introduced the franking credits will be calculated on the basis of 28.5 cent in the dollar. They are worth less and so the retirees and those saving to pay for retirement cop the bill because Abbott and Hockey have simply swapped a tax for a levy aiming to lower the franking credit.



This is a perfect illustration of one of the flaws with a separate levy on top of the corporate tax rate.  

If the company tax cut wasn't recouped by a separate levy, companies would have the capacity to increase dividends and hence offset the impact of reduced imputation credits on gross income at the shareholder level.

I'm surprised it's taken till the middle of the week for this specific aspect to flare up. It will certainly make tonight's leaders debate more interesting.


----------



## Julia (21 August 2013)

Knobby22 said:


> If you are a retiree or a share owner and you vote Liberal - you lose.
> As a friend said "this election is a choice between Dumb or Dumber."
> 
> Read below regarding how the parental scheme will be paid for.
> ...



Robert Gottleibson from Business Spectator raised this a couple of days ago.  At first no one took much notice, including on this forum,  but now the broader media has woken up (fantastic, fellas!).  Even Radio National devoted considerable time to it in the Breakfast program this morning.
Let your local candidate know if you're not happy.  I have.  Plus an email to Coalition head office.


----------



## moXJO (21 August 2013)

I was hoping Abbott would dump his stupid PPL scheme, but here we are. This was a stupid idea back during the Gillard days of femmanazis and should have been left there with all the gender war BS she inflicted. 

Just keep simple policies with a view to stable govt and a manageable vision to get the country back on track. And  for Gods sake, keep your grubby govt fingers out of my business.
 I was over grand schemes when Rudd failed to deliver on any of the things I voted for him on. And I'm sorry but gay marriage is not a vision for this country and I would not be surprised if the libs got it over the line first with some decent lobbying anyway.


----------



## Calliope (21 August 2013)

Rudd should avoid profile shots. His wobbly little chin disappears into his fat neck. Nevertheless the worm seemed to love it. Abbott obviously has to resist the temptation to punch his fat head in.


----------



## drsmith (21 August 2013)

Calliope said:


> Abbott obviously has to resist the temptation to punch his fat head in.



Tony Abbott's head is definitely pushed forward like he means business. 

Fortunately, it didn't go down as badly as the obvious comparison. Perhaps the handshake itself wasn't as vigorous.


----------



## Calliope (21 August 2013)

Abbott's best (and winning) line;

*“Does this guy every shut up?”*


----------



## Macquack (21 August 2013)

drsmith said:


> Tony Abbott's head is definitely pushed forward like he means business.




Abbott struts around like he is the heavy weight champion of the world.


----------



## noco (21 August 2013)

Macquack said:


> Abbott struts around like he is the heavy weight champion of the world.




I would like to see them both in the ring, boxing gloves and all.

Rudd wouldn't last one round.


----------



## drsmith (21 August 2013)

Calliope said:


> Abbott's best (and winning) line;
> 
> *“Does this guy every shut up?”*



Kev might have been a bit less hypo if he had a pee before he started.


----------



## Tink (21 August 2013)

I thought Rudd looked very angry when he came out tonight, when he said to Abbott, so what are you going to cut?
If we had the election tonight you would win sooo.....

As one of the reporters said
Whoa. PM Rudd right up in Tony Abbott's face demanding he say where he's going to cut. 

I didnt like it one bit

At the end, I saw all crowd gathering around Abbott, not Rudd.
More votes for him if its true they were undecided.  

Just my opinion.


----------



## drsmith (21 August 2013)

Tink said:


> At the end, I saw all crowd gathering around Abbott, not Rudd.
> More votes for him if its true they were undecided.



More interested in the future than the present or past.

Very telling.



drsmith said:


> Sportsbet now has the odds at $1.09/$7.25 in favour of the Coalition and the handicap has blown out to 17.5.



Now $1.08/$7.50 with the handicap at 18.5.


----------



## Calliope (22 August 2013)

Abbott's winning question cuts to the heart of Rudd's negative nagging carping debating style.

*



			BILLED AS THE "PEOPLE'S FORUM" BUT TONY ABBOTT ASKED THE QUESTION OF THE NIGHT.
		
Click to expand...


*


----------



## Calliope (22 August 2013)

The big enigma of this contest is that polls show that Rudd is considered more likable that Abbott.:shake:



> Who won last night’s debate? Ask make-up artist Lily Fontana:
> 
> Just finished doing Kevin Rudd and Tony Abbott’s makeup for the People’s Forum at the Broncos Leagues Club.
> 
> One of them was absolutely lovely, engaged in genuine conversation with me, acknowledge that I had a job to do and was very appreciative. The other did the exact opposite! Oh boy, I have ever had anyone treat me so badly whilst trying to do my job. Political opinions aside...from one human being to another...Mr Abbott, you win hands down.







http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...hows-his-make-up/story-fn9qr68y-1226701941993


----------



## MrBurns (22 August 2013)

Calliope said:


> The big enigma of this contest is that polls show that Rudd is considered more likable that Abbott.:shake:
> View attachment 53963
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...hows-his-make-up/story-fn9qr68y-1226701941993




Rudds a cowardly weakling, he wouldn't talk to a man like that, com'on Tony give him one in the breadbasket for all Australians


----------



## drsmith (22 August 2013)

MrBurns said:


> Rudds a cowardly weakling, he wouldn't talk to a man like that, com'on Tony give him one in the breadbasket for all Australians



The audience judging by their reaction had empathy for Tony Abbott's shut-up question in relation to Kevin Rudd.

Tony Abbott and the Liberals know Kevin Rudd's character is still flawed and that slow and steady will win the race. To that end, TA was calmer and generally more measured in his appearance last night. The only question now is whether the flawed character that is Kevin Rudd blows up before the election. That might be something the former team Gillard are quietly hoping for as a vindication for her time as PM.


----------



## noco (22 August 2013)

drsmith said:


> The audience judging by their reaction had empathy for Tony Abbott's shut-up question in relation to Kevin Rudd.
> 
> Tony Abbott and the Liberals know Kevin Rudd's character is still flawed and that slow and steady will win the race. To that end, TA was calmer and generally more measured in his appearance last night. The only question now is whether the flawed character that is Kevin Rudd blows up before the election. That might be something the former team Gillard are quietly hoping for as a vindication for her time as PM.




The Gillard team might just be waiting to $h*t on him in the last week.


----------



## MrBurns (22 August 2013)

noco said:


> The Gillard team might just be waiting to $h*t on him in the last week.




I hope so that would be a fitting send off for this terrible Govt.


----------



## sydboy007 (22 August 2013)

Is the coalition supporting Climate Engineering?

Greg Hunt is claiming a research article by Bjorn Lomborg _Copenhagen Consensus_ supports the Coalitions Direct Action policy

3 of the top 6 ways this "consensus" believes we should tackle Climate change involve some form of climate engineering.

I'd love to hear Hunt spin what the relative abatement costs of some of these engineering marvels will be.

Hunt also doesn't believe (probably rightly) in CCS so it seems he's at leasty partially at odds with the paper he purports supports DA.


----------



## drsmith (22 August 2013)

Saul Eslake's view on the Coalition's budget.



> There is a gap of almost $30 billion between the size of the tax cuts and new spending the Coalition has promised and the savings it has unveiled so far, leading economist Saul Eslake estimates.






> He predicts that the Coalition will ultimately adopt all of Labor's proposed budget savings measures, except for ending the tax break for cars bought through salary sacrifice.




He'll will be largely if not completely right on the latter. In that, there's potential reason why the Coalition is holding back on the detail of its costings.

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...ing-economist-saul-eslake-20130822-2sdil.html


----------



## Macquack (22 August 2013)

MrBurns said:


> Rudds a cowardly weakling, he wouldn't talk to a man like that, com'on Tony *give him one in the breadbasket* for all Australians




Why don't you do it yourself, big shot Burns.

You won't even get any jail time if you have a clean record.

"*Come on*" Burn's, put your fist where your big mouth is.


----------



## MrBurns (22 August 2013)

Macquack said:


> Why don't you do it yourself, big shot Burns.
> 
> You won't even get any jail time if you have a clean record.
> 
> "*Come on*" Burn's, put your fist where your big mouth is.




I don't hit girls.
Who let your cage door open ?


----------



## dutchie (22 August 2013)

MrBurns said:


> I don't hit girls.




LOL. Your a true gentleman Burnsie.


----------



## Macquack (22 August 2013)

MrBurns said:


> I don't hit girls.




I was looking forward to the cat fight.


----------



## MrBurns (22 August 2013)

Macquack said:


> I was looking forward to the cat fight.




Yeah we all know there's something weird about you.


----------



## IFocus (22 August 2013)

drsmith said:


> The audience judging by their reaction had empathy for Tony Abbott's shut-up question in relation to Kevin Rudd.




It showed Abbott doesn't handle real pressure but given the media response everyone seems to be ignoring Abbotts faults and unloading on Rudd still Abbott at a canter IMHO


----------



## drsmith (22 August 2013)

IFocus said:


> It showed Abbott doesn't handle real pressure but given the media response everyone seems to be ignoring Abbotts faults and unloading on Rudd still Abbott at a canter IMHO



That's because Kevin Rudd's faults are far worse.

A smart Kevvie not governed by emotion would have kept on topic (chipping away at TA's PPL scheme), but he didn't. He took it personally and that was clear in the tone and context in which he referred to TA as mate.


----------



## noco (22 August 2013)

Typical ABC harping on all today about what Abbott said, "DOES THIS BLOKE EVER SHUT UP" and which a large number of voters agree. I believe Rudd just likes to hear his own voice.

I have not heard one word from the ABC about how rude Rudd was to the make up artist. If it had been Abbott, it would have made headlines. 

"RUDNEY RUDE"


----------



## drsmith (22 August 2013)

How quick will the hypocrites that make up the Labor sisterhood be to brand Bob Hawke a misogynist ?



> FORMER prime minister Bob Hawke has come to the defence of Prime Minister Kevin Rudd over allegations he was rude to a makeup artist ahead of the second leaders' debate.
> 
> Mr Hawke has brushed off the incident as something that would hardly determine someone's vote at the September 7 poll.




Not very I suspect.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...dd-makeup-claims/story-fn3dxiwe-1226702185225


----------



## sydboy007 (22 August 2013)

Got to worry about Abbott.  Seems he's more along the lines of a National agrarian socialist than a Liberal free marketer.  So far not a single policy he's put to the public has any hint of Liberal values.  He's certainly for the age of entitlement as he's pretty much opposed to most forms of mean testing of Govt largess.

I never knew he was still against the floating of the AUD 10 years after it had occurred.  My understanding (I could be wrong) is he's in good step with his mentor Howard as he too was opposed to the floating of the AUD when in opposition at the time.

More and more I think we are going to jump out of the frying pan and into the fire with Abbott.


----------



## Ijustnewit (22 August 2013)

noco said:


> Typical ABC harping on all today about what Abbott said, "DOES THIS BLOKE EVER SHUT UP" and which a large number of voters agree. I believe Rudd just likes to hear his own voice.
> 
> I have not heard one word from the ABC about how rude Rudd was to the make up artist. If it had been Abbott, it would have made headlines.
> 
> "RUDNEY RUDE"




I actually tried several times to make this exact point on the ABC "tell us what you think" in relation to this story. Do you think I could get a comment through ? No , they wouldn't publish any comment I was trying to make. Instead they allowed through hundreds of comments blasting Abbott for his actions. Most of which were   in a far worse tone and manner than anything that Abbott said last night. Maybe the editor of their comments forum is afraid he is about to be cut , cut cut !!


----------



## MrBurns (22 August 2013)

drsmith said:


> How quick will the hypocrites that make up the Labor sisterhood be to brand Bob Hawke a misogynist ?
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Bob Hawke was/is a creep of the highest order no wonder he brushed the comment off
He once propositioned Sigrid Thornton and who knows how many others, a real grub.


----------



## drsmith (22 August 2013)

MrBurns said:


> Bob Hawke was/is a creep of the highest order no wonder he brushed the comment off
> He once propositioned Sigrid Thornton and who knows how many others, a real grub.



Ol' Mr Blanched Hazelnuts must be worried about the public impact this will have on Kevin Rudd. Otherwise he would have kept quiet.


----------



## Tink (23 August 2013)

drsmith said:


> That's because Kevin Rudd's faults are far worse.
> 
> A smart Kevvie not governed by emotion would have kept on topic (chipping away at TA's PPL scheme), but he didn't. He took it personally and that was clear in the tone and context in which he referred to TA as mate.




Agree, drsmith.

When Rudd was harping on Abbott like a looney about the cuts, Abbott said, I have told you about the $17 billion in savings I am doing, but Rudd just kept going, getting closer and closer in his personal space.
The veins in his neck were protruding.

The audience cheered when Abbott said, does this guy ever shut up?

Just like the GST at the first debate, he just keeps going even though he is told.


----------



## dutchie (23 August 2013)

Australia is getting ready with their cricket bats, baseball bats and golf sticks.

Not many sleeps now!


----------



## noco (23 August 2013)

RUDNEY RUDE is now lieing and cheating again with fake medicos to create more deception of the facts. 

How can Abbott sack health workers when it is a state responsibilty?

More negativity and to think we have another two weeks of this crap to contend with.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...over-health-cuts/story-fnii5s41-1226702467095


----------



## IFocus (23 August 2013)

Abbotts getting a free run on the cuts he will make. Federal funding now makes up a significant amount of the states health budgets if Abbott cuts those funds the states will have sack people same with education.

If thats the case so be it but Abbott and Hockey have so far been completely deceitful on the PPL funding which BTW will affect the income to most of the contributors to the political threads.

Hope you guys enjoy subsidising the girls at top end of town having new born's.


----------



## MrBurns (23 August 2013)

dutchie said:


> LOL. Your a true gentleman Burnsie.




or old ladies -


----------



## Calliope (23 August 2013)

Apparently Rudd threw his hissyfit when make-up artist Lily Fontana balked at his instruction to give him an aggressive chin line like Mr Abbott.


----------



## MrBurns (23 August 2013)

Calliope said:


> Apparently Rudd threw his hissyfit when make-up artist Lily Fontana balked at his instruction to give him an aggressive chin line like Mr Abbott.




I expect any day now like Bradley Manning, Rudd will announce he is a woman and wants to be called Myrtle.

Strangely no one would be surprised.............


----------



## Julia (23 August 2013)

IFocus said:


> Abbotts getting a free run on the cuts he will make. Federal funding now makes up a significant amount of the states health budgets if Abbott cuts those funds the states will have sack people same with education.



That's quite true.  At the same time, there's undoubtedly considerable waste amongst the Federal bureaucracy.  I think I heard Mr Abbott say there will be no fewer doctors, nurses etc.   I'd take any such assurance with minimal confidence however.



> If thats the case so be it but Abbott and Hockey have so far been completely deceitful on the PPL funding which BTW will affect the income to most of the contributors to the political threads.



Yes, but some of us have drawn attention to this.   It is absolutely not enough for Abbott and Hockey to repeat their mantra of "it's fully costed and fully funded", without setting out where that funding is coming from.
They have been shamefully reluctant to reveal the inclusion of loss of franking credits, and up until just the last couple of days tried to convey the impression the scheme will be fully funded by big business.  
The scheme's a complete dog, and it now has fleas imo because of their underhandedness in not being open about how it's funded.


----------



## Tink (23 August 2013)

IFocus, if you are talking about education, we had protests here in the city about the cuts to Universities, where do the teachers come from? They seem to rob Peter to pay Paul.

The sooner Rudd is out the better, and the last debate speaks volumes. If thats how he is in a room full of people, I hate to even think how he is behind closed doors, no wonder everyone refuses to work with him.

Abbott couldnt get a word in even if he tried at the debate as Rudd loves the sound of his own voice and nothing was said that was worth listening to.

If they cant work out the direction in six years then out.

Everything that he says he did was Gillards doing not his, he has done nothing.


----------



## McLovin (23 August 2013)

Julia said:


> They have been shamefully reluctant to reveal the inclusion of loss of franking credits, and up until just the last couple of days tried to convey the impression the scheme will be fully funded by big business.
> The scheme's a complete dog, and it now has fleas imo because of their underhandedness in not being open about how it's funded.




A question if I may, Julia? Are you against the idea of rolling back the franking credit scheme or are you against the way it was swept under the rug during the announcement?


----------



## Knobby22 (23 August 2013)

What's your attitude to franking credits McLovin? Bit unfair to ask Julia without providing your own view.

I think it has generally served us well. I would prefer them to take the money from the property sector. Say limited negative gearing unless it is a new property. This would help the economy and would serve a good purpose in increasing housing supply.


----------



## Calliope (23 August 2013)

*The face of a bully.*





Certainly he has Bill Shorten scared.:hide:



> Employment Relations Minister Bill Shorten defended Mr Rudd's character, saying he believed the Prime Minister had changed. "I have no doubt that not only is Kevin Rudd a more consultative person, but he is the right leader for these times," he said.




But Air Vice-Marshals don't scare easily;



> A RETIRED air vice-marshal has accused Kevin Rudd of "bully standover tactics" and a make-up artist has declared he was rude as she prepared him for the people's forum debate, reviving questions about the Prime Minister's character that emerged in his first stint in the role.
> 
> Air Vice-Marshal Peter Criss revealed Mr Rudd had warned him in a private meeting that funding for veterans would be at risk if he "bagged" the Labor government. He accused Mr Rudd of using "classic bully standover tactics" and threatening veterans with getting nothing if they criticised Labor's military superannuation indexation policy.




The targets of his bullying are usually wimps like Shorten or young women just doing their job.



> Another Brisbane-based make-up artist, Abigael Johnston, who has worked for the Nine Network, had posted on Ms Fontana's wall about a "similar experience" with Mr Rudd, noting John Howard and Peter Costello were "gentlemen". "The other, I could not even face book (sic) how he treated the crew. Just abhorrent!" she wrote.




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...ders-of-pms-past/story-fn9qr68y-1226702470808


----------



## MrBurns (23 August 2013)

Knobby22 said:


> What's your attitude to franking credits McLovin? Bit unfair to ask Julia without providing your own view.
> 
> I think it has generally served us well. I would prefer them to take the money from the property sector. Say limited negative gearing unless it is a new property. This would help the economy and would serve a good purpose in increasing housing supply.




This is an ideal opportunity to get stuck into negative gearing on residential property, would have a twofold benefit. residential property would come down in price mainly at the lower end, for new homebuyers and the Govt would have a source of revenue.

How would a change in franking credits effects shares like TLS ?


----------



## IFocus (23 August 2013)

MrBurns said:


> How would a change in franking credits effects shares like TLS ?




You simply pay more tax on the dividend.............hang on is that just another great big tax? 

PPL scheme isn't what we need and I don't know that it actually buys votes I dont think Abbott needs it.


----------



## MrBurns (23 August 2013)

IFocus said:


> You simply pay more tax on the dividend.............hang on is that just another great big tax?
> 
> PPL scheme isn't what we need and I don't know that it actually buys votes I dont think Abbott needs it.




So share price declines.


----------



## IFocus (23 August 2013)

Tink said:


> IFocus, if you are talking about education, we had protests here in the city about the cuts to Universities, where do the teachers come from? They seem to rob Peter to pay Paul.
> 
> The sooner Rudd is out the better, and the last debate speaks volumes. If thats how he is in a room full of people, I hate to even think how he is behind closed doors, no wonder everyone refuses to work with him.
> 
> ...





I am not a Rudd supporter and believe Abbott will win for sure.

I am an avid Abbott critic having followed his diabolical political career when he started out as a complete thug / dick head and really worried we are going to have a complete tosser as PM.

Given the Coalition are going to win then there needs to be a bit more scrutiny on their proposed  actions when in government rather than just be waved through by the Murdoch press.


----------



## Calliope (23 August 2013)

IFocus said:


> Given the Coalition are going to win then there needs to be a bit more scrutiny on their proposed  actions when in government rather than just be waved through by the Murdoch press.




Why? If the public doesn't like "their proposed  actions" it won't vote them in. But then again they have no choice, do they?

I hope the volcanologists are keeping a close eye on Rudd. I think he is ready to blow. He is seething below the surface. Seismic activity is a sign of an impending eruption. There have been several signs over the past few days.


----------



## MrBurns (23 August 2013)

Calliope said:


> Why? If the public doesn't like "their proposed  actions" it won't vote them in. But then again they have no choice, do they?




Non whatsoever.


----------



## Julia (23 August 2013)

McLovin said:


> A question if I may, Julia? Are you against the idea of rolling back the franking credit scheme or are you against the way it was swept under the rug during the announcement?



Both.  Plus I'm opposed to the Abbott PPL itself.  Labor's scheme is reasonable, not excessive, and imo one of the things they have got right.  That's if you must have any sort of scheme.  I'd prefer to see it all junked:  no baby bonus, no parental leave, minimal subsidy of child care.  I don't see the having or raising of children to be the responsibility of the State, but reluctantly acknowledge that it is a reality.

I find it obscene that Mr Abbott's scheme will pay $75,000 to women whose family income is in the millions, while we have young single mothers trying to exist on the absolutely inadequate unemployment benefit.
Ditto those simply on unemployment benefits where the level of poverty is totally counterproductive to their hopes of finding work.  They do not even receive concessional public transport, for heaven's sake!

So it's essentially about fairness across the whole system for me.

Agree with Knobby's suggestion that it would be preferable for some cost to come out of abolishing property related benefits, eg negative gearing should at least be modified/limited.
Or retain and modify the mining tax instead of abolishing that.

I dislike above all else the constant attempts by both sides, and in this instance the Coalition, to be less than candid about their policies and their funding.   It breeds further distrust about what they'll actually do when elected.

The reduction in franking credits, rather like Labor's proposed deposit tax, sets a concerning precedent.
Sure, we're just talking relatively small amounts right now, but it's the fundamental foot in the door, the soft introduction of a new way of taking our money away from us to pay for their ego driven nonsense.

Tony Abbott's PPL is his extravagant way of attempting to negate the image that he does not get women.
That probably irritates me most of all.



Knobby22 said:


> What's your attitude to franking credits McLovin? Bit unfair to ask Julia without providing your own view.



I'm happy to respond, but agree that I'd like to know your own view also McLovin.  



> I think it has generally served us well. I would prefer them to take the money from the property sector. Say limited negative gearing unless it is a new property. This would help the economy and would serve a good purpose in increasing housing supply.






MrBurns said:


> This is an ideal opportunity to get stuck into negative gearing on residential property, would have a twofold benefit. residential property would come down in price mainly at the lower end, for new homebuyers and the Govt would have a source of revenue.



+1



> How would a change in franking credits effects shares like TLS ?






MrBurns said:


> So share price declines.



I don't think it will necessarily affect the SP.  Just mean a little more tax paid for those paying tax, and a slight reduction in cash credit for those who do not.


----------



## moXJO (23 August 2013)

Labors PPL is worse for small business in that they force all the paperwork/expenses onto employers (labor may have backflipped on this just recently. I wouldnt call one better than the other.


----------



## sydboy007 (23 August 2013)

So with biillions in debt, and more billions yet to come, our Dear Leaders have decided with great benevolence to bestow upon the Mighty Broncos further largess.  Interesting to see Abbott has promised 5M, 2M more than Rudd, possibly to help pay repay the Imperial Murdoch forces for all their help during the circus performance.

Maybe it's fitting that in these times or self entitlement, the Govt is helping to keep the masses entertained, at least for a while longer.  

Vale the fiscal conservative who follows through on their beliefs.


----------



## Aussiejeff (23 August 2013)

sydboy007 said:


> So with biillions in debt, and more billions yet to come, our Dear Leaders have decided with great benevolence to bestow upon the Mighty Broncos further largess.  Interesting to see Abbott has promised 5M, 2M more than Rudd, possibly to help pay repay the Imperial Murdoch forces for all their help during the circus performance.
> 
> *Maybe it's fitting that in these times or self entitlement, the Govt is helping to keep the masses entertained, at least for a while longer.  *
> 
> Vale the fiscal conservative who follows through on their beliefs.




Well, they have taken a leaf out of the Book Of Roman Politix - give the hoi poloi more spectacle, arenas, gladiators... yeah, that's what I want....KRudd v TAbbott in a to-the-death gladiatorial contest. Bet THAT would bust the ratings meters... :samurai:


----------



## sydboy007 (23 August 2013)

Aussiejeff said:


> Well, they have taken a leaf out of the Book Of Roman Politix - give the hoi poloi more spectacle, arenas, gladiators... yeah, that's what I want....KRudd v TAbbott in a to-the-death gladiatorial contest. Bet THAT would bust the ratings meters... :samurai:




Come now, be an Aussie

5M to fund the *Thunder Dome*.  We don't need another hero eh.

Kathy can stand in for Tina.  All that chainmail should look good on her.

I dobut either of the Dear Leaders would be able to start a chainsaw, but I'd prefer less lethal weapons anyway.

Might as well make things last a while, and it would be good to share their pain 

Two go in, one comes out.


----------



## Ves (23 August 2013)

sydboy007 said:


> 5M to fund the *Thunder Dome*.




Probably 10M after they've built all the boat docks.


----------



## drsmith (23 August 2013)

drsmith said:


> Now $1.08/$7.50 with the handicap at 18.5.



Still $1.08/$7.50 in favour of the Coalition but handicap is now 19.5.

http://www.sportsbet.com.au/betting/politics/australian-federal-politics

Latest Fairfax Nielsen poll has the Coalition at 53% 2PP.

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...r-in-fairfax-nielsen-poll-20130823-2sgvr.html


----------



## sails (23 August 2013)

> *The claim*: Kevin Rudd says when Tony Abbott was health minister he cut $1 billion from the public hospitals budget of Australia.
> 
> *The verdict*: Mr Abbott was not responsible for the $1 billion reduction in public hospital funding between 2003 and 2008.





Read more from the ABC Fact Check:
Kevin Rudd wrong on Tony Abbott's '$1b hospital funding cut'


----------



## sydboy007 (23 August 2013)

Gotti is claiming Abbott is looking at making changes to the treatment of art works for SMSF so that they can be hung in the homes of the SMSF trustee.

Yay.  A great way to funnel hundreds of millions of dollars Tony into productive assets.  Just what the country needs.  Just imagining people with seriously valuable art work on display.  I feel a rise in home invasions coming on should this pass.

One can hope this is a false rumour, but with Tony ya never know.


----------



## Logique (24 August 2013)

Scoreboard this week:

Makeup artists and journalism students = 1
Kevin Rudd = 0

Remind me again, who's the misogynist? 

Because it wouldn't seem to be that '...absolutely lovely, engaged in genuine conversation with me, acknowledge[d] that I had a job to do and was very appreciative...' Mr Abbot.


----------



## bunyip (24 August 2013)

Rudd is looking increasingly desperate as an election win appears to be slipping further from his grasp. Hence his desperation tactics of inventing the CUT CUT CUT mantra in an effort to scare the electorate into voting against Abbot.
This is actually pretty amusing, considering the numerous funding cuts we’ve seen in six years of government under Rudd and Gillard.

Anyway, partly for my own amusement, and partly because of my intense dislike of Rudd and the Labor Party, I’ve put together the following poem to highlight the shameless hypocrisy of this grubby little pretender who masquerades as our Prime Minster.


CUT CUT CUT (by Bunyip)

Kevin Rudd’s a worried man
His smile is thin and flaky
His polling goes downhill each day
He looks increasingly shaky

He knows that only weeks from now
We’ll bring our judgment down
On six long years of incompetence
From him and his Labor clowns

So Kev and his pals have decided
In desperation it seems
To embark on a mantra of CUT CUT CUT 
To hijack the Abbot team

‘CUT CUT CUT’ chants Kevin
‘That’s what the Libs will do
Don't vote them into power
Or life will get harder for you
We’re in the building business
That’s the ALP way
We build things up in government
Then the Liberals throw them away’

Righto Kev, let’s dig deeper
To see if you’re telling us true
Or is this just more of the lying
That comes so easily to you?

You CUT CUT CUT defense spending
When you should have been spending more
To ensure that our military forces
Could keep our country secure

You CUT CUT CUT uni funding
You hypocritical fake
Yet you have the gall to mock Abbot
For the cuts that YOU claim he’ll make

You CUT CUT CUT Customs funding
And what has been the result?
Guns and drugs that slip through the net
You dim-witted, small-minded dolt

You CUT CUT CUT the health budget
You cut infrastructure as well
You and Gillard have CUT CUT CUT
Through six years of Labor hell

Why is it Kev that you CUT CUT CUT
And TAX TAX TAX with a passion?
Perhaps it’s because you’ve SPENT SPENT SPENT
In reckless and wasteful fashion.
School halls at three times the normal price
Pink batts to put in the roof
And the border protection debacle as well
Has supplied us with absolute proof
That you’re unfit to be leader, Kev
You’re just not up to the job
That’s why we plan to turf you out
You and your Labor mob

We’re looking forward to election day
Bring on September 7
We’ll boot the ALP rabble out
And their useless leader, Kevin


----------



## johenmo (24 August 2013)

Julia said:


> That's if you must have any sort of scheme.  I'd prefer to see it all junked:  no baby bonus, no parental leave, minimal subsidy of child care.  I don't see the having or raising of children to be the responsibility of the State, but reluctantly acknowledge that it is a reality.




+1 many times.  We accepted one income to raise our kids & still doing it.  Left a job open for someone else who needed it, not just wanted it.  Yes we are financially worse off than 2 incomes but all our children have said they appreciated one being home.  And I read today that in Ballarat, some of the schools have 1 in 3 starting school unable to read. Paras 5 and 7. And please don't say that's what school is for.  


http://www.thecourier.com.au/story/1726180/ballarat-imagination-library-becoming-a-reading-city/?cs=62


----------



## Calliope (24 August 2013)

Well done Bunyip.. But now our great leader has taken time off from his busy campaign schedule to return to Canberra to sort out Syria.

I am sure world leaders are waiting on his words of wisdom.


----------



## MrBurns (24 August 2013)

Calliope said:


> Well done Bunyip.. But now our great leader has taken time off from his busy campaign schedule to return to Canberra to sort out Syria.
> 
> I am sure world leaders are waiting on his words of wisdom.




He has worked out the best he can do for the campaign is not to appear in it.

Why would you give that fool briefings on Syria ? 
Is he trying to appear responsible and worldly ?

OR just trying to line up a diplomatic roll for after his sacking.


----------



## drsmith (24 August 2013)

Calliope said:


> *The face of a bully.*
> 
> View attachment 53988
> 
> ...




Bill Shorten looks very worried in that image.

He has good reason to be. With the political skin coming off Kevin Rudd like a banana being peeled, Labor could find itself in a worse place by election day than if it had kept Julia Gillard as leader.


----------



## sails (24 August 2013)

Well done on the poem, Bunyip. Here's a clever and very funny short clip on "cut, cut, cut" I found on Bolt's website:




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


----------



## bunyip (25 August 2013)

sails said:


> Well done on the poem, Bunyip. Here's a clever and very funny short clip on "cut, cut, cut" I found on Bolt's website:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




The good thing about it, Sails, is that Rudd is cutting his own throat every time he opens his mouth to chant his boring CUT CUT CUT mantra. And the silly bugger just can’t seem to see it.

The way this is going, I wouldn’t be surprised to see them trying to bring Gillard back into the fold! I’m only joking of course, but the wheels are well and truly falling off the Rudd wagon. It even looks like he’ll lose his seat here in Queensland – a delightful prospect if ever there was one!
Just imagine the blow to Rudd’s pride is that happens!


----------



## bunyip (25 August 2013)

johenmo said:


> I read today that in Ballarat, some of the schools have 1 in 3 starting school unable to read. Paras 5 and 7. And please don't say that's what school is for.
> 
> 
> http://www.thecourier.com.au/story/1726180/ballarat-imagination-library-becoming-a-reading-city/?cs=62




Hang on a minute – what’s so bad about kids being unable to read when they start school?
I couldn’t read when I started school, and there’s nothing wrong with my reading and writing skills now.
One of my kids is a medical student and was top of her school year for ten years in a row in a private school that was the fourth highest academic achiever in Queensland  - and she couldn’t read when she started school either.

- - - Updated - - -



Calliope said:


> Well done Bunyip.. But now our great leader has taken time off from his busy campaign schedule to return to Canberra to sort out Syria.
> 
> I am sure world leaders are waiting on his words of wisdom.




I was thinking the same thing – the world will undoubtedly be waiting with baited breath for a response from a statesman of the caliber of Rudd The Dud!


----------



## bunyip (25 August 2013)

IFocus said:


> I am not a Rudd supporter and believe Abbott will win for sure.
> 
> I am an avid Abbott critic having followed his diabolical political career when he started out as a complete thug / dick head and really worried we are going to have a complete tosser as PM.




So who are you going to vote for then, IFocus? Neither Rudd nor Abbot has your support. And surely you’re not silly enough to waste your vote on Christine Milne and her bunch of idealistic, unrealistic twits.
So what are you going to do – vote informal by drawing a big line through your ballot paper?


----------



## sails (25 August 2013)

Calliope said:


> Well done Bunyip.. But now our great leader has taken time off from his busy campaign schedule to return to Canberra to sort out Syria.
> 
> I am sure world leaders are waiting on his words of wisdom.




But not before he flew a taxpayer funded jet to Brisbane for a cooking show on the ABC during the afternoon before arriving in Canberra around 6pm...


Read about it here: Rudd’s goose is cooked


----------



## bunyip (25 August 2013)

MrBurns said:


> This is an ideal opportunity to get stuck into negative gearing on residential property, would have a twofold benefit. residential property would come down in price mainly at the lower end, for new homebuyers and the Govt would have a source of revenue.




One of the governments changed the rules on negative gearing a few decades ago (can’t recall if it was Labor or conservative). Apparently it resulted in a shortage of rental housing due to investors leaving the residential rental market, with rental prices rising substantially as a result.
The long and short of it was that within a few years the government abandoned the changes and reinstated the old negative gearing laws.


----------



## moXJO (25 August 2013)

bunyip said:


> One of the governments changed the rules on negative gearing a few decades ago (can’t recall if it was Labor or conservative). Apparently it resulted in a shortage of rental housing due to investors leaving the residential rental market, with rental prices rising substantially as a result.
> The long and short of it was that within a few years the government abandoned the changes and reinstated the old negative gearing laws.




Labor did it and rents went crazy. I still remember the headlines on how bad it was suppose to be in sydney and that waiting lists for public housing blew out about 20 years.


----------



## medicowallet (25 August 2013)

bunyip said:


> One of the governments changed the rules on negative gearing a few decades ago (can’t recall if it was Labor or conservative). Apparently it resulted in a shortage of rental housing due to investors leaving the residential rental market, with rental prices rising substantially as a result.
> The long and short of it was that within a few years the government abandoned the changes and reinstated the old negative gearing laws.




It was Labor,

Sure let's always use the same excuse to never touch the people's cash cow..

At the very least, cut it back substantially, and make it only apply to new properties.

Australian housing has got out of control, hence the "need" for paid parental schemes, negative gearing, and dual incomes.... a bit of a blight on the previous few government's abilities to plan for the future.

MW


----------



## MrBurns (25 August 2013)

Negative gearing on residential property has inflated prices so that young families are saddled with impossible debt so that those with plenty of cash can enjoy tax breaks.
Shameful


----------



## sydboy007 (25 August 2013)

moXJO said:


> Labor did it and rents went crazy. I still remember the headlines on how bad it was suppose to be in sydney and that waiting lists for public housing blew out about 20 years.




That is really a myth

IIRC rents increased in 4 capitals and decreased / stagnated in 4.

So if the removal of NG had been the cause of the rent increases it would seem strange to only affect some cities and not others?

Also, if 90% of IP loans are written to purchase existing properties, then how does the current NG system help with supply?

If the removal of NG causesd a reduction in investor demand then either current investors sit tight - no change in rental supply - or they start to sell - since no new investors willing to buy then you would have to think FHB would step in.

The current NG system does NOTHING to increase rental supply


----------



## sydboy007 (25 August 2013)

MrBurns said:


> Negative gearing on residential property has inflated prices so that young families are saddled with impossible debt so that those with plenty of cash can enjoy tax breaks.
> Shameful




I'd argue it would be cheaper to build public housing - similar to Singapore - than the current massive drain to the tax payer than has grossly distorted the market.  Our historically high debts cause many other issues for the community.

As you can see, the halving of CGT is the Howard Costello Gift that keeps on leaching tax revenues.  Better to spend $5B a year on building affordable housing than the current NG system.  Those not in Govt housing would benefit due to lower prices.

From Macrobusiness - http://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2013/05/more-negative-gearing-scaremongering/

Between July 1985 and September 1987 the Government “quarantined” negative gearing losses on new transactions, thereby only allowing investors to claim rental expenses against rental income, not other income.

In the event that negative gearing was once again quarantined and a proportion of investment properties were sold, those properties would not suddenly vanish into thin air leaving a large number of people homeless. Rather, these homes would be sold to renters, turning them into owner-occupiers. And while the number of rental properties would be reduced, this substitution of renters into owner-occupiers would simultaneously reduce the demand for rental properties, leaving the overall rental supply-demand balance unchanged.

Perhaps this is why the quarantining of negative gearing between July 1985 and September 1987 had little discernible impact on the rental market, with inflation-adjusted rents rising in four markets and falling in four markets over that period (see next table).

Surely, if negative gearing was such an important determinant of rental market health, shouldn’t rents have risen Australia-wide when it was “abolished” in the 1980s, since negative gearing affects all rental markets equally?


----------



## drsmith (25 August 2013)

On the topic of gearing, here's some economic voodoo from Clive Palmer,



> For example, *he would allow people to claim the first $10,000 of home loan payments as a be tax deduction.*
> 
> The leader of the recently formed Palmer United Party was asked during the hour-long web chat, hosted by Fairfax Media, what he would do to address housing affordability.
> 
> ...




http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...ds-and-money-on-the-table-20130821-2sb52.html

My bolds.


----------



## sydboy007 (25 August 2013)

drsmith said:


> On the topic of gearing, here's some economic voodoo from Clive Palmer,
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Woo Woo.  Demand side subsidies with no supply side reforms.

Hello house price INFLATION! 

Seems logical for Palmer though.  He's in the resource industry.  Increasing demand without increasing supply is a great way to wealth


----------



## drsmith (25 August 2013)

Julia Gillard not attending Labor's Campaign Launch.



> Mr Rudd gave a strong impression that Ms Gillard, who is leaving politics, would not attend the ALP launch in Brisbane next week.
> 
> “I understand Julia has made plain her position on that question and I respect it. It's entirely appropriate that she should make her own call on this and I respect her decision entirely,” he told ABC TV's Insiders.




I gather from that she's told Uncle Psycho where to shove it.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...campaign-no-show/story-fn9qr68y-1226703598749


----------



## Country Lad (25 August 2013)

bunyip said:


> ..............Neither Rudd nor Abbot has your support. And surely you’re not silly enough to waste your vote on Christine Milne...................




I have had a look at my candidates and I can't find Rudd, Abbot or Milne among them.  Funny how folks say the they will/will not vote for Rudd or Abbot or Milne when they are not candidates in their electorate.

I will do what I always do, vote for the candidate who will best represent my electorate.  

Cheers
Country Lad


----------



## bunyip (25 August 2013)

sails said:


> But not before he flew a taxpayer funded jet to Brisbane for a cooking show on the ABC during the afternoon before arriving in Canberra around 6pm...
> 
> 
> Read about it here: Rudd’s goose is cooked




Now now Sails – let’s not be too hard on the Labor Party. You know how important it is for our politicians to get their priorities right in an election year. For PM’s who aspire to re-election, what could be more important than a guest appearance on a TV cooking show, or a costly four hour photo shoot while lounging in a comfy armchair as you knit a pair of booties for the royal baby!


----------



## Julia (25 August 2013)

Country Lad said:


> I have had a look at my candidates and I can't find Rudd, Abbot or Milne among them.  Funny how folks say the they will/will not vote for Rudd or Abbot or Milne when they are not candidates in their electorate.



Hardly surprising, however, given the presidential nature of this campaign.



> I will do what I always do, vote for the candidate who will best represent my electorate.



I'd imagine that's what most of us will do.  

If your local representative was in your opinion less than competent, but he represented the party that you believe will best manage Australia, would you still vote for him/her?

Likewise, if the candidate was in your opinion competent, but you did not believe the party he/she represents is the best option for Australia as a whole, how would you vote?

In both above scenarios, let's say the seat is a marginal one where your vote actually matters.


----------



## johenmo (25 August 2013)

bunyip said:


> Hang on a minute – what’s so bad about kids being unable to read when they start school?
> I couldn’t read when I started school, and there’s nothing wrong with my reading and writing skills now.
> One of my kids is a medical student and was top of her school year for ten years in a row in a private school that was the fourth highest academic achiever in Queensland  - and she couldn’t read when she started school either.




For some - nothing at all.  For others, they are at a disadvantage. If the household supports them after they start school they'll catchup.  Not everyone is academically gifted and/or supported at home or able to attend a school with the support.  Govt schools don't have the funds to deal with the current size of the problem.  I heard a teacher who's child started school & couldn't read say "that's what school is for".  Her child struggled for the first couple of years and it was one-on-one work that got the child up to average.   Our kids sound like yours.  I believe it's parental responsibility to prepare kids for school, that's all.


----------



## Calliope (25 August 2013)

Country Lad said:


> I have had a look at my candidates and I can't find Rudd, Abbot or Milne among them.  Funny how folks say the they will/will not vote for Rudd or Abbot or Milne when they are not candidates in their electorate.
> I will do what I always do, vote for the candidate who will best represent my electorate.




Nobody in my electorate of Fisher no one will be voting on for Abbott or Rudd. It is a vote of good versus evil.




> Peter Slipper, who arrived late, was keen to talk about his more distant past - as an altar boy. Despite having hit the national headlines over sending sexually charged text messages to his gay staffer James Ashby, Mr Slipper spoke at length of the need to protect Australia's Christian values.
> 
> He defended his record of 20 years in getting funding and infrastructure for the Coast, including the university and the Bruce Highway upgrade, and vowed to fight to keep the state Sunshine Coast University Hospital in public hands.
> 
> ...



http://www.sunshinecoastdaily.com.au/news/passion-shines-in-fisher-outsiders/1993779/


----------



## Country Lad (25 August 2013)

Julia said:


> If your local representative was in your opinion less than competent, but he represented the party that you believe will best manage Australia, would you still vote for him/her?
> 
> *No.  That has happened where we had a complete ******** representing Canberra in our electorate and we may as well not have been part of Australia.*
> 
> ...




Let's face it, the whole system is broken.  Has been ever since the political party ideology has pervaded the Senate  and stuffed its real purpose.

Cheers
Country Lad


----------



## Calliope (25 August 2013)

sails said:


> But not before he flew a taxpayer funded jet to Brisbane for a cooking show on the ABC during the afternoon before arriving in Canberra around 6pm...
> 
> 
> Read about it here: Rudd’s goose is cooked




Rudd obviously used this show to demonstrate how charming he is when dealing with women. But then he wouldn't dare try to bully Annabel Crabb. 

Her public face is also deceptively charming, but behind the facade she is pure steel.


----------



## moXJO (25 August 2013)

sydboy007 said:


> That is really a myth
> 
> IIRC rents increased in 4 capitals and decreased / stagnated in 4.
> 
> ...




Yeah thats what was reported at the time myth or not, the govt did a back flip not long after. Gloss it up all you like


----------



## bunyip (25 August 2013)

Country Lad said:


> I will do what I always do, vote for the candidate who will best represent my electorate.
> 
> Cheers
> Country Lad




I’ll put the best interests of Australia first, by voting for the LNP candidate in my electorate.


----------



## bunyip (25 August 2013)

johenmo said:


> Our kids sound like yours.  I believe it's parental responsibility to prepare kids for school, that's all.




Depends on what you mean by ‘prepare’. We read to our kids long before they started school, encouraged their natural curiosity and love of learning that is common to all kids.
But we didn’t see any need to teach them to read.

My baby boomer generation has generally better literacy and numeracy skills than todays kids, and I can tell you that a much lower percentage of us went to kindy or pre-school or had any kind of training to prepare us for school.
We raced around outside and did normal kid things until we got called in for dinner and then bed. We were usually too worn out from being normal kids to have much time or interest for books. Pre schools and kindy were not even available to me. Nor were TV and computer games. 
I could think of a dozen reasons why some kids might struggle while others don’t. And they’re not necessarily related to whether or not they could read before they started school. 
Not that I think the ability to read is any disadvantage to a child starting school for the first time. But nor do I think it’s a necessary attribute to ensure that kids can perform well.

I have no doubt that we could substantially lift literacy and numeracy standards of our schools simply by reinstating the learning system that was in place during my school days. Seems to me the education department did to education what Rudd did to the Pacific Solution....tried to fix a system that wasn’t broken.
Whoever wins government on September 7, I’d like to see them consulting those who are familiar with the school curriculum of five decades ago, and using that as a general blueprint for todays curriculum.


----------



## Julia (25 August 2013)

> If your local representative was in your opinion less than competent, but he represented the party that you believe will best manage Australia, would you still vote for him/her?
> 
> *No. That has happened where we had a complete ******** representing Canberra in our electorate and we may as well not have been part of Australia.*
> 
> ...



I'm in a safe National seat so my vote is pretty irrelevant.  The long term sitting member, a really great bloke,  retired when the election was called.  His replacement is not up to scratch.

The best individual imo is a bloke who was previously an Independent and was instrumental in bringing the "Dr Death" case.  Unfortunately he has now joined the crazy Clive Palmer so I couldn't bring myself to vote for him.



bunyip said:


> My baby boomer generation has generally better literacy and numeracy skills than todays kids, and I can tell you that a much lower percentage of us went to kindy or pre-school or had any kind of training to prepare us for school.
> We raced around outside and did normal kid things until we got called in for dinner and then bed. We were usually too worn out from being normal kids to have much time or interest for books. Pre schools and kindy were not even available to me. Nor were TV and computer games.



Probably depends on where you were brought up and the attitudes of your parents.  
My parents taught me to read long before school start, and books, visits to the library etc, plus kindy, took a much higher priority than racing round outside.


----------



## Ves (25 August 2013)

Julia said:


> I'm in a safe National seat so my vote is pretty irrelevant.  The long term sitting member, a really great bloke,  retired when the election was called.  His replacement is not up to scratch.
> 
> The best individual imo is a bloke who was previously an Independent and was instrumental in bringing the "Dr Death" case.  Unfortunately he has now joined the crazy Clive Palmer so I couldn't bring myself to vote for him.



Are you talking about Rob Messenger?  If so, from the accounts of friends who have lived up that way, it sounds like you live in a beautiful part of the world, Julia.


----------



## Julia (25 August 2013)

Ves said:


> Are you talking about Rob Messenger?  If so, from the accounts of friends who have lived up that way, it sounds like you live in a beautiful part of the world, Julia.



Yes, Rob Messenger.  He did a great job supporting the nurse whistleblower in the Dr Jayant Patel case.


----------



## bunyip (26 August 2013)

Julia said:


> The best individual imo is a bloke who was previously an Independent and was instrumental in bringing the "Dr Death" case.  Unfortunately he has now joined the crazy Clive Palmer so I couldn't bring myself to vote for him.




Clive Palmer was on TV last night. When the interviewer asked him about the cost of his policies, Clive’s answer was something along the lines of ‘_Stuff the cost, who cares about the cost, just do it’!_

Clive should stick to business and leave politics to politicians who can speak sense.


----------



## Logique (26 August 2013)

Green Malcolm 
http://blogs.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/timblair/  - 25 August 2013

Is this the guy who should be the Conservative Leader?


----------



## sydboy007 (26 August 2013)

bunyip said:


> Clive Palmer was on TV last night. When the interviewer asked him about the cost of his policies, Clive’s answer was something along the lines of ‘_Stuff the cost, who cares about the cost, just do it’!_
> 
> Clive should stick to business and leave politics to politicians who can speak sense.




I definitely wouldn't invest in a company he's running.  Perfect way to bankruptcy if you don't care about costs.


----------



## sydboy007 (26 August 2013)

So Tony says to trust him, and he'll lead the path to smaller Government.  Ah Tony, PPL and DA are not ways to smaller Government, at least from my perspective!

Ah Tony the form you have from being in the Howard Govt is not encouraging.

As you can see below Howard ran a very BIG Government - 1 of the highest taxing in history as a % of GDP.  I wonder if Abbott will know how to keep spending within revenue levels some 2.5-3% lower than he was used to in power?  That's at least $35B less - hmm that's roughly what Saul Eslake thinks Abbott needs to find in savings just to match Labors current deficit target.  Maybe Tony hasn't quite got his head around just how poorly revenue is coming in these days.  Not even another halving of CGT to spur on house price inflation is going to help him out this time.


----------



## Calliope (26 August 2013)

Don't send in the clown.



> Call it blowback, call it karma, but in Australia's longest-running election campaign, Julia Gillard and then Rudd both sought to make Tony Abbott's character the central issue and both saw their own reputations wilt instead. *Rudd, with his distinct combination of owlish face, preachy persona, punctilious speech and negative tactics, is in danger of becoming what politicians most dread, a joke.*



Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/comment/smile-youre-on-candidate-camera-20130825-2sjrn.html#ixzz2d25NuIfX


----------



## drsmith (26 August 2013)

Syd, 

I'd like to see the above graphic back to the start of the Hawke/Keating government and it to also include government expenditure as a proportion of GDP.


----------



## sydboy007 (26 August 2013)

drsmith said:


> Syd,
> 
> I'd like to see the above graphic back to the start of the Hawke/Keating government and it to also include government expenditure as a proportion of GDP.




Me too.  If you can find one please share.

Sometimes i feel these kinds of Govt statistics are near state secrets.  Practically impossible to find.


----------



## drsmith (26 August 2013)

While there's been a slight improvement in Labor's numbers (in particular its primary vote) in the latest Newspoll, 2PP is still 53% in favour of the Coalition. Newspoll last week was also a bit of an outlier in comparison to the other polls.

Sportsbet though still has Labor going backwards. Odds are now $1.06/$9.50 in favour of the Coalition and the handicap also continues to rise, now at 20.5 seats.

This week is where it might become more interesting with the Coalition to release some detail on savings.

http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/breakfast/interview-with-tony-abbott/4911560


----------



## sydboy007 (26 August 2013)

drsmith said:


> Syd,
> 
> I'd like to see the above graphic back to the start of the Hawke/Keating government and it to also include government expenditure as a proportion of GDP.




This report is the best I could find - http://ipa.org.au/library/publication/1367829888_document_paper_-_australias_big_government_-_may_2013.pdf

I think the IPA is a bit right leaning but the report is a reasonable read.  Probably agree more often than not with what they say.

Pertinent table for historical readings on Govt revenue against GDP is below.

Second table shows some of the major spending areas.  Note tthey don't classify as welfare things like family tax benefits / health insurance rebate / child care fees rebate and other programs like that, so I think they are terribly under reporting the level of welfare payments

Another table in the report shows we have over 16% of the population receiving welfare payments, but once again it's a gross under reporting.

The third table shows what a big public sector employer Howard was.


----------



## drsmith (26 August 2013)

sydboy007 said:


> This report is the best I could find - ....



I think that while you'll find the Howard Government bdidn't run big enough surpluses during the latter years of the resources boom, it's been Labor in government that's failed to adequately respond on the expenditure side of the ledger in response to reduced revenue growth while in government in order to balance the books.

Lets not forget that the last three years of Coalition tax cuts were implemented under a Labor government during the GFC. Peter Costello was right when he said that if surpluses weren't handed out as tax cuts, Labor would waste the money when in office. Labor has still managed to waste billions anyway.


----------



## Calliope (26 August 2013)

drsmith said:


> Labor has still managed to waste billions anyway.




Most posters on this forum wax indignant over Abbott's "over generous" offer to our pregnant working mothers. Yet we just accept as normal that Labor will spend $200,000 on each illegal immigrant just to make them feel at home.



> The government has spent $30 million in the run-up to the election on a saturation ad campaign stating that boat people who destroy their documents will never be settled permanently in Australia. It is a fantasy. Since Rudd announced that boat people will be sent to Papua New Guinea and never see Australia, his ploy has collapsed. Three thousand boat people have arrived since then and most are being warehoused in Australia. *Based on Labor's policies, they will spend years in the Australian legal system at an average cost to taxpayers of roughly $200,000 a person. Madness.*



(My bold)

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/comment/smile-youre-on-candidate-camera-20130825-2sjrn.html#ixzz2d2Z5PgGQ


----------



## Julia (26 August 2013)

Calliope said:


> Most posters on this forum wax indignant over Abbott's "over generous" offer to our pregnant working mothers. Yet we just accept as normal that Labor will spend $200,000 on each illegal immigrant just to make them feel at home.



Um, I don't think we accept this as normal at all.  It's hardly as if there hasn't been plenty of outrage expressed over it.


----------



## Calliope (26 August 2013)

Maybe. But criticism of PPL comes from both the left and the right (including me)... but criticism of the enormous waste of billions in providing every service possible for boat people to circumvent the system, is missing from the left.

There is no doubt that both sides are going to waste billions on undeserving recipients. Rudd prefers illegals for his largess...Abbott prefers mothers. It's a no-brainer really.


----------



## sydboy007 (26 August 2013)

drsmith said:


> I think that while you'll find the Howard Government bdidn't run big enough surpluses during the latter years of the resources boom, it's been Labor in government that's failed to adequately respond on the expenditure side of the ledger in response to reduced revenue growth while in government in order to balance the books.
> 
> Lets not forget that the last three years of Coalition tax cuts were implemented under a Labor government during the GFC. Peter Costello was right when he said that if surpluses weren't handed out as tax cuts, Labor would waste the money when in office. Labor has still managed to waste billions anyway.




Howard and Costello are held up as being marvelous economic managers.  Abbott uses this belief to imply that he will also be a great economic manager.

I have a lot of issue with this claim because:

* The halving of CGT caused massive house price inflation.

* The increased cost of housing has made the economy far more vulnerable to shocks.

* The increased cost of housing has a huge impact on the quality of life for those with a mortgage - higher than would need be - and renters - rents higher than need be.  This is a huge drain on the economy as we now devote far to much of national income to support the over priced housing.

* Flow on effect of the CGT changes is govt revenue is depleted by ~ $5-8B a year due to NG

* By running too small surpluses interest rates were higher than needed.

* Higher interest rates were one of the major causes of the AUD being so over valued which has caused much more damage to the non resource sectors of the economy than needed to occur.  The hollowing out of many sectors may be permanent due to this.

* Foreign debt is probably $2-300B higher than it needs to be due to the excessive pricing of housing in this country, along witht eh associated debt boom the house price inflation caused - remember CBAs 'equity mate" adds?

Focusing just on debt as the only indication of good Governence is wrong.  The explosion of middle class welfare under Howard was destructive to the economy.  He took a temporary jump in the ToT and made permanent increases in Govt outlays and large cuts to Govt revenue.  Labor were stupid to go intot he 2007 election promising the last 3 tax cuts, but Howard and Costello wear some of the blame for suggesting them in teh first place.

What would have been better to have been done is run the surpluses they did, and topped this up with either direct payments into super accounts or set up a SWF as a rainy day insurance policy for when it was needed.  This would have increased national savings, helped to limit the interest rate increased we had, kept the AUD at a more realistic vauation, helped the rest of the economy have an easier adjustment to the resource boom, limited the hollowing out of manufacturing and made the current budget situation a lot easier to handle.

Remember Howard kept on spending even when the RBA was raising interest rates as inflation was getting out of control.  A good economic manager would have set fiscal policy to be in step with monetary policy.  Howard was actually fighting the RBA and we saw mortgage interest rates peak at around 9% due to this.

So I really hope Abbott shows more restraint that the Howard Govt, but so far that's not looking likely.  His 10 year "plan" will be hard to achieve because it will require a level of fiscal discipline that NO Govt has ever shown.


----------



## MrBurns (26 August 2013)

Kevin Rudd removing restrictions on foreign investment caused the latest housing bubble, Chinese bought and are still buying, everything regardless of cost. Driving our young out of the market or into very large debt.

I despise that slimy reptile of a man.


----------



## Calliope (26 August 2013)

sydboy007 said:


> So I really hope Abbott shows more restraint that the Howard Govt, but so far that's not looking likely.  His 10 year "plan" will be hard to achieve because it will require a level of fiscal discipline that NO Govt has ever shown.




I know you hate the conservatives, but more objective people will judge him against the Rudd/Gillard performance.


----------



## sydboy007 (26 August 2013)

MrBurns said:


> Kevin Rudd removing restrictions on foreign investment caused the latest housing bubble, Chinese bought and are still buying, everything regardless of cost. Driving our young out of the market or into very large debt.
> 
> I despise that slimy reptile of a man.




* Can you explain the difference between the current treatment of foreign investors for housing and how it was under Howard?  I ask because I don't know and you say you do.

* You still love Howard even though his CGT changes allowed boomers to NG into housing and push house price inflation to stratospheric levels.  Vale the FHB


----------



## sydboy007 (26 August 2013)

Calliope said:


> I know you hate the conservatives, but more objective people will judge him against the Rudd/Gillard performance.




How about you confine your posts to facts rather than character assessments?

Please put some effort in and refute what I have posted or just stay quiet for a change.

FYI - I have equal displeasure with both sides of politics.

I'm assuming you believe you are in the objective group of people?

I have my point of view, but at least when I post I supply a reasonable level of information to support my view.  I have no issue with someone questioning my reasoning, just so long as they explain why they think I'm wrong with some supporting evidence to back up their claim.

I don't think I've seen you ever realy contribute to the debate Calliope.  You never provide a reasoning, besides blatant ideology.

I joined ASF to share ideas and to learn.  I didn't joint to receive personal attacks which you seem to deal in quite a bit, at least when referrign to my posts.


----------



## noco (26 August 2013)

Please Rudney Rude, cut, cut, cut out the lies

The majority are awake up to you.

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


----------



## Calliope (26 August 2013)

sydboy007 said:


> How about you confine your posts to facts rather than character assessments?




Name me an instance where I have assessed someone's character...except politicians, or "stay quiet for a change".:shake:

Aren't you the guy who referred to Abbott as a "giant twat". Would you like me to give a "character assessment" of your role model, Peter Slipper?



> FYI - I have equal displeasure with both sides of politics.




You are like a cracked record...all Abbott -Abbott -Abbott and Howard-Howard_Howard. Your displeasure with Rudd is just a slight tiff.

Your other serial "displeasures" are Turnbull and Telstra.

Apparently when someone disagrees with you it's a "personal attack". Grow up.


----------



## drsmith (26 August 2013)

sydboy007 said:


> So I really hope Abbott shows more restraint that the Howard Govt, but so far that's not looking likely.  His 10 year "plan" will be hard to achieve because it will require a level of fiscal discipline that NO Govt has ever shown.



One difference is that the Howard government in its early years was much more fiscally prudent than Rudd/Gilard/Rudd Labor has been throughout its time in office. 

I don't think you'll get much argument that the Howard government should have run larger fiscal surpluses in its latter years then it did. That history has been well and truly covered as has Labor's poor fiscal management record whilst in government. The Libs at least weren't running deficits year after year with no end in sight while in office.

As Calliope has pointed out, judgement on election day will be relative and with regard to the $AUD, it's still relatively high despite low interest rates.


----------



## sydboy007 (26 August 2013)

Calliope said:


> Name me an instance where I have assessed someone's character...except politicians, or "stay quiet for a change".:shake:




_I know you hate the conservatives, _ - I don't see the point of you saying that.  If that's not talking about my character, then i stand corrected.



Calliope said:


> Aren't you the guy who referred to Abbott as a "giant twat". Would you like me to give a "character assessment" of your role model, Peter Slipper?




I don't think I've used that term.  If you can show me the posting I'll stand corrected.  

The only reason I've mentioned Peter Slipper, never defending him, was that he's possibly goign to jail for doing something that  Abbott, and a fair chunk of Federal politicians, have done ie claimed personal travel to the tax payer.  Would you have supported someone sneakily referring Tony's book signing travel expenses straight to the AFP in a similar way to Slipper?  Would you have supported someone doing an Ashbury on Tony?  Why didn't the coalition sort Slipper out years ago as it seems his activities were well known for at least a decade?  Gillard showed poor judgment giving him the speaker roll, but the Coalition provided him his senate seat let him hold it while knowing what he was up to.



Calliope said:


> You are like a cracked record...all Abbott -Abbott -Abbott and Howard-Howard_Howard. Your displeasure with Rudd is just a slight tiff.




You're like a cracked record Rudd Rudd, Gillard Gillard.



Calliope said:


> Your other serial "displeasures" are Turnbull and Telstra.




I attack Turnbull and Telstra on technical issues.  If you think I'm wrong then come out and say it.  When I asked you for a specific policy of Abbotts that makes you want to vote for him you never provided one.



Calliope said:


> Apparently when someone disagrees with you it's a "personal attack". Grow up.




I think it is an attack of my character to say "I know you hate the conservatives," because i don't.  I believe in the free market and see the role of Government to stop the market from destroying itself ala the GFC and what the finance industry got up to.

Once again I'l ask you to criticise what I say, and have the decency to provide some supporting evidence as to why you believe I'm wrong, but you never do.  The only issue you seem to have with my postings is when I criticise the Coalition.

On this forum I do criticise the Coalition more than Labor, mainly because the majority here never really do, well beyond PPL but then you'd be doing an Abott defendign the indefensible.

Abbott is likely going to be PM in a couple of Sundays.  Isn't it about time he started to deliver more than hot air and simple slogans?


----------



## drsmith (26 August 2013)

Slogans don't come much simpler than cut-cut-cut.

As for hot air, I have my stash of Liberal Party balloons to blow up on election day to celebrate the demise of Uncle Psycho's government.

Labor too I suspect will be celebrating if Uncle Psycho loses his own seat.


----------



## sydboy007 (26 August 2013)

drsmith said:


> I don't think you'll get much argument that the Howard government should have run larger fiscal surpluses in its latter years then it did. That history has been well and truly covered as has Labor's poor fiscal management record whilst in government. The Libs at least weren't running deficits year after year with no end in sight while in office.




The point I'm trying to make is that by not running much larger surplusses Howard caused a blowout in private debt as big, if not bigger than what Labor has.  His CGT changes have been a perpetual hit to revenue.

The other issue I have is when people talk about Labors debt, they don't take into account that the Federal Government HAD to take on some debt during the GFC.  I'd say probablly a $100B hit to the budget was within order, because to keep it much below that would have caused a larger drop in revenue than we've seen.

I'm looking forward to seeing how Abbot and Hockey cope with managing an economy with a ToT in reverse to what they had a decade ago, where any cuts they make will cause a further fall in GDP growth.  No more free lunches.

It's interesting the debt is bad rhetoric from Abbott has stopped now.  No surplus till his second term.  Will he be man enough to take ownership of any deficit in the 2014/15 or 2015/16 FY?  Surely 21 months is more than long enough to get a budget surplus?  Labors issues have been more of over spending, so does he have the cajones to make the cuts required to get things back in order?  h emight surprise me, but his stance in opposition doesn't bring me much hope.

I REALLY hope to be proved wrong, but my projection is Abbott will be remembered as the GW Bush Jr of Australian PMs


----------



## drsmith (26 August 2013)

sydboy007 said:


> Surely 21 months is more than long enough to get a budget surplus?



It's not for Labor.


----------



## Calliope (26 August 2013)

sydboy007 said:


> _I know you hate the conservatives, _ - I don't see the point of you saying that.  If that's not talking about my character, then i stand corrected.
> ...I think it is an attack of my character to say "I know you hate the conservatives,"




It's really questioning your rationality or common sense rather than attacking your character. I think you are confusing character with acumen.  I'm sure that apart from some political hang-ups you have a lovely character.


----------



## Julia (26 August 2013)

sydboy007 said:


> I think it is an attack of my character to say "I know you hate the conservatives," because i don't.



To be fair, you do give every impression of incessantly pointing out where you feel the Coalition has failed or is lacking.   That's entirely reasonable, but - given that you almost never make any similar criticism of Labor - it doesn't seem unreasonable for anyone to see you as intensely disliking the conservative side of politics.

That's also fair enough, and I don't see any observation of this to necessarily represent an 'attack of your character".  i.e. why should dislike of any side of politics represent a failing of character on the part of the person making that observation?


----------



## drsmith (26 August 2013)

Andrew Bolt has summarised today's 2PP polls,



> Essential Media: Labor 50, Coalition 50
> 
> Newspoll: Labor 47, Coalition 53
> 
> Morgan: Labor 48.5, Coalition 51.5




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

This too wouldn't be a surprise to me if true,

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


----------



## sails (26 August 2013)

drsmith said:


> Andrew Bolt has summarised today's 2PP polls,
> 
> 
> 
> ...




It's on twitter.  If true, it is hard to believe the dishonest tricks and lies used by the left:






https://twitter.com/captdudd/status/371772191626362880/photo/1


----------



## drsmith (26 August 2013)

sails said:


> It's on twitter.  If true, it is hard to believe the dishonest tricks and lies used by the left:



Andrew Bolt's gone as far as claiming to have seen the original screenshot.

Hopefully he's too sensible to have been duped.


----------



## Purple XS2 (26 August 2013)

sydboy007 said:


> ,,, my projection is Abbott will be remembered as the GW Bush Jr of Australian PMs




That my friend, would indicate you've taken no notice of our absent friend 'W' (Dubbya), are taking no notice of Abbott, or both.

W was patently unqualified from day one. He was a put-up job by the machine because they saw him (correctly, it seems) as a man whom the average American Joe could identify with. A communicator. Incredible, but I think that's true.

To that extent, Rudd would be a better comparison to 'W'. Rudd is more intellectual certainly, but the _only_ characteristic Rudd offers to _even his direct supporters_ is that he's a good campaigner. 

Nobody, repeat NOBODY, actually believes Rudd is a capable leader. Except Rudd.

Abbott at least is his own man. Not a talking sock-puppet, nor a actor/entertainer.

I'm not expecting to like his politics.

But if the world turns ugly, I'd much rather see Abbott in the big chair than any leader the Labor party has had to offer since Keating.


----------



## sydboy007 (26 August 2013)

Julia said:


> To be fair, you do give every impression of incessantly pointing out where you feel the Coalition has failed or is lacking.   That's entirely reasonable, but - given that you almost never make any similar criticism of Labor - it doesn't seem unreasonable for anyone to see you as intensely disliking the conservative side of politics.
> 
> That's also fair enough, and I don't see any observation of this to necessarily represent an 'attack of your character".  i.e. why should dislike of any side of politics represent a failing of character on the part of the person making that observation?




Is it too much to ask that comments are confined to issues with the facts of what I've said, rather than issue that I've said it or that I criticise 1 side more than the other?  I'm not making up the criticisms, and no one has come out and said I'm positing factually incorrect data.

I've got no issue with someone saying Syd, I don't think your right about X, because I see it this way....

That kind of response adds value to the discussion.

From my point of view what Calliope does really adds no value.  I'm may not agree that often with say Mr Burns or Dr Smith, or others on this forum, but at least I can understand where they're coming from because they generally explain themselves, and sometimes my view does change a bit as it did in teh Superannuation discussion a few month back.

At least I put a fair amount of effort and research into what I post.

- - - Updated - - -



sails said:


> It's on twitter.  If true, it is hard to believe the dishonest tricks and lies used by the left:
> 
> 
> View attachment 54051
> ...




Imbeciles.  In this day and age of instant gotcha.

They deserve the lambasting they get.


----------



## FxTrader (26 August 2013)

Purple XS2 said:


> W was patently unqualified from day one. He was a put-up job by the machine because they saw him (correctly, it seems) as a man whom the average American Joe could identify with. A communicator. Incredible, but I think that's true.



W's base was the Christian right, far right and big business and he acknowledged as much.  911 saved his presidency by transforming him into a "war president".  Abbott is no doubt more competent (not a high hurdle) but his constituency is essentially the same, there are definite parallels between them.  Unlike Abbott though, Bush could actually deliver a message that did not involve the use of "uh" or "but" in every sentence or feel it a necessary to repeat punch lines at least twice in every sound bite.

Abbott will creep over the line based on Labor mismanagement of the economy and its own leadership, not due to his inspiring ideas or speeches.  Turnbull would be a far better leader but is just to centrist for a front bench whose idol is Howard and his policy legacy.  Abbott is a Howard-lite figure with similar views to his mentor but he lacks the policy courage or public speaking/debating skills of his hero.  Abbott is a leader of the past, a regression to the Howard era of Liberal politics where the BCA crafted policy, refugees were used as political fodder and financial management was the highest aspiration and calling of government.


----------



## Calliope (26 August 2013)

sydboy007 said:


> I'm not making up the criticisms, and no one has come out and said I'm positing factually incorrect data.




I've no idea...it's just boring.



> From my point of view what Calliope does really adds no value.




No value to a leftie. My vote on 7 September will add value in kicking that obnoxious creep Peter Slipper out on his ear. I guess he will be sadly missed by his friends in Oxford Street.



> At least I put a fair amount of effort and research into what I post.




You poor ole thing...you are not getting the appreciation you deserve.


----------



## sydboy007 (27 August 2013)

Something neither party will want to talk about - thanks to Macrobusiness highlighting the work of Brian Toohey

Budget support for retirement incomes dwarfs all other fiscal problems, yet there is bipartisan support for pretending nothing needs to change. Without serious reform, an ageing population will impose a crippling burden on a proportionally smaller workforce. Conservative estimates put the combined cost of the age pension and the superannuation tax concessions at more than $100 billion a year by 2019-20 and almost $500 billion over the next four years.

In the Financial Review on Thursday, David Bassanese nominated Peter Costello’s removal of tax on super after age 60 as the worst policy blunder of the past decade or so (“The pick of the policy blunders”, August 22). Unhappily, the then Treasury head, Ken Henry, called it one of his department’s best policy proposals. Now Henry says taxes must go up to cope with rising costs…

Although not on Bassanese’s list, Howard’s introduction of the Commonwealth Seniors Health Card was another blunder. It lets people over 65 with a tax-free income of more than $500,000 receive prescription drugs for one sixth of the price for minimum wage earners. Abbott might agree to tighter means tests, but will be reluctant to scrap the card completely…


----------



## bunyip (27 August 2013)

Remember the song, ‘The Great Pretender’?
Here’s an updated version.

http://www.2gb.com/audioplayer/10457


----------



## bunyip (27 August 2013)

My missus and I have just been going through our ballot papers before casting our postal vote. 
With 36 political parties to choose from, I’m finding it a pretty daunting task to choose between them. So far I’ve narrowed it down to three possibilities....

* The Help End Marijuana Prohibition Party
* The Sex Party
* The Pirate Party

Can somebody help me out here – which one of these three should get my vote?


----------



## Logique (27 August 2013)

sails said:


> It's on twitter.  If true, it is hard to believe the dishonest tricks and lies used by the left:
> View attachment 54051
> 
> https://twitter.com/captdudd/status/371772191626362880/photo/1



Gabrielle might also be part of the Q&A balanced audience.


----------



## bunyip (27 August 2013)

noco said:


> Please Rudney Rude, cut, cut, cut out the lies
> 
> The majority are awake up to you.
> 
> http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/rudds_campaign_of_lies/




One of the reasons ALP Premier Anna Bligh copped a wipeout in the Queensland election was that like Rudd, she had little but a track record of incompetence and economic mismanagement to bring to the election campaign. So in desperation she started making up lies in an attempt to discredit Campbell Newman. The public saw straight through her blatant dishonesty, and she went down in a landslide defeat.

I didn’t think Rudd would be dumb enough to copy Bligh’s failed tactics, but he’s proven me wrong.


----------



## Calliope (27 August 2013)

sydboy007 said:


> In the Financial Review on Thursday, David Bassanese nominated Peter Costello’s removal of tax on super after age 60 as the *worst policy blunder of the past decade *or so...
> 
> ... Howard’s introduction of the Commonwealth Seniors Health Card was *another blunder*.




The hatred for Howard and Costello among the left is almost palpable. Gillard and Rudd on the other hand apparently never made any blunders. It seems to be a class war thing.


----------



## MrBurns (27 August 2013)

Bill Shortens rant on Q and A about how all Labors woes are the fault of the media was very well done, except he forgot the mention that the media wouldn't be so critical if Labor weren't so incredibly unworthy of Governing.


----------



## sydboy007 (27 August 2013)

Calliope said:


> The hatred for Howard and Costello among the left is almost palpable. Gillard and Rudd on the other hand apparently never made any blunders. It seems to be a class war thing.




I see it this way Calliope

Gillard is gone - so what benefit is there in criticising her?

Rudd is pretty much gone - Govt is in care taker mode so he can't do anything till after the election and well if you'd like to bet he'll still PM after the election I'll take you on - so seems no point in criticising him as he's got no relevance to the future.

Abbott is most likely going to be the next PM, so out of the 3 he's the only one who will have the power to enact their policies.

So why waste my time criticising Rudd or Gillard, when maybe criticising Abbott might help to change it for the better?

Hopefully you noticed I started that post with "Something *neither *party will want to talk about" ie I was criticising Labor AND the Coalition.

Once again all you've done is criticise me for saying something about Abbott and the Coalition, but you don't seem to think the facts behind what I'm saying is wrong.  I'm happy to debate you on your choice of Abbotts policies.  maybe pick the one that most makes you want to vote for him and let the discussion start.

- - - Updated - - -

My gosh, News corp the most balanced reporting of the election.


----------



## Calliope (27 August 2013)

sydboy007 said:


> So why waste my time criticising the past, when maybe criticising the future might help to change it for the better?




Exactly. So why keep carping on about Howard and Costello?

Criticise the future???

Perhaps you could educate yourself by reading this article on CLEANING UP LABOR'S MESS in the hated Murdoch press.



> Bob Hawke and Paul Keating overspent, but the productive economy they left did a great deal of the work for Howard-Costello in paying debts. The same could not be said for the Rudd-Gillard governments.
> 
> It would be tempting to consider laying charges against Labor ministers Kevin Rudd, Julia Gillard, Wayne Swan, Penny Wong and Stephen Conroy for wasting $250 billion of Australian taxpayers' money. But, hey, Australia is a liberal democracy and we don't like to be seen to exact revenge. Perhaps an apology would do it.




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...g-up-labors-mess/story-fn8v83qk-1226704567737


----------



## Knobby22 (27 August 2013)

Lol Sydboy. what a joke.

It's like the CNNNN quote. We report...you believe!


----------



## drsmith (27 August 2013)

MrBurns said:


> Bill Shortens rant on Q and A about how all Labors woes are the fault of the media was very well done, except he forgot the mention that the media wouldn't be so critical if Labor weren't so incredibly unworthy of Governing.



Last night's Media Watch was the warm up act for the main theme of Q&A. Even Janet Albrechtsen copped it for stating essentially what Kevin's own colleagues have said about him in the past and will no doubt revisit after Labor's election loss.



> And of course The Australian has also been there to put the boot in  through its columnist Janet Albrechtsen ...
> 
> _VOTERS ARE WAKING UP TO THE REAL RUDD
> 
> ...




The ABC culture is clearly having difficulties with the questioning of their messiah's character. It needs to remember that unlike Fairfax and Newscorp, it is publically funded.

http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcripts/s3834127.htm

As for Q&A, Kelly O'dwyer was impressive. It would have been a very long episode for Bill Shorten. His body language and frustration throughout the show was obvious. Near the end of the show, he mentioned the prospect of Coalition control of the Senate. That's Labor's battlefront now.

http://www.abc.net.au/tv/qanda/txt/s3818772.htm


----------



## drsmith (27 August 2013)

drsmith said:


> Sportsbet though still has Labor going backwards. Odds are now $1.06/$9.50 in favour of the Coalition and the handicap also continues to rise, now at 20.5 seats.



Now $1.04/$10.00 with the handicap at 21.5 seats.


----------



## moXJO (27 August 2013)

Anyone had a serious look at Clive Palmers Australian Party?
I agree with some of his policies I have seen, but haven't really looked much deeper for any fruit cake hidden  beneath.


----------



## drsmith (27 August 2013)

moXJO said:


> Anyone had a serious look at Clive Palmers Australian Party?
> I agree with some of his policies I have seen, but haven't really looked much deeper for any fruit cake hidden  beneath.



One policy wish list.

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/f...t=26320&page=2&p=790788&viewfull=1#post790788

The detail on his own site is a little lean.

http://palmerunited.com/policies/


----------



## Calliope (27 August 2013)

I just watched part of a sickening interview of Rudd on Ch 7 by Rudd-lover Mark Riley. Riley asked him if he was concerned about losing his seat. This was the bullsh!t reply:

"You know something Mark, I'm not faintly concerned about what happens to me. I am only concerned about what happens to Australia." 

With the usual Rudd hyperbole he also said that Abbott was going to waste billions on PPL to *millionaire women.*

The man is a psychopathic liar, i.e. he actually believes his own lies.


----------



## sydboy007 (27 August 2013)

moXJO said:


> Anyone had a serious look at Clive Palmers Australian Party?
> I agree with some of his policies I have seen, but haven't really looked much deeper for any fruit cake hidden  beneath.




The Palmer United Party wants a 15 percentage point cut in income tax, the abolition of fringe benefits tax and tax deductibility of home loan payments.

So far no mention of how to pay for this massive loss of revenue.


----------



## noco (27 August 2013)

Why is it that every time Labor aquires the purse strings whether in Federal, State or Local Governments it always finishes up in one hell of a mess only to be sorted out by an incoming Liberal Government. Then once the Liberals get the counrty back on its feet, the naive say it is time for a change and history is repeated all over again

The Beattie/Bligh Labor Government were borrowing money to pay public servants. The public servants in Queensland rose from 140,000 to over 200,000 in ten years. That was all a part of Labors plan to hood wink people into believing Labor had reduced unemployment. Rudd blamed Newman for the increase in unemployment because he reduced the public service by 14,000 when in actual fact unemployment fell in Queensland. Rudd dare not mention about the two Labor states of Tasmania and South Australia who have 8.5% and 7.2 % unemployment.

Labor gloats about what they have achieved. and that is very little by the way, but it is all on borrowed money. Most of the money they have borrowed has been wasted.   

Gary Johns remonstrates Labors mess and what the incoming Coalition will have to face to clean it up.


http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...g-up-labors-mess/story-fn8v83qk-1226704567737


----------



## drsmith (27 August 2013)

Calliope said:


> I just watched part of a sickening interview of Rudd on Ch 7 by Rudd-lover Mark Riley. Riley asked him if he was concerned about losing his seat. This was the bullsh!t reply:
> 
> "You know something Mark, I'm not faintly concerned about what happens to me. I am only concerned about what happens to Australia."
> 
> ...



If Kev could dredge and widen the Brisbane River to get the nation's primary naval port within his own electorate to save his political hide, he would.


----------



## sydboy007 (27 August 2013)

rent seeking 101 - http://www.whosnext.com.au/

_Up until now, salary sacrificing a car (also known as novated leasing) has been a common and affordable way for employees to drive a car._

Seems there's no other way into car ownership.

I wonder if we'll see novated leases for housing as the answer to home affordability.


----------



## Julia (27 August 2013)

Calliope said:


> With the usual Rudd hyperbole he also said that Abbott was going to waste billions on PPL to *millionaire women.*
> 
> The man is a psychopathic liar, i.e. he actually believes his own lies.



Is it not true that the Abbott PPL is as available to millionaire women as to those on the average wage, with fewer assets?


----------



## noco (27 August 2013)

Julia said:


> Is it not true that the Abbott PPL is as available to millionaire women as to those on the average wage, with fewer assets?




I believe there is only about 2% of women on $150,000 and there would be a very small percentage of that 2 % who would fall pregnant.  Most of those type of women are career women and most of them would not even be married and most of them would be of mature age any way. Isn't the scheme capped at $150.000?

I heard on QandA on Monday night where the lowest paid women would be paid $5,000 more on Abbott's PPL than the current system under Labor. Kelly O'Dwyer could not pin down Bill Shorten to fessing up to it which means she was most likely correct.


----------



## Calliope (27 August 2013)

noco said:


> I believe there is only about 2% of women on $150,000 and there would be a very small percentage of that 2 % who would fall pregnant.  Most of those type of women are career women and most of them would not even be married and most of them would be of mature age any way. Isn't the scheme capped at $150.000?




Yes I doubt if many (or any) millionaire women would be eligible. Most would be widows or past breeding age. In America millionaires are on average 61 years of age. I imagine it is similar here.  *Rudd never misses an opportunity to play the class warfare card.*


----------



## Bushman (27 August 2013)

Now the good uncle psycho, he of the 'rat f*****s' school of diplomacy, is trying to profit off a thousand dead Syrians by saying Abbott couldn't deal with rubber stamping the us plan of action. Wow, he really is entrenched in his krudd bubble. My favorite is him cryptically telling news journos today to stop giving him a hard time and to watch media watch!! then apparently that evil hairdresser got him all wrong and hurt his feelings. He is certifiable, crazier even than Latham. Only the alp can deliver such vaudeville.


----------



## Calliope (27 August 2013)

sydboy007 said:


> I'm happy to debate you on your choice of Abbotts policies.  maybe pick the one that most makes you want to vote for him and let the discussion start.




The policy that makes me want to vote for him is his determination to get rid of the malignant, lying, deceitful, nasty, malicious and corrupt Kevin Rudd and his gang of sycophants.

I now await the Rudd or Milne policy that attracts you most.


----------



## sydboy007 (28 August 2013)

Calliope said:


> The policy that makes me want to vote for him is his determination to get rid of the malignant, lying, deceitful, nasty, malicious and corrupt Kevin Rudd and his gang of sycophants.
> 
> I now await the Rudd or Milne policy that attracts you most.




Hmm.  Doesn't seem a policy per se but hey whatever rocks your boat.

As for myself, so far not a single party inspires me to vote for them.  From my perspective so far no political party is willing to tackle the major issues facing this country.  Issues like:

* Unsustainable welfare - seems we'll be increasing this

* The turn of demographics and the fact we've left beind the favourable tail winds of improving dependency ratios and have been experiencing for the last 3 years an increasing number of dependents per worker.

* Degrading infrastructure - little interest in fixing this and I don't understand Abbotts hatred of funding rail.  

* Housing affordability - neither of the major parties really mentions this, and until they are willing to tackle the perverse effect of half rate CGT and full rate NG, along with improving supply side issues, the country will continue to be crippled by renters and mortgagees paying ridiculous levels of their income for the basic need of shelter.

So realy Calliope, why vote for any of them?  They're not doing much for the country, they're not being honest with the public about the issues we're facing.  It seems the magic pudding is alive.  They can spend spend spend, and for Abbott cut taxes as well.

So the lie is you can have it all - higher spending, lower taxes, just vote for ME.

I've only every heard you criticise Abbott over his policies.  I've never heard you praise anything that he says he'll do when in power, though I suspect you probably favour his blood oath to remove carbon trading and set the hounds of beaucracy across the land to implement his DA.  Your hatred of Labor is clear, but does anyone really know what Abott stands for.  The guy can't even read an electricity bill - http://tinyurl.com/8rno7o4 - so I'm not sure how he's supposed to "manage' the economy (another lie the politicians tell us), and he's as ethically challeged as any politician out there - his spinning a changing message to different audiences shows this.

So why don't you apply the same yard stick to Labor and Coalition?

ps check out the net savings rate for the private sector, especially during the Howard Costello years.  Pretty scary the perverse effect of halving the CGT had when it combind with NG and house price inflation.  I dobut it will happen again, but Abbott say he wants to take us back to those halcyon years.  The country can't support an increase in debt like that again, and I'd hope Abbot doesn't do a Howard on those with a mortgage and get interest payments as a proportion of disposable income back up to the recession we had to have levels.


----------



## bunyip (28 August 2013)

I have no idea if the following really is from a retired RAAF Wing Commander. But I agree that Rudd’s recent visit to Afghanistan was nothing more than an expensive publicity stunt designed to snare the vote of the defense forces.

Ditto for Rudd’s latest stunt to move the naval fleet from Sydney to Brisbane – just another scam to try and shore up his Queensland vote. He didn’t even have the decency to discuss it with NSW Premier Barry O'Farrell, or even to let him know. 
I wouldn’t be surprised if Rudd didn’t even let some of his own cabinet know. When he announced his policy for the development of Northern Australia earlier this month, Bill Shorten admitted that Rudd had told him about it ‘only yesterday’. 
The northern Australian development policy is pretty much the same one put forward by the LNP earlier that Labor were so critical of.

Their latest plan for the naval fleet is the direct opposite of their own policy just a few months ago when in their white paper on defense, they outlined all the reasons why moving the fleet to Brisbane was not a viable option.

I don’t think it will happen if Rudd is re-elected – he has no intention of doing it, just like he has no intention of doing some of the other things he’s bangs on about – they’re just publicity stunts that he hopes will be vote winners.
_


From a retired ex RAAF Wing Commander

KRUDD & the first shiela's trip to Afghanistan via a RAAF KC30-A. A330 Tanker was specifically tasked for just him, wife & media visit to Afghanistan .
The trip went via Perth and was a very quick over & back task.

What a complete waste of taxpayer funds for a photo op with the troops, when we have a massive cutback in defence spending.

This trip will not have come out of No 34 VIP Squadrons funding for Prime Ministerial travel. The KC30-A Tanker belongs & funding expenditure is allocated by No 33 Squadron at Amberley.

In effect he is stealing funding from defence operations for his own political purposes. Is there no end to this prick's selfishness, self aggrandisement, waste and contempt to the Armed Services and the Australian Tax Payer?

And this while most of my retired military friends are living impoverished lives on their Labor Party deliberately reduced (Defence Forces Retirement Benefit Fund) superannuation indexation. In my case it is minus $550 a fortnight since I retired and I was a Wing Commander. Most of the retired guys were Warrant Officers or lesser ranks and really struggling after serving their country all their working lives.

It's a bloody disgrace! About $560 million would repay it all back which is about a week's worth of illegal immigrants under Rudd!
_


----------



## waza1960 (28 August 2013)

Syd  I actually respect the fact that you support your argument with some substance.
       However you shoot yourself in the foot showing your true colours when you write these furphies


> Degrading infrastructure - little interest in fixing this and I don't understand Abbotts hatred of funding rail.



  Hatred of Rail??  I haven't seen any evidence of this plus its a state responsibility. Infrastructure will improve under his government IMO.


> The guy can't even read an electricity bill - http://tinyurl.com/8rno7o4



  Really you go back to 2012 for this?? The "guy" is a Rhodes scholar at worst he is guilty of a little spin like most pollies.

 Disclaimer: I am a liberal voter and proud of it.


----------



## bunyip (28 August 2013)

sydboy007 said:


> I joined ASF to share ideas and to learn.



Syd

I was really pleased to see that you came on this forum to learn. 

OK then, here’s a lesson you can take  home with you.....*DON’T EMPLOY INCOMPETENT PEOPLE.*

Don’t employ an incompetent painter to paint your house, or an incompetent mechanic to work on your car, or an incompetent accountant to handle your taxation affairs.
*And don’t employ an incompetent manager to run your country*.

The last six years have shown us that Labor and Rudd are incompetent to run Australia. For most of that time we’ve enjoyed the biggest resources boom in our history, yet in spite of inheriting a no debt situation and a big budget surplus, Labor managed to turn them into a huge debt and a big budget deficit. This is in spite of whacking on one new tax after another to try and shore up their coffers. Year after year after they’ve promised to deliver a budget surplus, and have failed to do so every time. Meantime, our debt has kept climbing.
Year after year they’ve given us lies and spin. Year after year they’ve been clueless on how to fix the illegal boat people debacle which they created. 
Year after year they’ve wasted billions of dollars on stupid expenditure that has virtually no lasting benefit for our country. Year after year they’ve cut funding to such essentials as customs services, health, defense, and universities.
Year after year they’ve fought among themselves like lions around a zebra carcass.

Ask yourself this question......’_Is this the sort of government I want to run my country’?_
If you answer yes to this question, then you’re a fool. If you answer no, then vote the bastards out on September 7 and give somebody else a go. If the next mob don’t do any better, then vote them out too at the first opportunity. 
But at least show enough respect for your country to toss out these incompetent clowns who have been running Australia into the ground for six long years.


----------



## Knobby22 (28 August 2013)

noco said:


> I believe there is only about 2% of women on $150,000 and there would be a very small percentage of that 2 % who would fall pregnant.  Most of those type of women are career women and most of them would not even be married and most of them would be of mature age any way. Isn't the scheme capped at $150.000?
> 
> .




Bit sad if true. I only know two career women personally, both earn over $150,000. Both have kids. one is a politician.
The other one went recently with the family to visit all the Harry Potter sites in England with the kids. She gets looked after with regards to maternity leave at full pay where she works anyway. In future, under this scheme instead of the company supplying it, it will be the government, i.e. us.


----------



## MrBurns (28 August 2013)

Knobby22 said:


> Bit sad if true. I only know two career women personally, both earn over $150,000. Both have kids. one is a politician.
> The other one went recently with the family to visit all the Harry Potter sites in England with the kids. She gets looked after with regards to maternity leave at full pay where she works anyway. In future, under this scheme instead of the company supplying it, it will be the government, i.e. us.




Someone should have told here they're in New Zealand

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_country_are_the_Harry_Potter_films_filmed


----------



## Calliope (28 August 2013)

waza1960 said:


> Syd  I actually respect the fact that you support your argument with some substance.
> However you shoot yourself in the foot showing your true colours when you write these furphies
> 
> Hatred of Rail??  I haven't seen any evidence of this plus its a state responsibility. Infrastructure will improve under his government IMO.
> ...




Good for you waza.. Unlike sydboy who claims he is a neutral. It is obvious what sydboy does stand for. He is wrapped up in the politics of envy and class warfare. He nags away at me because I don't criticise Abbott's policies. Frankly, I don't give a toss about Abbott's policies. All I ask of him is that he rid this country of a malignant cancer. I see it as a case of decency versus evil.

In my electorate the choice is clear cut. The choice is between Mal Brough, a decent man who I know well, and Peter Slipper who is probably the most despised man in the electorate, but you will never hear any criticism of him from sydboy. 

His hatreds are more well defined...Howard, Costello, Abbott, Turnbull. Telstra...


----------



## pajdons (28 August 2013)

Syd

As an aside you continually rant about the negative impact of the 50% CGT discount and the impact on revenue and as no one has queried your stance l raise the following. This was introduced as part of a package of CGT reform of which the major component was the removal of indexation of the cost base. My understanding was the calculated net revenue impact of the changes was a significant and increasing government tax take over time. The taxing of nominal (not necessarily real) gains accrued over time at full marginal tax rates in one year would have been a very hard sell, given even with the 50% discount it represented a big tax increase.


----------



## Julia (28 August 2013)

noco said:


> I believe there is only about 2% of women on $150,000 and there would be a very small percentage of that 2 % who would fall pregnant.  Most of those type of women are career women and most of them would not even be married and most of them would be of mature age any way. Isn't the scheme capped at $150.000?



OK, the more appropriate reference would be perhaps to 'millionaire families'.
$150K cap is far too high.  I just don't see how you can justify paying wealthy people to have kids.
If any sort of PPL happens it should be something that's negotiated between the woman and her workplace.


----------



## drsmith (28 August 2013)

The 50% discount to CGT as implemented was poor policy in my view. By allowing the full discount after 12 months, it encouraged speculation which no doubt fed into demand for established residential property. When combined with the removal if CPI indexation of the cost base, long term asset investment was also penalised in both relative and absolute terms.

That's not to say some other form of discount was inappropriate given the combination of relatively low inflation of the time (compared to when CGT was introduced) and high marginal rates of personal income tax.

A more prudent approach would have been to retain CPI indexation of the cost base, grade any other discount in over a number of years and give individual investors the choice of either a CPI indexed cost base or the alternative discount upon disposal of an asset.

As for the current election campaign, The Coalition has released a summery page of savings.

http://www.afr.com/p/national/politics/hockey_reveals_coalition_costings_H0MgKIxaACH8EyuS7y3PNN


----------



## Calliope (28 August 2013)

drsmith said:


> The Coalition has released a summery page of savings.
> 
> http://www.afr.com/p/national/politics/hockey_reveals_coalition_costings_H0MgKIxaACH8EyuS7y3PNN




Summery savings are a pleasant change after our winters of discontent.

Sorry Doc, sometimes I just can't help myself.


----------



## drsmith (28 August 2013)

Calliope said:


> Summery savings are a pleasant change after our winters of discontent.
> 
> Sorry Doc, sometimes I just can't help myself.



It's getting closer to summer every day and September 7 will be a significant step forward in that regard.


----------



## sails (28 August 2013)

Reachtel poll: 
Labor 47 to Coalition 53.  
preferred PM - Abbott 53.6 to Rudd 46.4


More data from Reachtel: http://www.reachtel.com.au/blog/7-news-national-poll-26august13

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...n/comments/reachtel_labor_47_to_coalition_53/


----------



## noco (28 August 2013)

More lies from MR. HYPOCRITE. He cut,cut,cut the ADF to the point where they are almost defenceless.

Rudd promised to increase defence spending to 3% of GDP and is now down to 1.6%.

What else would he cut,cut,cut if he got into power? 


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


----------



## Knobby22 (28 August 2013)

MrBurns said:


> Someone should have told here they're in New Zealand
> 
> http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_country_are_the_Harry_Potter_films_filmed




They showed me shots of the railway and some other things.  

3-Day Isle of Skye, Scottish Highlands and the Jacobite Steam Train from Edinburgh, Edinburgh, ...  


3-Day Isle of Skye, Scottish Highlands and the Jacobite Steam Train from Edinburgh 

5 star rating: Highly Recommended16 Reviews 


Experience the Highland beauty of the Isle of Skye on a 3-day excursion from Edinburgh. You'll spend two nights on the Isle of Skye, see legendary Loch Ness ...  Read more


----------



## IFocus (28 August 2013)

noco said:


> I believe there is only about 2% of women on $150,000 and there would be a very small percentage of that 2 % who would fall pregnant.  Most of those type of women are career women and most of them would not even be married and most of them would be of mature age any way. Isn't the scheme capped at $150.000?





I believe the real issue is women earning $100K or more which is 7% to 8% by all accounts the PPL is likely to be underfunded.


----------



## noco (28 August 2013)

IFocus said:


> I believe the real issue is women earning $100K or more which is 7% to 8% by all accounts the PPL is likely to be underfunded.




Yes that is all very well, but those on that type of money would have paid $30,000 income tax.

A woman on $150,000 would have to pay close to $40,000 income tax which would be enough to provide for two aged pensioners.

These are the facts that are being overlooked by one eyed rusted on Labor supporters.

All Rudd can rave on about with his scare campaign is why should the tax payers pay a millionare to have a babe.

IMHO, irrespect of the tax that high income earners pay, I do believe the PPL should be deferred untill the ecomomy revives the Labor wilful waste. I do understand Abbotts scheme does not come into effect untill July 2015


----------



## Calliope (28 August 2013)

noco said:


> IMHO, irrespect of the tax that high income earners pay, I do believe the PPL should be deferred untill the ecomomy revives the Labor wilful waste. I do understand Abbotts scheme does not come into effect untill July 2015




It's a pity it has to be deferred that long. This country badly needs more high calibre women having high calibre babies.

This is typical of the sour carping whining losers who oppose it.


----------



## sails (28 August 2013)

IFocus said:


> I believe the real issue is women earning $100K or more which is 7% to 8% by all accounts the PPL is likely to be underfunded.




I understand that women will pay their normal tax on the PPL - that means those on high wages will give back a higher percentage of their PPL in tax. Does anyone know if that's correct?


----------



## noco (28 August 2013)

sails said:


> I understand that women will pay their normal tax on the PPL - that means those on high wages will give back a higher percentage of their PPL in tax. Does anyone know if that's correct?




Yes I believe that is correct. I can't see how it could ever be tax free. So a Mumma on $150,000 would receive $75,000 and pay some $20,000 in income tax: enough to pay a pensioner for one year.


----------



## Logique (28 August 2013)

Rudd was as glib and silver-tongued as ever on the leaders debate tonight. 

He sends a shiver up my spine. The past 6 years, the national debt, the electrified workers in pink batt ceilings, it's as nothing to him.  

The AFL demonizes James Hird. Who are the real criminals in this country.


----------



## sydboy007 (29 August 2013)

waza1960 said:


> Syd  I actually respect the fact that you support your argument with some substance.
> However you shoot yourself in the foot showing your true colours when you write these furphies
> 
> Hatred of Rail??  I haven't seen any evidence of this plus its a state responsibility. Infrastructure will improve under his government IMO.
> ...




Actually at least oneFederal Labor Govts have helped the states with rail.  My understanding is some of the train carriages in Brisbane were funded by an ALP Federal Govt.  I don't understand why Abbott is only interested in funding roads in the states.  Surely if there's a bigger economic payoff for investing in rail then isn't that a better use of scares money?

As for Abbotts electricty bill claims, if as you say he's intelligent enough to read the bill correctly then I have a huge issue with what he did.  I grew up bouncing around the poverty line for my first 22 years.  It's not fun.  the stress and fear Abbott caused with that lie, well politicians shouldn't be doing that to people on low incomes.

This is what Tony said: "With an $800 increase in just one bill of which 70 per cent is due to the carbon tax, how can the Prime Minister possibly claim that Hetty Verolme's compensation is in any way adequate?"

Spin is when you use factually correct information and present it in a way to manipulate people's understanding.  I don't like it but I can accept that it' part and parcel of politics.  Tony LIED.  What he said was factualy incorrect, and the brooha his statements caused meant it was widely reported.  He got away with it, and seems most people don't care.  Fair enough, but if you let him get away with crap like that now, don't expect him to behave any better as PM.  Rudd is no much better with his cut cut cut scare campaign.  FFS both parties decided to take a temporary increase in Govt revenue and blow it.  Little of it was used to secure further income in the future.  Cuts have to be made and someone needs to start telling the public we're going to see a fall in our living standards till we match Govt revenue with spending.


----------



## sydboy007 (29 August 2013)

bunyip said:


> Syd
> 
> I was really pleased to see that you came on this forum to learn.
> 
> OK then, here’s a lesson you can take  home with you.....*DON’T EMPLOY INCOMPETENT PEOPLE.*




Bunyip

I feel like I've been in a Labor taxi with a crazy driver screaming at other taxis and generally scaring the bee jezzes out of me.  Now I'm at a set of lights and throwing money to the drive and jumping out.

There's a pretty slick looking Liberal taxi.  Pretty much no other options around.  Oh I could take the pedal power Green taxi, but it's summer mate and I dun feel like sweating that much.

Prob is, I fear the Liberal taxi is going to take me on a near as crazy trip.  I hope I'm wrong, and if the Coalition actualy release some new policy before the election I might decide to sit in the back seat and see how things go.

Prob the thing i hate most about the Labor dysfunction is the free ride it's given Abbott.  No one is realy question him on Coalition policies - PPL excepted.  He's taken advantage of it and basically asking us to trust him.  I know we get to do a perforamnce review in 3 years, but 3 years can be a very long time, and I doubt I'll ever trust a politician.


----------



## sydboy007 (29 August 2013)

pajdons said:


> Syd
> 
> As an aside you continually rant about the negative impact of the 50% CGT discount and the impact on revenue and as no one has queried your stance l raise the following. This was introduced as part of a package of CGT reform of which the major component was the removal of indexation of the cost base. My understanding was the calculated net revenue impact of the changes was a significant and increasing government tax take over time. The taxing of nominal (not necessarily real) gains accrued over time at full marginal tax rates in one year would have been a very hard sell, given even with the 50% discount it represented a big tax increase.




My issue with the halving of CGT was that Howard left NG able to offset non asset income.  Since the CGT change:

* Investment properties in aggregate have made a loss EVERY YEAR.  Prior to the change the losses were minimal with the odd positive year.  The accumulated losses are around the $60B mark if you take inflation into account.  Most years the loss is equivalent to a decent income tax cut.

* The halving of CGT on pre exisiting assets did very little to encourage new investment - IP loans are around 90% for pre exisiting dwellings.  It did encourage speculation and people to look for ways to convert income into capital gains.

If Howard had also reformed NG to be the same as most other countries - ie any losses above the income of the asset are added to the cost base and lower the CGT bill - I dare say we wouldn't have had the house price inflation we've had, household debt would be far lower, rents would be lower, FHBs would probably not be priced out of the housing market, and our external debt would be far lower.  Economicaly and socially we'd all be better off

As it stands property "investors" (I don't think someone willing to loose money in the hopes of a capital gain is an investor) are pretty much all that's in the housing market at present.

Whoever decides to tackle this issue will have to be extremely courageous in the Sir Humphrey sense.

- - - Updated - - -



Logique said:


> He sends a shiver up my spine. The past 6 years, the national debt, the electrified workers in pink batt ceilings, it's as nothing to him.




By your reasoning if there is an increase in workplace deaths during an Abbot Govt, he will take personal responsibility?  Notice the massive decline in workplace deaths since Labor has been in office.  A pretty amazing achievement when considering the huge increase in workers in the resource sector and associated construction.


----------



## wayneL (29 August 2013)

Syd, Re the CGT changes. 

1/ They also apply to other assets classes such as shares

2/ There housing price bubble was common to most western countries and some in the East. More to do with availability of credit and social proof than taxation.

I think your continuous bleeting on this point is off the mark... no more than a minor impact


----------



## Tink (29 August 2013)

I think a majority have made up their minds who they will be voting for by now, 10 days out of the election. 
Come on down the 7th.
Some of the questions in this last debate said it loud and clear, that the public want change.

Labor have trashed their brand in the last six years and need time out to reform. 
I cant see Rudd staying as leader if he loses.


----------



## bunyip (29 August 2013)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=71sucm5iWNY&list=UUNl_vmWxfBo5ySCuKS_RNfA&feature=player_embedded#t=6


----------



## bunyip (29 August 2013)

Tink said:


> Labor have trashed their brand in the last six years and need time out to reform.
> I cant see Rudd staying as leader if he loses.





I don’t think the ALP will want Rudd after he loses the election. Most of them don’t really want him now, but they reluctantly elected him because he was their only possible hope of pulling off an election win. 
Win or lose on September 7, I think the Labor Party will once again turn on Rudd after the election.

Maybe friend Kevin will be on the lookout for another political party to join. 
I was surprised to see on my ballot paper that one of the parties is called the Pirate Party. Kev might be a prime candidate to join this party, given his plan to plunder our bank accounts!


----------



## Calliope (29 August 2013)

Paul Kelly thought that Abbott clearly won last night's debate. His only negative for Abbott seems to be the PPL. 



> If there is any big message for the Opposition Leader , it is the political problem arising from his PPL scheme.




This comment on Kelly's article exactly mirrors my own experience and thoughts;



> Ron of ACT Posted at 9:39 AM Today
> With regard to comment 27, it is not just younger women who support it. As an older male(retired, and yes I guess I will lose some franking credits), I am strongly in favour of the PPL.* I worked with many very capable women who had to work hard juggling new babies and busy careers. They were amazing in managing it and deserve all of the support the PPL will offer*




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...vin-to-the-brink/story-e6frg74x-1226706068435


----------



## Julia (29 August 2013)

bunyip said:


> I don’t think the ALP will want Rudd after he loses the election. Most of them don’t really want him now, but they reluctantly elected him because he was their only possible hope of pulling off an election win.
> Win or lose on September 7, I think the Labor Party will once again turn on Rudd after the election.



+10.  Even if he won, I think it would all fall apart pretty quickly, so great is their loathing of him.


----------



## noco (29 August 2013)

Logique said:


> Rudd was as glib and silver-tongued as ever on the leaders debate tonight.
> 
> He sends a shiver up my spine. The past 6 years, the national debt, the electrified workers in pink batt ceilings, it's as nothing to him.
> 
> The AFL demonizes James Hird. Who are the real criminals in this country.




And don't forget the 1000 + who have lost their lives at sea all because of Rudd's stipid decision to relax the borders.

Rudd says he had a mandate to do what he did. I would sure like to see some evidence of that statement!!!!


----------



## Calliope (29 August 2013)

All over Red Rover. I guess that GG and Explod are the only remaining Rudd backers on the forum.



> *That’s it! Sorry Sky News, apologies to the ABC, don’t bother news.com.au. We’re calling it first*.
> 
> Sportsbet has declared the federal election a one-horse race and we’re paying out all bets on the Coalition nine days before Australia goes to the polls.
> 
> ...



(My Bolds)

- See more at: http://www.sportsbet.com.au/blog/ho...ion?CarouselSB1#sthash.gVGC7Yqn.HkvIv6xA.dpuf


----------



## bunyip (29 August 2013)

Julia said:


> +10.  Even if he won, I think it would all fall apart pretty quickly, so great is their loathing of him.




Julia

Any thoughts on who will replace Rudd if he relinquishes the leadership or is once again booted out by his own party? 
Weak Willie perhaps? (Shorten)


----------



## Julia (29 August 2013)

bunyip said:


> Julia
> 
> Any thoughts on who will replace Rudd if he relinquishes the leadership or is once again booted out by his own party?
> Weak Willie perhaps? (Shorten)



Bill Shorten seems to be the person most commonly referred to as the heir apparent.  I don't see what it is about him that impresses anyone.  After most of the front bench resigned in protest at Rudd's reinstatement, they don't have a lot of choice, do they!


----------



## MrBurns (29 August 2013)

Julia said:


> Bill Shorten seems to be the person most commonly referred to as the heir apparent.  I don't see what it is about him that impresses anyone.  After most of the front bench resigned in protest at Rudd's reinstatement, they don't have a lot of choice, do they!




Julia Gillard is the obvious choice


----------



## noco (29 August 2013)

And our illustrious Prime Minioster has the audacity to blame the Premier of Queensland, Campbell Newman, for the rise in the National unemployment.

He took the right action to decrease the over loaded state public servants by 14,000 and since then unemployment fell with creation of 18,000 jobs and now another 9000 in the Brisbane area alone.

You never hear Rudd talk about the high unemployment in Tasmania or South Australia.

What a wanka.


http://www.couriermail.com.au/quest...n-moreton-region/story-fni9r1i7-1226705817457

- - - Updated - - -



MrBurns said:


> Julia Gillard is the obvious choice




Yeah, bring back JULIAR. Everybody lubs her.

Why is everybody still pickin' on poor Julia?????????????


----------



## MrBurns (29 August 2013)

noco said:


> Yeah, bring back JULIAR. Everybody lubs her.
> 
> Why is everybody still pickin' on poor Julia?????????????




OR Mark Latham would be good, especially when he has a skinful and starts punching, real Labor Party class.


----------



## drsmith (29 August 2013)

Dear oh dear.



> Australia's two most senior economic bureaucrats have effectively torpedoed Kevin Rudd's claim of a $10 billion hole in opposition costings declaring that neither the Treasury nor the Finance Department had any role in the financial assessment.
> 
> Mr Rudd on Thursday claimed to have found a "$10 billion fraud" in Coalition policy costings, arguing savings identified had been deliberately overstated.




http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...alitions-10b-savings-hole-20130829-2stgu.html


----------



## MrBurns (29 August 2013)

drsmith said:


> Dear oh dear.
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...alitions-10b-savings-hole-20130829-2stgu.html




The whole Labor show is looking increasingly desperate, thank goodness there's only a week to go.


----------



## bunyip (29 August 2013)

drsmith said:


> Dear oh dear.
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...alitions-10b-savings-hole-20130829-2stgu.html




Poor Kevin. Poor silly Kevin. Making the same mistake that Gillard and Queensland's Anna Bligh made before him -  thinking that you can win an election by telling lies to denigrate your opponent. In this day and age you just can’t get away with that sort of thing in politics. Bligh and Gillard found that out the hard way. Rudd will too.

- - - Updated - - -



Julia said:


> Bill Shorten seems to be the person most commonly referred to as the heir apparent.  I don't see what it is about him that impresses anyone.  After most of the front bench resigned in protest at Rudd's reinstatement, they don't have a lot of choice, do they!




Yes, ‘Weak Wille’ Shorten is talked about in Labor ranks like he’s the ‘Wonder from Down Under’. For the life of me I can’t see why.
Just the fact that he used to be Gillard’s boyfriend tells us plenty about his character, or lack of it.


----------



## drsmith (29 August 2013)

bunyip said:


> Poor Kevin. Poor silly Kevin. Making the same mistake that Gillard and Queensland's Anna Bligh made before him -  thinking that you can win an election by telling lies to denigrate your opponent. In this day and age you just can’t get away with that sort of thing in politics. Bligh and Gillard found that out the hard way. Rudd will too.



I seem to recall Paul Keating in the 1996 election campaign tried something similar to discredit the Coalition on their costings and the costings he had turned out to be fake.

I can't find any reference to it now though.


----------



## nioka (29 August 2013)

noco said:


> These are the facts that are being overlooked by one eyed rusted on Labor supporters.




Dont get to read ASF posts much these days. Probably wont be back again until after the elections. Disgusted in the one eyed rusted on Liberal supporters that fill the page. I'll look in and see how happy you are with one eyed rusty Tony in a year or two.


----------



## bunyip (29 August 2013)

sydboy007 said:


> Prob the thing i hate most about the Labor dysfunction is the free ride it's given Abbott.  No one is realy question him on Coalition policies - PPL excepted.  He's taken advantage of it and basically asking us to trust him.  I know we get to do a perforamnce review in 3 years, but 3 years can be a very long time, and I doubt I'll ever trust a politician.





It’s not just Abbot who’s asking us to trust him. Both Rudd _*and*_ Abbot are asking us to trust them.  And that’s pretty funny in Rudd’s case, considering that he and Gillard and Labor have been so untrustworthy over the last six years.

Yes, three years can indeed be a long time to have to put up with an incompetent government – particularly if Labor wins and we have to add another three years on to the last six that our country has suffered under their abysmal governance.
The way I see it Syd, we know Rudd and Labor are incompetent – they’ve proved it for six long years with one stuff up after another. It would take a very big stretch of the imagination to believe that if re-elected they’ll suddenly change from incompetent to competent. 
By comparison, Abbot and Co _may_ turn out to be incompetent too, but then again maybe they won’t. They’ve gotta be a better bet than Labor. 

Personally I think Abbot and Co will do a good job. He’ll largely cut out wasteful expenditure – one of the first rules of good business management. Sure, he’ll spend money here and there that you and I think could have been better spent. But there’s no way he’ll go nuts with reckless spending like Labor did.
I believe he WILL stop the boats – a massive expenditure in itself, whereas Labor will never do so.
He *will* get rid of taxes that cruel business and investment and hence employment - taxes like the mining and carbon taxes.
He *will* bring the budget back to surplus and he _*will*_ bring our debt down to acceptable levels. How do I know that for sure? I don’t, but the LNP has a good track record in controlling debt and producing budget surpluses, whereas Labor’s track record in these areas is pathetic.
I don’t doubt that he’ll do a lot of other things too, some good and some bad, but if he does the things I’ve mentioned above then he’ll be be streets ahead of Labor’s abysmal performance.

I say again, you don’t employ people who are proven incompetents. You get rid of them and replace them with people who may (or may not) do better. _*But you don’t employ proven incompetents.*_ If you do, then your business or country suffers serious damage.


----------



## bunyip (29 August 2013)

nioka said:


> Dont get to read ASF posts much these days. Probably wont be back again until after the elections. Disgusted in the one eyed rusted on Liberal supporters that fill the page. I'll look in and see how happy you are with one eyed rusty Tony in a year or two.




LOL! You just can't handle people pointing out the hard truths about Labor!


----------



## Julia (29 August 2013)

bunyip said:


> Yes, ‘Weak Wille’ Shorten is talked about in Labor ranks like he’s the ‘Wonder from Down Under’. For the life of me I can’t see why.
> Just the fact that he used to be Gillard’s boyfriend tells us plenty about his character, or lack of it.



To be fair, I don't think Mr Shorten has ever had a personal relationship with Julia Gillard.
Perhaps you're thinking of Craig Emerson.


----------



## MrBurns (29 August 2013)

nioka said:


> Dont get to read ASF posts much these days. Probably wont be back again until after the elections. Disgusted in the one eyed rusted on Liberal supporters that fill the page. I'll look in and see how happy you are with one eyed rusty Tony in a year or two.




Ok lets put Rudd in, lets see how YOU feel after less than a year.


----------



## bunyip (29 August 2013)

Julia said:


> To be fair, I don't think Mr Shorten has ever had a personal relationship with Julia Gillard.
> Perhaps you're thinking of Craig Emerson.




I’m happy to stand corrected if I’m wrong about that, Julia, but I was pretty sure that both Emerson _*and*_ Shorten are old bed mates of Gillard.


----------



## wayneL (29 August 2013)

MrBurns said:


> Ok lets put Rudd in, lets see how YOU feel after less than a year.




Jizuz!! 

Don't even joke about that!!!


----------



## Julia (29 August 2013)

The idea is apparently not so far from the minds of key Labor figures!
http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...il&utm_campaign=editorial&net_sub_uid=6223362


----------



## So_Cynical (29 August 2013)

nioka said:


> Dont get to read ASF posts much these days. Probably wont be back again until after the elections. Disgusted in the one eyed rusted on Liberal supporters that fill the page. I'll look in and see how happy you are with one eyed rusty Tony in a year or two.




They will be in ecstasy, conservatives love nothingness.


----------



## Calliope (29 August 2013)

nioka said:


> Dont get to read ASF posts much these days. Probably wont be back again until after the elections. Disgusted in the one eyed rusted on Liberal supporters that fill the page. I'll look in and see how happy you are with one eyed rusty Tony in a year or two.




Don't give up hope nioka and So_Cynical. One-eyed rusted-on Labor supporters like you can still trust your mates the Greens, while controlling the Senate, to make it as difficult as possible for the Abbott government to deliver responsible government, even with an overwhelming mandate.

Like the Greens you are both wreckers. I know neither of you will read this...  bereft of any ideas and safely cocooned in your boxes.


----------



## So_Cynical (29 August 2013)

Calliope said:


> Like the Greens you are both wreckers. *I know neither of you will read this*...  bereft of any ideas and safely cocooned in your boxes.




I don't usually see the content of your posts due to having you on ignore for the past 2 years or so.

Don't know about Nokia.

---

Calling us wreckers?


----------



## Klogg (29 August 2013)

sydboy007 said:


> Notice the massive decline in workplace deaths since Labor has been in office.  A pretty amazing achievement when considering the huge increase in workers in the resource sector and associated construction.




Errr... did you forget the 4 deaths that occurred as a direct result of poor policy implementation (pink batts). Don't care what the figures say, all findings say ALP were directly responsible for this one (Queensland coroner's report is worth a read).

Figures are worthless when deaths can be *directly *related to policies.

Claim anything else about the ALP that you like, but on this one they've lost all credibility. More important than any budget savings or economic stimulus, they cost four people their lives. The man should be on trial, not running in the election.


----------



## drsmith (29 August 2013)

I wonder whether Fairfax will run their fact checker through this in one of their flagship papers.

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/pork-o-meter

As an example, they have $1.3bn of so-called pork for WA compared to ~$6m for Labor. The $1.3bn listed is for road projects. 

One of these road projects is Gateway WA, a $1bn upgrade of roads around Perth Airport. This is a joint Federal and State Government project with the feds contributing close to $700m. Both sides have in fact committed to its funding and construction has commenced.

Meanwhile, back in the real world, Rudd's electoral foundations continue to crumble.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...on-loss-newspoll/story-fn59niix-1226707012645

The upcoming 9 days will be I suspect the longest of Bill Shorten's life and when he's interviewed, it shows.

There's no mercy rule though for Bill and Labor. They'll just have to suck it up and wait for the final siren.


----------



## sydboy007 (30 August 2013)

bunyip said:


> IHe *will* get rid of taxes that cruel business and investment and hence employment - taxes like the mining and carbon taxes.




small business might not agree with you:

The Coalition is tearing up around $4.2 billion of Labor’s SME assistance measures across forward estimates:

– $2.9 billion in instant asset write-offs on investment items costing up to $6500

– $900 million in the ‘loss carry back’ scheme

– $400 million in accelerated depreciation for cars.

That’s not the only supply-side pain in the Coalition’s plans. The 1.5 per cent tax cut for companies big and small doesn’t begin until 2015, but the 1.5 per cent levy on big business to fund Abbott’s paid parental leave scheme begins in 2014.

That’s a one-year tax hike, followed by years of ‘no change’ for big business and a modest tax cut for small business.


----------



## Miss Hale (30 August 2013)

bunyip said:


> I’m happy to stand corrected if I’m wrong about that, Julia, but I was pretty sure that both Emerson _*and*_ Shorten are old bed mates of Gillard.




Shorten previously had a relationship with Nicola Roxon not Julia Gillard.


----------



## sydboy007 (30 August 2013)

Calliope said:


> Don't give up hope nioka and So_Cynical. One-eyed rusted-on Labor supporters like you can still trust your mates the Greens, while controlling the Senate, to make it as difficult as possible for the Abbott government to deliver responsible government, even with an overwhelming mandate.
> 
> Like the Greens you are both wreckers. I know neither of you will read this...  bereft of any ideas and safely cocooned in your boxes.




Why do you have to get into denigrading comments like this?

Accept there's a diversity of views.  You certainly don't have to agree with others, but being rude because someone doesn't have the same point of view is just petty.

You pro business mate Tony has gutted over $4B from the SME sector in the forward estimates.  One could say he's shafted small business to pay for PPL.


----------



## Aussiejeff (30 August 2013)

sydboy007 said:


> Why do you have to get into denigrading comments like this?
> 
> Accept there's a diversity of views.  You certainly don't have to agree with others, but being rude because someone doesn't have the same point of view is just petty.
> 
> You pro business mate Tony has gutted over $4B from the SME sector in the forward estimates. * One could say he's shafted small business to pay for PPL.*




Looks like KRudd has been shafted by his own beloved Public Servants... the jig is up. It's all over now bar the shouting match. Should be fun to watch...  



> TWO of Australia's most senior public servants have undermined Labor claims of a $10 billion black hole in Tony Abbott's election costings, prompting Joe Hockey to call Kevin Rudd "a liar".
> In a dramatic and highly unusual move, *the heads of Treasury and Finance issued a statement to distance themselves from claims the Coalition had a major financial hole in their election costings.*




http://www.news.com.au/national-new...ee/story-fnho52ip-1226706531898#ixzz2dOLCXmA6


----------



## noco (30 August 2013)

Aussiejeff said:


> Looks like KRudd has been shafted by his own beloved Public Servants... the jig is up. It's all over now bar the shouting match. Should be fun to watch...
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.news.com.au/national-new...ee/story-fnho52ip-1226706531898#ixzz2dOLCXmA6





And from the Australian News paper as well.

Me thinks Martin Parkinson and David Tune might just be good friends with Julia Gillard and Wayne Swan and are out to spoil RUDNEY RUDES party.

I have been saying for quite a while now that Gillard and Swan will be seeking revenge on Rudd in the last week of the campaign and this is just the start of a bad last week for Rudd.

Watch the polls hit rock bottom next week.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...s-biggest-crisis/story-e6frg75f-1226706989599


----------



## noco (30 August 2013)

noco said:


> And from the Australian News paper as well.
> 
> Me thinks Martin Parkinson and David Tune might just be good friends with Julia Gillard and Wayne Swan and are out to spoil RUDNEY RUDES party.
> 
> ...




How low can this Prime Minister Rudd go to discredit the Coalition. 

He is lower than a rattle snakes belly.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...ition-black-hole/story-fn9qr68y-1226707034281


----------



## dutchie (30 August 2013)

The Labor Party caught out again.

Not cut, cut, cut but lie, lie, lie.

How pathetic are they?



From The Australian:


Bureaucrats expose ALP's biggest crisis

    by: Dennis Shanahan, Political Editor
    From: The Australian
    August 30, 2013 12:00AM


TREASURY has been subjected to a lot of ridicule and criticism from the Coalition over costings and budget forecasts. But last night Treasury head Martin Parkinson and David Tune at the Department of Finance signalled a line had been crossed.

Two of the nation's most senior public servants had been placed in an impossible position by Labor's wilful misuse of confidential briefings. They had to act. Stepping out from behind the normal veil of government, Parkinson and Tune did precisely what strong public servants should do in the caretaker period - calling out Labor's misrepresentation for what it was.

Kevin Rudd now faces the biggest crisis of the election campaign - on an issue of truthfulness, trust and economic competence - after Treasury, Finance and the Parliamentary Budget Office exposed the government's politically fraudulent and desperate attempt to frame Tony Abbott for a "$10 billion fraud". Early yesterday, the Prime Minister accused the Liberal leader of fraud, and questioned his "truthfulness" based on "independent" Treasury and Finance Department costings of the Coalition's promises. Rudd, Chris Bowen and Penny Wong stood shoulder to shoulder and declared "Treasury, Department of Finance and Deregulation and PBO figures released this morning have exposed a $10bn hole in the savings claimed by the Coalition yesterday".

"At no stage prior to the caretaker period has either department costed opposition policies," they said in an unprecedented public statement.

The PBO later added its own condemnation of the way Labor had purported to release opposition policies costed by the independent office. The government was caught in its own "pea and thimble" trick, stitching together old reports and comparing apples with oranges to conclude Abbott was a fraud. Rudd's attempts to portray Abbott in a particular way have backfired and it is the Prime Minister's truthfulness that is now in question. This response to the Liberal policies is reminiscent of the last days of the Keating government, when then treasurer Ralph Willis got caught flogging false documents about Liberal plans, supposedly from Victorian premier Jeff Kennett. *It was a singular moment of humiliation for a dying government.*



My Bolds


----------



## bunyip (30 August 2013)

Miss Hale said:


> Shorten previously had a relationship with Nicola Roxon not Julia Gillard.




Fair enough - wrong call on my part this time.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (30 August 2013)

Calliope said:


> All over Red Rover. I guess that GG and Explod are the only remaining Rudd backers on the forum.




I would find it difficult to describe myself as a Rudd backer, though, I take your point.

Rudd will win.

He is a campaigner par extraordinaire.

But a devious little one.

Like vampire on ice, he has destroyed the ALP, and now he is intent on doing it to Australia.

The ALP tried a stake through his heart to rid it of him, but forgot the garlic.

He will get the large muppet vote out there, 2 or 3 generations of welfare dependent voters, who he will target in the last week.

I will never vote again if he gets in.

I fear he will.

gg


----------



## sydboy007 (30 August 2013)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> I would find it difficult to describe myself as a Rudd backer, though, I take your point.
> 
> Rudd will win.
> 
> ...




I'd prefer if Tony wins, with a few seats majority, no control of the senate.

Then he can start to dismantle the welfare state he helped create when Howard was around.

Should be fun times seeing how he copes with the MSM howling in outrage over every cut he makes.


----------



## Logique (30 August 2013)

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/29/coalition-to-win-election
Coalition now into Black Caviar-like odds to win election, says Sportsbet

Betting agency has paid out $1.5m in bets on Coalition in what it calls a one-horse race

The agency priced the Coalition at $1.03 with Labor at $11.50.


----------



## bunyip (30 August 2013)

sydboy007 said:


> small business might not agree with you:
> 
> The Coalition is tearing up around $4.2 billion of Labor’s SME assistance measures across forward estimates:
> 
> ...




Better vote the lefties back into power then Syd, if you think the coalition will be so hard on business. 
It won’t take long before Labor are giving you plenty of reasons to wish you’d turfed them out when you had the chance.
All we'd get from another term of Labor government would be more of the lies, economic mismanagement, incompetent and dysfunctional government that they've been dishing up to us for the last six years.


----------



## bunyip (30 August 2013)

Klogg said:


> Errr... did you forget the 4 deaths that occurred as a direct result of poor policy implementation (pink batts). Don't care what the figures say, all findings say ALP were directly responsible for this one (Queensland coroner's report is worth a read).
> 
> Figures are worthless when deaths can be *directly *related to policies.
> 
> Claim anything else about the ALP that you like, but on this one they've lost all credibility. More important than any budget savings or economic stimulus, they cost four people their lives. The man should be on trial, not running in the election.




Talking of deaths that are directly related to policies.......let’s not forget an estimated one thousand people who have lost their lives while attempting to come to Australia by boat, after Rudd dismantled the Pacific Solution.


----------



## noco (30 August 2013)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> I would find it difficult to describe myself as a Rudd backer, though, I take your point.
> 
> Rudd will win.
> 
> ...




GG what was in that bottle last night?

Are you dreamin' or stirrin'???????????


----------



## Calliope (30 August 2013)

sydboy007 said:


> Why do you have to get into denigrading comments like this?




i think you mean denigrating. i am sorry if my post has offended you syd.:hide:


----------



## dutchie (30 August 2013)

Labor party has only three policies that they are fighting the election on.

1. Abbott, Abbott, Abbott
2. Cut, Cut, Cut
3. Costs, Costs, Costs

No wonder most newspapers are rubbishing them. The truth is they deserve it.

Just a pathetic mob of fraudsters.


----------



## dutchie (30 August 2013)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> I would find it difficult to describe myself as a Rudd backer, though, I take your point.
> 
> Rudd will win.
> 
> ...




I thought you were a better judge of the political scene, Garpal.

Saturday night (7th) and Rudd will be on the scrap heap just like his predecessor.

Both massive failures.

Australia deserves a lot better than those two losers and the public will vote accordingly.

Baseball bats, cricket bats et al,  will be flying.


----------



## Ijustnewit (30 August 2013)

The two biggest reasons why I can't wait to see this current Government gone .

1. I will not have to listen to Rudd 24/7 on every channel calling us *Good Folks*.
For Gods sake Rudd we are not country bumpkins . It comes across like he is above everyone , what he really means I'm sure is,
 " All those below him and not at his level".

2. I will not have to listen to an ever increasing sour twisted woman like Penny Wong.

Yipppppe


----------



## Calliope (30 August 2013)

So_Cynical said:


> I don't usually see the content of your posts due to having you on ignore for the past 2 years or so.
> 
> Don't know about Nokia.
> 
> ...




I should have apologised earlier when I apologised to sydboy, but I thought you had me on "ignore". If you read this S_C, please accept my belated apologies for equating you with the Greenies.


----------



## moXJO (30 August 2013)

sydboy007 said:


> small business might not agree with you:
> 
> The Coalition is tearing up around $4.2 billion of Labor’s SME assistance measures across forward estimates:
> 
> ...




Libs screwed small business over a little with some of their policy imo. Libs are more labor then what labor is in certain policy.


----------



## noco (30 August 2013)

noco said:


> And from the Australian News paper as well.
> 
> Me thinks Martin Parkinson and David Tune might just be good friends with Julia Gillard and Wayne Swan and are out to spoil RUDNEY RUDES party.
> 
> ...




Some more on Labors self destruct.

I am not the only one who believes Gillard and/or Swan are friends of two Treasury public servants who exposed Rudd, Bowen and Wong.

I also believe we will see more this in the last week of campaigning.

Gillard and Swan are after Rudd's blood.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...17-back-fires/comments-fnho52qp-1226707268831


----------



## Calliope (30 August 2013)

In just 168 hours Australia will be declared a Rudd-free zone.


----------



## drsmith (30 August 2013)

sydboy007 said:


> That’s not the only supply-side pain in the Coalition’s plans. The 1.5 per cent tax cut for companies big and small doesn’t begin until 2015, but the 1.5 per cent levy on big business to fund Abbott’s paid parental leave scheme begins in 2014.



Where did you find that start up data for the 1.5 per cent levy ?


----------



## drsmith (30 August 2013)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> I would find it difficult to describe myself as a Rudd backer, though, I take your point.
> 
> Rudd will win.
> 
> ...



They put the garlic on when they resurrected his rotting political corpse. The thought that would keep the underlying stench hidden.

They were wrong.


----------



## So_Cynical (30 August 2013)

Klogg said:


> Errr... did you forget the 4 deaths that occurred as a direct result of poor policy implementation (pink batts).




Your delusional 

A safe workplace is the responsibility of the employer...installation of safety switches the responsibility of the home owner...WTF has the Govt financing insulation got to do with that.

Its like this coming election win has given ever right wing, red neck nutter licence to voice all their bias and prejudice.


----------



## pilots (30 August 2013)

So_Cynical said:


> Your delusional
> 
> A safe workplace is the responsibility of the employer...installation of safety switches the responsibility of the home owner...WTF has the Govt financing insulation got to do with that.
> 
> Its like this coming election win has given ever right wing, red neck nutter licence to voice all their bias and prejudice.




Mate it's up to the installer to make sure the house they are working on has safety switches, a home owner is not required to have them. Only 168 hours more and we can take back our BROKE country.


----------



## So_Cynical (30 August 2013)

pilots said:


> Mate it's up to the installer to make sure the house they are working on has safety switches, a home owner is not required to have them. Only 168 hours more and we can take back our BROKE country.




Who said a home owner is required to have a safety switch? i simply pointed out the FACT that its the home owners responsibility to have a safety switch IF the home owner doesn't want anyone electrocuted in their home...simple.

Our country is broke, Jesus H Christ give me a break...you seem to be confusing us with the rest of the world, AAA & AAA+ is not something that country's that are broke or are going broke have..


----------



## drsmith (30 August 2013)

Labor's sin with its home insulation program was that it overwhelmed that particular part of the economy with money. This resulted is all sorts rushing in for a quick buck. 

The outcome speaks for itself. 



So_Cynical said:


> Jesus H Christ give me a break...




Prayer for salvation from the ballot box isn't going to help Labor now.


----------



## Judd (30 August 2013)

Seems one restaurant has the correct take on election signs.


----------



## pilots (31 August 2013)

So_Cynical said:


> Who said a home owner is required to have a safety switch? i simply pointed out the FACT that its the home owners responsibility to have a safety switch IF the home owner doesn't want anyone electrocuted in their home...simple.
> 
> Our country is broke, Jesus H Christ give me a break...you seem to be confusing us with the rest of the world, AAA & AAA+ is not something that country's that are broke or are going broke have..




Your name is so appropriate, So Synical, had the ALP held power for 4 more years we would be BROKE.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (31 August 2013)

Rudd will win.

Not by very much.

But he will.

He is such a stable, intelligent, intuitive, caring, considerate and empathic man, it is difficult to believe him not.

gg


----------



## noco (31 August 2013)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Rudd will win.
> 
> Not by very much.
> 
> ...




-1  

GG what in the hell are you drinking to make you so delirious?


----------



## Tink (31 August 2013)

I think he had his last say yesterday -- all over red rover.

They even turned out the lights in the middle of one of his conferences, an early sign -- Goodbye.

It looks like Labor is going to be wiped out of all our marginal seats, which is no surprise.

Not long now


----------



## Macquack (31 August 2013)

noco said:


> GG what in the hell are you drinking to make you so delirious?




GG and Kevin Rudd are both Queenslanders, and Queenslanders stick together.

GG is just putting out the "QUEENSLANDER" call.

If you ever watch a State of Origin match, you will understand.


----------



## Aussiejeff (31 August 2013)

Macquack said:


> GG and Kevin Rudd are both Queenslanders, and Queenslanders stick together.
> 
> GG is just putting out the "QUEENSLANDER" call.
> 
> If you ever watch a State of Origin match, you will understand.




Here are some QLD-ers and NSW-ailers watching a State of Origin match....

:bananasmi :bananasmi :bananasmi
  

Can you spot the difference?


----------



## bunyip (31 August 2013)

Macquack said:


> GG and Kevin Rudd are both Queenslanders, and Queenslanders stick together.




Judging by the way the polls are going in Queensland, it hardly looks like Queenslanders are sticking with Kevin Rudd. Or Peter Beattie either.
Both of these clowns have run their race in Queensland, as has the toxic Labor movement which they represent. 
Us Queenslanders are heartily sick of Rudd, Beattie and Labor, and we'll show it with a vengeance on September 7.


----------



## IFocus (31 August 2013)

Thought this would turn into a Abbott like rant from his love in supporters which is interesting given his polices will certainly damage a lot of the posters here in some way.

I'll actually gain but what the hell, the bottom 1/2 of Australian incomer earners are about to find out what class warfare is and who the losers are.

Abbott will win at a very slow canter will be fascinating listening to the screams from here once reality kicks in.

Talking about reality (open the link for a chart for those that cannot read about any good news from Labor)



*Life is much better under Labor after all, says study*



> The Gillard government oversaw the smallest increase in cost of living of any Australian government for at least 25 years despite the introduction of the carbon tax, a new study has found.
> 
> Moreover, Australian households have seen real incomes - disposable income minus cost of living increases - rise 15 per cent since just after Labor took office, giving the average household a $5324 a year boost, or $102 a week.
> 
> ...





Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...-says-study-20130830-2sw8l.html#ixzz2dUwf6GiP


----------



## bunyip (31 August 2013)

What perplexes me is why Kevin Rudd was ever seen as ‘popular’. 
Rudd was so unpopular with Australians that Labor was headed for a certain landslide defeat in the last election if they’d stuck with him.
He was so unpopular within Labor ranks that his own party turned against him and tossed him out. 
He was and still is so unpopular within his own party that many of his colleagues have publicly subjected him to scathing criticism.

Despite his well documented unpopularity, it seems that many people took pity on Rudd over the backhanded way that his own party got rid of him last time. 
This pity appears to have been mistaken for popularity. The current election campaign is showing us, however, that Rudd’s so called ‘popularity’ is very hollow indeed.

Only one week to go until the ‘popularity’ myth surrounding Kevin Rudd is put to rest once and for all.


----------



## IFocus (31 August 2013)

More Labor bias reporting


The Economist backs Kevin Rudd for 'second turn'

Some thing we already know



> he Economist has hesitantly thrown its support behind Kevin Rudd as the nation gears up to head to the polls next week, declaring that the Labor Party's "decent record" in recent years makes it the best party to face the challenges of the future.
> 
> While acknowledging that the Liberal-National coalition is the natural home of The Economist's vote, the magazine says in an editorial due to be published on Saturday that it has broken with tradition and endorsed Mr Rudd, although *"the choice for voters, frankly, is not great".*




Oh dear black hole anyone



> Liberal leader Tony Abbott "does not seem an instinctive fan of markets", the editorial says, and *had not explained how he would pay for a federal scheme for paid parental leave,* one of the few key policies he has announced.







> "The main mark against Labor's policy card is that it has shifted a long way towards Mr Abbott's position on asylum-seekers. Aside from that, it has a reasonable record," the editorial says, pointing to Labor's management of the economy and introduction of popular social programs including the national disability insurance scheme and the national broadband network.




Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...second-turn-20130830-2svda.html#ixzz2dUyyzbv8


You really know you are backing a real loser (Abbott)when The Economist backs Rudd sheezers even I don't think much of Rudd.

Oh well Abbott will be PM and Australia will become know as having voted in a brainless Tosser for PM such is life.

Carry on with the ranting everyone enjoy it while you can.


----------



## dutchie (31 August 2013)

IFocus said:


> More Labor bias reporting
> 
> 
> The Economist backs Kevin Rudd for 'second turn'
> ...





A "brainless Tosser" is still 100 levels up from Krudd


----------



## drsmith (31 August 2013)

IFocus said:


> More Labor bias reporting



Yes.



IFocus said:


> The Economist backs Kevin Rudd for 'second turn'



From the above linked article.



> It would be nice if he revived his liberal approach to asylum-seekers. And, who knows, he may even live up to his promise to be less vile to his colleagues.


----------



## noco (31 August 2013)

Macquack said:


> GG and Kevin Rudd are both Queenslanders, and Queenslanders stick together.
> 
> GG is just putting out the "QUEENSLANDER" call.
> 
> If you ever watch a State of Origin match, you will understand.




Good old Laurie Oakes who is normally pro Labor believes Rudney Rude will be a lonely figure next Saturday night. 


http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...t-saturday-night/story-e6freon6-1226707822622


----------



## drsmith (31 August 2013)

IFocus said:


> *Life is much better under Labor after all, says study*



How much of that is the Coalition's tax cuts that Labor matched in its first term ?


----------



## drsmith (31 August 2013)

The coming electoral disaster for Labor,



> In NSW, Labor faces a coastal wipeout, with five marginal seats - Dobell, Robertson, Kingsford-Smith, Page and Eden-Monaro - all held by margins of 5.2 per cent or less but facing a 6 per cent swing to the Coalition that would leave it represented mostly only around Wollongong and Newcastle.
> 
> In addition to the three ALP Victorian seats that are likely to fall and the five NSW coastal seats, there are up to 10 Labor seats at risk in western Sydney. Given the two independent seats of Lyne and New England are also going strongly to the Coalition, Tony Abbott could pick up 20 seats just in NSW and Victoria.






> The results of polling in marginal electorates and independent-held seats suggest that the Coalition could pick up between 20 and 26 seats.




ABC Insider's host Barrie Caasidy will have one last chance to grace the bedside of his mortally wounded political messiah while his panel (whoever they are) read the last rites.

The wake for Labor will then begin early with their campaign launch. One former Labor PM who is not in a rush to attend either the messiah's political bedside or the wake is Julia Gillard. The only question there is whether she ultimately does a little dance on the grave in the dark of night or in the bright light of day. She might have to join a queue of her former colleagues if it's the latter.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...out-in-marginals/story-fn9qr68y-1226707926995


----------



## Judd (31 August 2013)

Putting aside who or who will not win, either Federally or in specific seats, people may be interested in reading Anthony greens election blog

http://blogs.abc.net.au/antonygreen/2013/08/voting-below-the-line-in-the-senate.html#more

about strategic voting and in preparing your own voting paper according to the web-sites for which he has provided a link.

Roll on Saturday, 7 September 2013.


----------



## noco (31 August 2013)

drsmith said:


> The coming electoral disaster for Labor,
> 
> 
> 
> ...




I believe Rudd will die a slow death from Julia Gillards slow poisoning which started on Thursday with the Treasury and there will be more to come next week.

It is called revenge.


----------



## drsmith (31 August 2013)

noco said:


> I believe Rudd will die a slow death from Julia Gillards slow poisoning which started on Thursday with the Treasury and there will be more to come next week.
> 
> It is called revenge.




With regards to that so-called budget black hole, I did note this in The Australian's description of events.



> The Treasury secretary was at a workshop of all commonwealth department secretaries, who are preoccupied with preparing incoming government briefs. They had all gathered the previous night for a farewell dinner for former prime minister Julia Gillard.




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...le-of-own-making/story-fn9qr68y-1226707924612


----------



## banco (31 August 2013)

You guys are absolutely delusional if you think Gillard had any influence whatsoever on the statement from Treasury and Finance.


----------



## drsmith (31 August 2013)

banco said:


> You guys are absolutely delusional if you think Gillard had any influence whatsoever on the statement from Treasury and Finance.



My reading of the above from The Australian is that Julia Gillard had better professional relations with these officials than Kevin Rudd currently enjoys.



Garpal Gumnut said:


> Rudd will win.
> 
> Not by very much.
> 
> ...



You've been drinking at the wrong establishment.  

There must be plenty of others to choose from that are more upbeat.



> The Galaxy poll for The Townsville Bulletin showed the LNP leading Labor 57-43 on a two-party preferred basis in Dawson and 55-45 on a two-party preferred basis in Herbert.




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...-to-election-win/story-fn9qr68y-1226708053714

Is Bill shorten also loosing his cool ?


----------



## banco (31 August 2013)

Secretaries of Government Departments are almost invariably careerists.  The issuing of the statement on Thursday probably wouldn't have happened if it looked like Rudd was going to win.


----------



## bunyip (31 August 2013)

IFocus said:


> Oh well Abbott will be PM and Australia will become know as having voted in a brainless Tosser for PM such is life.




Australia is already known as having voted in a brainless tosser for PM six years ago.

I reckon you’ll still be calling Abbot a tosser even if he.....

* Stops the boats and regains control of our borders.
* Brings us back to budget surpluses and reduces our debt to more responsible levels.
* Reverses Labor’s funding cuts to Customs services, defense, health, and universities.
* Reduces wasteful expenditure.
* Starts the ball rolling in developing the potential of northern Australia.
* Gives us stable, responsible government in place of the infighting that has plagued Labor for years on end.

Yep, Abbot will always be a tosser in the eyes of you and your kind, no matter how well he performs.


----------



## Julia (31 August 2013)

drsmith said:


> My reading of the above from The Australian is that Julia Gillard had better professional relations with these officials than Kevin Rudd currently enjoys.



You're probably right there.  People who worked with her seemed to find her approachable and reasonable.

She seems to be moving on with her life so good for her.  Apparently she's in the process of moving to Adelaide where Adelaide University has made her an Honorary Professor.
http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2013/08/30/gillard-receive-honorary-professorship


----------



## sydboy007 (31 August 2013)

bunyip said:


> Australia is already known as having voted in a brainless tosser for PM six years ago.
> 
> I reckon you’ll still be calling Abbot a tosser even if he.....
> 
> ...




If Abbott can achieve half of that I'll gladly take back my prediction he'll be the George Bushg Junior of Aussie PMs.

His ucrfrent populist form doesn't inspire great confidence in me.  It will be interesting to see how he manages the change from all debt is due purely to Govt mismanagement to his acceptance there will probably be a few more years of deficits while the rest of the ToT fall flows through revenue and teh slow adjustment from the decline in mining investment washed through the economy.


----------



## dutchie (31 August 2013)

drsmith said:


> The coming electoral disaster for Labor,
> 
> 
> 
> ...





Apparently Tony Abbott will be the guest.


----------



## So_Cynical (31 August 2013)

bunyip said:


> What perplexes me is why Kevin Rudd was ever seen as ‘popular’.




Thinking the fact that for the first time in (Modern) Australian federal political history, a sitting PM lost his seat...may, just may have something to do with the "popular" tag.

----------

Found this interesting map of all the seats and who holds them, colour coded.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/federal-election-2013/map/


----------



## Judd (31 August 2013)

So_Cynical said:


> Thinking the fact that for the first time in Australian federal political history, a sitting PM lost his seat...may, just may have something to do with the "popular" tag.




Stanley Bruce in 1929 and John Howard in 2007, so there have been two precedents.


----------



## drsmith (31 August 2013)

dutchie said:


> Apparently Tony Abbott will be the guest.



He's timed that very well.

Barrie himself knows what's coming for labor as it goes from government to wilderness,



> Labor's internal hatreds have been percolating ever since the negotiated victory in 2010. After September 7, the lid will blow sky high.




The fireworks may well commence during the broadcast of the election count itself next Saturday evening.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-08-30/cassidy-this-is-the-calm-before-the-political-storm/4922744


----------



## Calliope (31 August 2013)

This is my favourite election ad. Note the excellent job Plibersek does as a nodder.

[video]http://video.news.com.au/2402508137/Election-campaign-this-week-in-sixty-seconds[/video]


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (31 August 2013)

Kevin Rudd will win imo.

He is held back by his party.

If they just recognised him as the Messiah he is, the Coalition would be even further behind.

My adoration of Kevin knows bounds.

gg


----------



## noco (31 August 2013)

drsmith said:


> With regards to that so-called budget black hole, I did note this in The Australian's description of events.
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...le-of-own-making/story-fn9qr68y-1226707924612




Doc, stand by for fire works next week indirectly from Gillard and Swan.

They certainly won't sign thier names to it as it will be done indirectly as she did through Martin Parkinson who had dined with her at her farewell dinner during the week.

There is a lot of venom left in Gillard and she is out to poison Rudd when ever she can. She wants to see Rudd humiliated.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (31 August 2013)

Kevin Rudd did the following which no other politician has been ever able to do

Got us a seat on the UN
Gave us unlimited free downloads, some of us anyway in the cities, in some suburbs in some streets, on some sides of streets via the NBN
Cured the scabies
Increased migration to Australia
Introduced migration to PNG from Iran
Stopped the pestilence of Salary Sacrifice for Nurses and Allied Health Workers
Opened up the Northern Territory to Lower Taxes
Saved Bathurst for Holdens only
Reversed Global Warming
Invented Ugg Boots
Moved the Navy with pure wind
Built a Rail Line between Sydney and that other southern city ? Melbourne
Walked on water


So why anyone would vote for anyone else other than Kevin, has got me beat.

gg


----------



## Calliope (31 August 2013)

The three lying conspirators have been caught out and don't even have the decency to apologise.

As Hockey would say...it's not in their DNA.


----------



## MrBurns (31 August 2013)

> Some good news... about Julia ( She's Gone! )
> But wait, there’s more!!
> Did you ever wonder why Julia originally chose the 14th of September for an election date?
> For a Prime Minister to receive FULL  parliamentary pension and perks, they need to be leader/PM
> ...




Someone sent me this, any comments ? 
True, False ?


----------



## drsmith (31 August 2013)

MrBurns said:


> True, False ?



That one I think would be false, but I reckon Kev would have if he could have.

She became PM in June 2010.


----------



## noco (31 August 2013)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Kevin Rudd did the following which no other politician has been ever able to do
> 
> Got us a seat on the UN
> Gave us unlimited free downloads, some of us anyway in the cities, in some suburbs in some streets, on some sides of streets via the NBN
> ...




GG when Rudd gets crucified on the 7th it would be impossible for him to walk on water with holes in his feet.

- - - Updated - - -



Calliope said:


> The three lying conspirators have been caught out and don't even have the decency to apologise.
> 
> As Hockey would say...it's not in their DNA.
> 
> View attachment 54161





So which one of the trio blew it?

You whistle and I will point.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/opinion/hands-up-if-you-blew-it-labor-trio-fails-over-opposition-costings/story-fni0fha6-1226707827211


----------



## drsmith (31 August 2013)

noco said:


> So which one of the trio blew it?



The other two are just waiting for the final siren and I think wished it would be sooner.

There's no mercy rule in politics.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (31 August 2013)

I must admit to never having seen a Labor Party so stuck in the headlights of adverse public opinion since the Split in 1955.

Then unlike now decent workers were split over Communist influence versus Democratic.

Now the dregs of the Upper Middle Class and Tory Labor Right fight for the splintered bones of a once great Workers Movement.

Vale the ALP.

Rudded.

gg


----------



## MrBurns (31 August 2013)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> I must admit to never having seen a Labor Party so stuck in the headlights of adverse public opinion since the Split in 1955.
> Then unlike now decent workers were split over Communist influence versus Democratic.
> Now the dregs of the Upper Middle Class and Tory Labor Right fight for the splintered bones of a once great Workers Movement.
> Vale the ALP.
> ...




What do they expect, they give us Mark Latham, Julia Gillard and Rudd ..............twice.

How stupid are there people ?

They expect the media to support them ?, they expect people to vote for them ?

Just go away, fix it , then we'll talk.


----------



## Calliope (1 September 2013)

The Worlds Ten Dumbest Criminals? Thats not fair.  I reckon that Rudd, Bowen and Wong have earned a place in the top ten.

http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/the-10-dumbest-criminals-in-the-world/story-fnixwvgh-1226708128173


----------



## cynic (1 September 2013)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Kevin Rudd did the following which no other politician has been ever able to do
> 
> Got us a seat on the UN
> Gave us unlimited free downloads, some of us anyway in the cities, in some suburbs in some streets, on some sides of streets via the NBN
> ...




Apologies GG, but I feel I cannot allow your post to pass without correction.

I've no doubt that Rudd possesses many of these attributes, however, the concept of UGG boots predated Rudd's genesis by many decades and aquatic perambulation hardly needs mentioning given that this quality is currently a mandatory prerequisite for acceptance into Government office.

Beyond the aforementioned criticisms, your post is clearly beyond reproach.


----------



## Macquack (1 September 2013)

Calliope said:


> This is my favourite election ad. Note the excellent job Plibersek does as a nodder.
> 
> [video]http://video.news.com.au/2402508137/Election-campaign-this-week-in-sixty-seconds[/video]




Calliope, if you really study that video thoroughly, you will also notice that she also breathed. 

How dare she breathe.


----------



## MrBurns (1 September 2013)

Well the election is over but to all the Labor voters out there I ask , who's fault is it that you lost ?

Don't blame the Murdoch press or anyone else it's entirely your fault, you let the Labor party offer up Mark Latham, Julia Gillard and Rudd.............twice.

How absolutely hopeless are you ?

You expect the press to support you ?, you expect people to vote for you ?

It's just lucky some of your lot aren't in jail ......yet.


----------



## Calliope (1 September 2013)

I switched over to Rudd's campaign launch for a few minutes only to catch Therese Rein in the middle of a heart-rending tale about the time when the Rudd family had to sleep in the family car for a couple of nights after being turfed off the family farm by the wicked landlord after the death of his father.

Well, this hoary old tale worked well in 2007, so why not trot it out again? There wasn't a dry eye in the house after Therese's teary tale. It makes you want to take Rudd in your arms and cuddle the poor pet.

In 2007 in the Telegraph;



> In fact any childhood home poorer or smaller than Mark’s (Latham) would technically be considered a chook shed by planning authorities.
> 
> As a result Kevin Rudd had to dig deep for his campfire tale. Houses, he told the electorate, were for toffs. He was raised in a car.
> 
> ...


----------



## pixel (1 September 2013)

Did everyone receive the CD from Clive Palmer?
I just browsed through it - and I can imagine a lot of voters might give his candidates serious consideration.
"Tony Gillard and Julia Abbott" LOL


----------



## So_Cynical (1 September 2013)

MrBurns said:


> Well the election is over but to all the Labor voters out there I ask , who's fault is it that you lost ?
> 
> Don't blame the Murdoch press or anyone else it's entirely your fault, you let the Labor party offer up Mark Latham, Julia Gillard and Rudd.............twice.
> 
> ...




I'm asking myself, how have i left you off my ignore list for so long? what the hell was i thinking?

----------

At least there is a good chance that we will control the senate...i just hope they give Tony back some of what he paid out, block everything.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (1 September 2013)

cynic said:


> Apologies GG, but I feel I cannot allow your post to pass without correction.
> 
> I've no doubt that Rudd possesses many of these attributes, however, the concept of UGG boots predated Rudd's genesis by many decades and aquatic perambulation hardly needs mentioning given that this quality is currently a mandatory prerequisite for acceptance into Government office.
> 
> Beyond the aforementioned criticisms, your post is clearly beyond reproach.




My apologies, mate.

Nonetheless, I still believe Kevni, to be capable of winning this contest.

Long live our Dear Leader Kevni.

gg


----------



## moXJO (1 September 2013)

So_Cynical said:


> I'm asking myself, how have i left you off my ignore list for so long? what the hell was i thinking?
> 
> ----------
> .





It must be a empty thread with all those right posters on ignore


----------



## drsmith (1 September 2013)

A Galaxy poll out this weekend has the libs at 53% 2PP.

http://www.news.com.au/national-new...se-election-5347/story-fnii5s3x-1226708281383

The ABC Insiders Poll of Polls also has the Coalition at 53% 2PP. 

Beyond that, the segment itself is interesting in that it highlights the large difference between the above overall polls and the much stronger Coalition results being reported from polling in the Labor marginals.

http://www.abc.net.au/insiders/content/2012/s3838360.htm

Sportsbet has the shortest odds for the number of Coalition seats on the range 91 to 100 or right in the middle.

Strongly against ththis overall trend, Alannah MacTiernan at her second attempt looks like winning the seat of Perth comfortably.



> Ms MacTiernan's primary support - 47 per cent - is almost 7 per cent up on the result secured by Stephen Smith at the 2010 election. Mr Smith, the Defence Minister, is retiring.
> 
> The strong polling for Ms MacTiernan is even more remarkable because it defies a national trend. In the past week Galaxy conducted more than 11,500 interviews in 20 key electorates across Australia. In 19, there was a swing away from Labor ranging from 1.3 per cent to 8.8 per cent, with an average of 4.4 per cent. Only in Perth was there a swing to Labor (of 2.1 per cent).




http://www.perthnow.com.au/news/wes...federal-politics/story-fnhocxo3-1226708188616

In WA's most marginal seat, Hasluck, Liberal Ken Wyatt looks like increasing his margin and Labor's Gary Grey might hang on.

The Galaxy poll itself was taken during the past week and so my not fully represent in impact of Labor's claims about the Coalition's costings blowing up in their own faces.



Garpal Gumnut said:


> My apologies, mate.
> 
> Nonetheless, I still believe Kevni, to be capable of winning this contest.
> 
> ...




Pure gold GG, pure gold.


----------



## noco (1 September 2013)

They say polls come and go but I say than can and are rigged to suit the political climate.

I received one political phone poll by Morgan last week where by I was included irrespect of my age.

Today I received a political poll from Neilson and the first question the girl asked was, are you in the male 18 to 49 year old group which I responded in the negative. I was told sorry you are not included.

Then I was asked were there any females aged 18 to 29 and once again I answered in the negative.

OK sorry bye and she hung up.

So please don't anyone try to pretend that polls are taken across a wide spectrum of the public.


----------



## drsmith (1 September 2013)

noco said:


> Today I received a political poll from Neilson and the first question the girl asked was, are you in the male 18 to 49 year old group which I responded in the negative. I was told sorry you are not included.



One possibility is that they might have specific callers polling specific age groups. This would obviously be less efficient in terms of overall numbers, but may make it easier to quickly differentiate poll results into specific age groups.

Either way, you now know how to answer the age group question next time you're asked.


----------



## noco (1 September 2013)

drsmith said:


> One possibility is that they might have specific callers polling specific age groups. This would obviously be less efficient in terms of overall numbers, but may make it easier to quickly differentiate poll results into specific age groups.
> 
> Either way, you now know how to answer the age group question next time you're asked.




Yes Doc I do now. I had never been asked before and was caught unaware.

But my point is, these polsters can manipulate the trend to which ever way they desire.


----------



## bellenuit (1 September 2013)

noco said:


> Yes Doc I do now. I had never been asked before and was caught unaware.
> 
> But my point is, these polsters can manipulate the trend to which ever way they desire.




I would think it is more to do with getting a representative cross section of the people. I would assume that at the outset they would have decided that a representative cross section would require a certain percentage of people aged in each of various age groups, perhaps 50% male, particular geographic distributions etc. If they are polling 2,000 people say, then once each category's quota of polled people is reached, they would not want any more from that category.

If they were to just randomly call during the day and poll whoever answers, they would most likely end up with an overrepresentation of retirees, unemployed and stay at home housewives; those who are most likely to be around during the day and, apart from the latter, those having the time to answer whatever questions are being asked.


----------



## moXJO (1 September 2013)

Double post


----------



## Julia (1 September 2013)

noco said:


> They say polls come and go but I say than can and are rigged to suit the political climate.
> 
> I received one political phone poll by Morgan last week where by I was included irrespect of my age.
> 
> ...






bellenuit said:


> I would think it is more to do with getting a representative cross section of the people. I would assume that at the outset they would have decided that a representative cross section would require a certain percentage of people aged in each of various age groups, perhaps 50% male, particular geographic distributions etc. If they are polling 2,000 people say, then once each category's quota of polled people is reached, they would not want any more from that category.
> 
> If they were to just randomly call during the day and poll whoever answers, they would most likely end up with an overrepresentation of retirees, unemployed and stay at home housewives; those who are most likely to be around during the day and, apart from the latter, those having the time to answer whatever questions are being asked.




Noco, bellenuit has, as usual, provided the appropriate explanation for you.  Often you see poll results where a result is quoted for particular age groups.  The group I can think of as being most often singled out is Gen Y.
To get this, obviously the research company has to obtain responses by x number of respondents in that age group.
You could equally have struck a research company which was seeking responses from retirees, in which case presumably you would have 'qualified'.
Nothing manipulative about it.


----------



## So_Cynical (1 September 2013)

moXJO said:


> It must be a empty thread with all those right posters on ignore




Cant see 70% of the posts...and i suppose that's the cost of wanting to filter out the right wing whining and now the chest thumping.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (1 September 2013)

So_Cynical said:


> Cant see 70% of the posts...and i suppose that's the cost of wanting to filter out the right wing whining and now the chest thumping.




Can you see mine?

I think Boy Rudd is going to win.

gg


----------



## banco (1 September 2013)

Once again Noco sees conspiracies everywhere where there are none. Tell us again how Gillard's ousting of Rudd was an elaborate charade designed to set Rudd up for the UN Secretary-General's job.


----------



## So_Cynical (1 September 2013)

For those people who like to do their own thing when it comes to senate voting, i have found a neat little site that basically allows you to pre fill a senate ballot paper for your state, that you can you print and take along to your polling station and use as a reference for filling out the form correctly.

Handy for me because i want to make sure my preference goes to Labor well ahead of Pauline Hanson and any other right wing nutters...voting for senator online "above the line" wouldn't do that...put Pauline last that is.

http://www.clueyvoter.com/

For example
~


----------



## Tink (2 September 2013)

Rudds whole campaign was dont vote Abbott and poor poor pitiful me, we are all victims, throw away more money, thats the Labor way.

They are losing all their seats -- the public are having their say of what they think of the last six years. We havent had our turn yet, but Saturday they will know.

Rudd and this Labor Government deserve to lose in a landslide.


----------



## johenmo (2 September 2013)

bellenuit said:


> I would think it is more to do with getting a representative cross section of the people. I would assume that at the outset they would have decided that a representative cross section would require a certain percentage of people aged in each of various age groups, perhaps 50% male, particular geographic distributions etc. If they are polling 2,000 people say, *then once each category's quota of polled people is reached, they would not want any more from that category.*
> 
> If they were to just randomly call during the day and poll whoever answers, they would most likely end up with an overrepresentation of retirees, unemployed and stay at home housewives; those who are most likely to be around during the day and, apart from the latter, those having the time to answer whatever questions are being asked.




My bolds - this is why.  I got a call, he asked my age group then said that category was complete. It then allows the user of the data to look at preferences trends within age brackets.


----------



## Judd (2 September 2013)

johenmo said:


> My bolds - this is why.  I got a call, he asked my age group then said that category was complete. It then allows the user of the data to look at preferences trends within age brackets.




Essentially, it is survey design.  

The sample size in Simple Random Survey depends on three factors:

• The population size
• The variability of the parameter which is to be estimated
• The desired level of precision and confidence level in the result.

They, presumably, then apply the mathematical formulae to ascertain the appropriate sample size based on the above and for Stratified Sampling.

The outcome can then be applied, with varying degrees of confidence, to the entire population or group without the need to survey all the population or group.


----------



## sails (2 September 2013)

johenmo said:


> My bolds - this is why.  I got a call, he asked my age group then said that category was complete. It then allows the user of the data to look at preferences trends within age brackets.




But then the results could be somewhat skewed if people lie about their age.

There are reports that a labor voter lied about being an undecided voter to get into the Brisbane forum recently.


----------



## Tink (2 September 2013)

From the ABC

Today's Newspoll numbers:

•Primary: Labor 33 (down 4); Coalition 46 (down 1)
•Two-party: Labor 46; Coalition 54
•Preferred PM: Rudd 41; Abbott 43


----------



## Calliope (2 September 2013)

Rudd is fighting to save The Light on the Hill.


----------



## bunyip (2 September 2013)

Tink said:


> Rudds whole campaign was dont vote Abbott and poor poor pitiful me, we are all victims, throw away more money, thats the Labor way.
> 
> They are losing all their seats -- the public are having their say of what they think of the last six years. We havent had our turn yet, but Saturday they will know.
> 
> Rudd and this Labor Government deserve to lose in a landslide.





Yes Tink, Labor deserves to lose in a landslide, and that just might happen too if their support keeps plunging in the next five days like it's done in the last week.

Peter Beattie was on ABC this morning talking about how in yesterday's campaign launch, Rudd spoke of 'core Labor values' such as apprenticeships. During the interview Beattie must have repeated ten times that he thought Rudd should have started outlining these 'core Labor values' much earlier.
I agree with him - the election campaign must be a month old by now but the Labor Party leave their campaign launch until just six days before the election. 
And the Libs only did their official campaign launch a week earlier. 
I would have thought that the time for campaign launches where they talk about the core values of their party would be at or near the start of the election campaign.

Another thing that Beattie said was _‘Queenslanders don’t come any better than Kevin Rudd’._ That one brought a smile to my face, firstly because I’d feel ashamed to call myself a Queenslander if Rudd was the best our great state could produce. And secondly, because Beattie is the man who in the past has publicly directed scathing criticism at Rudd. And now all of a sudden he wants us to believe that he thinks Rudd is fantastic.

But what put the biggest smile on my face was when Rudd said _‘I don’t think the truth is such a bad thing in politics’. _
Good lord, this from the creep whose been one of the worst serial liars that Australian politics has ever produced.

I really think that in the eyes of most voters this election is more about honesty and credibility than about policies. Seems to me that most of the electorate are looking at Labors track record and seeing a party that has lied, cheated, smeared, stuffed up most of what they’ve attempted, and fought among themselves almost constantly. People see a party like that and they simply judge them unfit to govern regardless of what policies they put forward.
That’s why Labor are heading for a rout next Saturday. 
I’ve spent the last couple of months building a new deck on our house – I’ve already invited a bunch of people over next Saturday night to christen the new deck with a drink or three to celebrate Labor’s defeat.
Or if Rudd lives up to his prediction that he’ll win – well then we’ll have a few drinks to drown our sorrows instead!
Bring on September 7!


----------



## drsmith (2 September 2013)

Tink said:


> From the ABC
> 
> Today's Newspoll numbers:
> 
> ...



I also note that the Greens are up 1% to 10% and the others are up 4% to 11%.

The electorate is now deserting Labor in droves, but they're not exactly flocking to the Coalition. The individual Leaders ratings are also the same in this regard. Satisfaction ratings for both are down, but by much more for Labor than the Coalition. In summary, the past week overall has been below par for bothg parties, but obviously much worse for Labor than the Coalition.

The task for TA and the Opposition this week is to convince those voters who have parked themselves in the others category to vote for the Coalition.

Looking beyond the election, primary support for Labor is now chronically poor. The future may be a Labor/Greens coalition. In terms of primary support, the Coalition is at 46% and Labor/Greens is at 43%.


----------



## Calliope (2 September 2013)

bunyip said:


> But what put the biggest smile on my face was when Rudd said _‘I don’t think the truth is such a bad thing in politics’. _
> Good lord, this from the creep whose been one of the worst serial liars that Australian politics has ever produced




That takes the cake bunyip. However one of his co-conspirators in the untruths and deceit games, Treasurer Chris Bowen, came close when he said the other day;

"You have to campaign as you intend to govern". 

The poor fool should have kept that quiet.


----------



## IFocus (2 September 2013)

drsmith said:


> Looking beyond the election, primary support for Labor is now chronically poor.




An Abbott government will take care of that.

Interesting re Abbott and future surpluses, what a fraud I guess Australia will have to get used to that ( Abbott = Fraud) over the next three years.


----------



## Julia (2 September 2013)

> Primary: Labor 33 (down 4); Coalition 46 (down 1)




Did Labor's primary get down that far under Julia Gillard?  I can't remember.

If it didn't, can't you imagine the gnashing of teeth and blood letting behind the scenes in Labor at present!


----------



## Logique (2 September 2013)

Julia said:


> Did Labor's primary get down that far under Julia Gillard?  I can't remember.
> 
> If it didn't, can't you imagine the gnashing of teeth and blood letting behind the scenes in Labor at present!



From memory, the Gillard government spent large amounts of time at around 31% primary vote. But the Rudd trend is down, so we could hit 7 Sept with Labor back at 31%.

A lot of media commentators seem more friendly to the Coalition than previously.


----------



## noco (2 September 2013)

Julia said:


> Did Labor's primary get down that far under Julia Gillard?  I can't remember.
> 
> If it didn't, can't you imagine the gnashing of teeth and blood letting behind the scenes in Labor at present!




I can recall Gillard down to 29% at one stage.


----------



## drsmith (2 September 2013)

The tide is also turning for Labor on Essential Media. 

52% 2PP support for the Coalition compared to 50% last week on two weekly averages. Essential have also done a weekly intention and that's 53% in favour of the Coalition.

http://essentialvision.com.au/category/essentialreport


----------



## IFocus (2 September 2013)

IFocus said:


> An Abbott government will take care of that.
> 
> Interesting re Abbott and future surpluses, what a fraud I guess Australia will have to get used to that ( Abbott = Fraud) over the next three years.





Ross Gittins

Worth a read on the great big taxes Abbott will need.

Why taxes would rise under Abbott


> lection campaigns have become works of fantasy where, to enter the spirit of things, you have to suspend disbelief. And the greatest unreality this time is Tony Abbott's claim the budget can be returned to surplus in the coming decade while taxes go down, not up.
> 
> To most people the idea of permanently paying less tax is hugely attractive. And Abbott is promising to abolish the carbon tax and the mining tax, cut the company tax rate by 1.5 percentage points and abandon Labor's plan to end tax concessions for company cars. All this would cost about $28 billion over four years.
> 
> So what reason is there to doubt he would deliver a lasting reduction in taxes? Simply his promise to get the budget back to surplus - plus the knowledge government spending is set to grow strongly in the next decade.




Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/business/why-taxes-would-rise-under-abbott-20130901-2sytp.html#ixzz2djloQQaw


----------



## Wysiwyg (2 September 2013)

It is now a foregone conclusion. The Labor Party, of which I support, have *botched their opportunity to govern Australia wisely. Mr. Sneaky and Mr. Nasty have the helm. 



> * botch  (bch)
> tr.v. botched, botch·ing, botch·es
> 1.  To ruin through clumsiness.
> 
> 2.  To make or perform clumsily; bungle.


----------



## SeekingYields (2 September 2013)

Just a question of by how much now for the Coalition. Labor should be focused on limiting the number of seats they are going to lose otherwise they are going to find it impossible to regain power after 3 years.


----------



## sptrawler (2 September 2013)

IFocus said:


> Ross Gittins
> 
> Worth a read on the great big taxes Abbott will need.
> 
> ...




It's nice to see someone still reads Gittens.lol

It doesn't take a brain surgeon to realise, if you have billions of debt, and you are still running a defecit. 
There will be an increase in taxes and a decrease in spending to fix it.
Or you can just keep racking up the problem, sooner or later you have to fix it.

Despite what Kev says, what a waste of a oxygen.


----------



## sails (2 September 2013)

SeekingYields said:


> Just a question of by how much now for the Coalition. Labor should be focused on limiting the number of seats they are going to lose otherwise they are going to find it impossible to regain power after 3 years.




You want them back in after three year to trash the place again and start running up more deficits and debt? Goodness,I hope not!


----------



## Wysiwyg (2 September 2013)

sails said:


> You want them back in after three year to trash the place again and start running up more deficits and debt? Goodness,I hope not!




When Labor learns how to balance a budget then they may get another chance. People in Australia are not doing it tough. 

Doing it tough is when you bludge for unemployment benefits, have kids you can't afford to maintain and take on too much debt (mortgage, cars). The day Commonwealth Government stops supporting individual life choices (babies, child care, schooling, dole bludging) then Australia can collectively move forward.


----------



## sptrawler (2 September 2013)

Why the hell would you vote for Labor when they approve this sort of assett stripping.

http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/newshome/18754597/woodside-confirms-floating-option-for-browse/

Why allow these companies to develop offshore processing of our gas, then sell it overseas. We must be the dumbest nation on earth.IMO


----------



## bunyip (3 September 2013)

IFocus said:


> Ross Gittins
> 
> Worth a read on the great big taxes Abbott will need.
> 
> ...




And you don’t think Labor will need ‘great big taxes’ if they win??!!
Hell, Rudd has already introduced a bunch of new taxes in the short time since he became PM again. And then there are the numerous taxes he and Gillard introduced over the last six years.
Considering the big debt and big budget deficits that six years of Labor government have produced, are you really so blind that you can’t see what Rudd will need to do if he’s ever going to address the mess that his incompetence has created?


----------



## Judd (3 September 2013)

In the House of Reps, my first preference will be towards some obscure no-hope party simply to deny either of the majors my $2.50 they get for preference votes.

in the Senate, the same for first (below the line) and then split #2 or #3 for the obscure party, then the majors.  I don't like the way the preference deals re applied for above the line voting for the Senate.  It's how people are elected when they get less than 2% of the vote.


----------



## bunyip (3 September 2013)

Calliope said:


> That takes the cake bunyip. However one of his co-conspirators in the untruths and deceit games, Treasurer Chris Bowen, came close when he said the other day;
> 
> "You have to campaign as you intend to govern".
> 
> The poor fool should have kept that quiet.




I’m very disappointed in Chris Bowen. I used to consider him one of the more decent members of the Labor Party. But recently he’s degraded himself by becoming just another lying, grubby little bastard like Rudd and Wong and the rest of them.

I wonder if some of these people will be able to look back on their political careers once they retire, and truthfully say “_I’m proud of having conducted myself with honesty and integrity when I was in politics”._


----------



## Tink (3 September 2013)

I will be celebrating too, bunyip.

How anyone could even consider voting this pack of self serving idiots beats me. Six years and they still cant work out their direction.

Rudds campaign made me cringe, full of lies, and am waiting the next mass exodus of how the poor Kevin had such a hard life yet treats people like trash.
Never seen him do anything for charity.
All talk, no action.

One thing his wife said that was true, he went out to buy one thing and came back with everything except what he said -- the country was run the same way.


----------



## Logique (3 September 2013)

Judd said:


> In the House of Reps, my first preference will be towards some obscure no-hope party simply to deny either of the majors my $2.50 they get for preference votes.
> 
> in the Senate, the same for first (below the line) and then split #2 or #3 for the obscure party, then the majors.  I don't like the way the preference deals re applied for above the line voting for the Senate.  It's how people are elected when they get less than 2% of the vote.



That's interesting Judd, it's 2.50 for each first preference vote, is that how it works?


----------



## noco (3 September 2013)

SeekingYields said:


> Just a question of by how much now for the Coalition. Labor should be focused on limiting the number of seats they are going to lose otherwise they are going to find it impossible to regain power after 3 years.




I would say they will be lucky to win back government in the next 9 years.

Labor have lost most of their major players in parliament and are liksly to lose more after Saturday.


----------



## Judd (3 September 2013)

Logique said:


> That's interesting Judd, it's 2.50 for each first preference vote, is that how it works?




Yeah, if the party gets 4% or more of first preference then it gets money (ours) per vote.  It's what I did last time as well.  I believe the price per vote is around that amount but I could be wrong.

Remember the recent kerfuffle when both parties wanted to increase that amount form the public purse - and make the legislation retrospective?


----------



## IFocus (3 September 2013)

sptrawler said:


> It's nice to see someone still reads Gittens.lol
> 
> It doesn't take a brain surgeon to realise, if you have billions of debt, and you are still running a defecit.
> There will be an increase in taxes and a decrease in spending to fix it.
> ...




Hmmmm you seem to miss the point on the surplus there is no difference between Labor and Abbott. 

Abbott has run away from the quick return to surplus apparently thats in the Coalitions DNA......BS

Howard and Costello you know those absolute economic geniuses (read a couple of mugs who got lucky) who sold $70 bil of assets, increased government spending well above 2% in a revenue expansion surely lay the ground for Abbott's grand plan which he hasn't told you about.

Abbott has a massive spend and tax program the very thing all the rabid Abbott fans here criticize Labor for.

Looking forward to the next three years BTW its going to cost most of you money.


----------



## sails (3 September 2013)

IFocus said:


> ...Abbott has a massive spend and tax program the very thing all the rabid Abbott fans here criticize Labor for...





Hmmmmm - labor's track record is coming up towards $300 BILLION in debt with around a $12 billion interest bill per annum.  Five massive deficits in a row...

What has labor done with the money?  And don't tell me the GFC - that was considered to be officially over around 2010.  What about the last three years - *where has the money gone?*

Look in your own backyard first, IF...


----------



## Gringotts Bank (3 September 2013)

What I want is a "middle of the road" man.

Rudd = geek/nerd with a mean streak.  Chaotic. Overly concerned with his hair.
Abbott = old-fashioned, 1940's values, awkward, stilted speech, can't just relax and be himself.
Palmer =  fat rich guy, bull dozes whomever he wants with his QC's.

Where are the normal people?


----------



## moXJO (3 September 2013)

IFocus said:


> Looking forward to the next three years BTW its going to cost most of you money.




Whats the alternative, vote labor back in and have it cost us twice as much?


I'll be the first to admit that liberals have a long list of policy that I think is absolute ****e. But at least it will clean labor out and they may put forward a credible team in six or so years. 
Right now I am having a hard time picking between either. Labor can't implement policy at all, in fact they must be the most terrible and corrupt stuff ups I think I have seen. If they carry on they will blow the debt through to half a trillion before they are finished.
Libs on the other hand are presenting policy I don't like that much if at all. 
But they don't have the proven track record yet of policy failure that labor has, which is why I will probably end up voting that way.
It will have to come down as a choice between the two, as I don't want to see a minority govt again.


----------



## pixel (3 September 2013)

Gringotts Bank said:


> What I want is a "middle of the road" man.




What's wrong with a woman?
Tanya Plibersek for example - seems "middle of the road" enough. And cute to boot; Abbott might even say she's got sex appeal. 

Methinks we have a much bigger problem: The backbenches are overcrowded with below-average drongos, who lack the skills to work for a living, so they follow a party leader and take home a big pay cheque for nothing. Some of them may also have vested interests of their own or some minority groups, but lack the broader intelligence to make useful long-term plans.


----------



## Gringotts Bank (3 September 2013)

pixel said:


> What's wrong with a woman?
> Tanya Plibersek for example - seems "middle of the road" enough. And cute to boot; Abbott might even say she's got sex appeal.
> 
> Methinks we have a much bigger problem: The backbenches are overcrowded with below-average drongos, who lack the skills to work for a living, so they follow a party leader and take home a big pay cheque for nothing. Some of them may also have vested interests of their own or some minority groups, but lack the broader intelligence to make useful long-term plans.




She seems ok.  Nothing wrong with a woman leader.

I'll end up voting Libs but only because of the possibility that Turnbull will come to the fore.


----------



## Julia (3 September 2013)

Assuming Labor loses on Saturday, what are the odds for Kevin Rudd to get out of politics?

Will he finally realised that he has now failed twice?


----------



## IFocus (3 September 2013)

moXJO said:


> Whats the alternative, vote labor back in and have it cost us twice as much?




Labor are gone.

But to wave Abbott though while he plays shonks with cuts, costings and debt is a travesty.

Everyone here thinks he has magic fairy dust that makes all the issues go away.

- - - Updated - - -



Julia said:


> Assuming Labor loses on Saturday, what are the odds for Kevin Rudd to get out of politics?
> 
> Will he finally realised that he has now failed twice?




Suspect Labor will burn him at the stake.

Barrie Cassidy  looks at what is likely to happen for both sides.


This is the calm before the political storm 




> Labor's internal hatreds have been percolating ever since the negotiated victory in 2010. After September 7, the lid will blow sky high.
> 
> So many players on one side have wanted to go to town on the initial Julia Gillard coup. They want to publicly argue, free of the constraints of office, that Labor's problems started with that event, and went downhill from there.




http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-08-30/cassidy-this-is-the-calm-before-the-political-storm/4922744


----------



## bunyip (3 September 2013)

A bit of light reading.....make of it what you will.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Stimulus Myths & Facts

There are many lies being spread this election season, but none more galling than the claim by Prime Minister Rudd that he "saved" us from the Global Financial Crisis.

Sadly, it seems many Australians still believe that Kevin throwing $80 billion dollars away, and spending us deep into debt, was a good thing. To combat this, we have prepared a short fact sheet detailing the myths and facts about the so-called stimulus. 

Every point is researched meticulously, supported by hard data, and has been fact checked by a number of professional economists. I would encourage you to forward this to all your contacts, as we must get the truth out.

Here are the myths and here are the facts:

MYTH: Australia only escaped the “Global Financial Crisis” because of Kevin Rudd

FACT: Australia’s escaped relatively unscathed from the so-called “Global Financial Crisis” due to the legacy of the Howard Government leaving strong budget surpluses and eliminating the debt - Australia had no net debt federally, and, according to the IMF, some of the lowest gross debt in the world. Furthermore, the Howard government's reforms to industrial relations ensured a flexible labour market and increase productivity. This – combined with some prudent monetary policy (the lowering of relatively-high interest rates by the Reserve Bank giving Australians a higher disposable income, thereby boosting consumption)  and the strength of Australian banks – is what spared us.

MYTH: Government Spending can stimulate an economy

FACT: Academic research overwhelmingly finds that the exact opposite is true: government spending makes a poor economy worse. There has been no case in history where a country has spent itself out of a recession. Here’s a great 3 minute video summarising why.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MgPggTlnoxM
 Dr Julie Novak found that  in Australia, “an increase in government size by ten percentage points is associated with a lower annual GDP per capita growth rate of between 1.2 and 2.5 percentage points”.  Empirical evidence proves that the only way to boost an economy is through tax cuts – instead, Kevin Rudd did the exact opposite

MYTH: Countries who cut spending did worse between 2008-2013 than those who increased spending
FACT: In every country where governments cut spending, the economy started to boom. Estonia is a good example of this,  and even  , Sweden – the darling country of the left! - slashed spending which resulted in an “economic miracle”. Other examples are numerous.

The facts speak for themselves: 


MYTH: The Stimulus helped save and create jobs

FACT: Labor’s cooked the books! There are now 350,000 people receiving unemployment benefits who are classified as “non-jobseekers”, meaning they are not required to work and don’t come up in the unemployment figures. In fact, a conservative estimate by the Australian Bureau of Statistics shows that the number of people without jobs went up by 222,000 between December 2007 and July 2013! Treasury didn’t even bother to do proper modeling, but a peer review paper by John Humphreys, our Deputy Director, has shown that even using the Treasury’s own approach, the stimulus directly cost 30,000 jobs. To make matters worse, productivity also has plummeted under the Labor Government due to their winding back our industrial relations system back to the 1960's. 

MYTH: The Stimulus Boosted Consumption

FACT: Detailed academic analysis has shown that Kevin Rudd’s “Stimulus: had – NO effect household non-durable consumption. None.  In fact, even the Australian Treasury found that Kevin Rudd’s $900 cheques  equaled only $1 of economic activity – that’s right, $1.

MYTH: “The alternatives [to the stimulus packages] were to do nothing or, worse, effectively replicate the Premiers' Plan of 1931 when governments cut expenditure, thereby compounding the problems created by a private sector already in retreat. The result, of course, was an economic rout, appalling unemployment and a decade of negligible growth through the 1930s” – Kevin Rudd, 2009

FACT: Despite what our left-wing high school syllabuses may say, it is a matter of historical fact that the Premier’s Plan was a success – and saved Australia. I know this is difficult for many people to accept - so steeped is the left wing myth in our culture - but the facts speak for themselves. In the United States, where President Hoover and then FDR increased spending, and the economy went into a tailspin, after the premier’s plan, the Australian economy sharply recovered: GDP went up, and unemployment started to rapidly fall. No wonder that in the United States Henry Morgenthau  – FDR’s very own Treasury admitted “we have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work. . . . I say, after eight years of this administration, we have just as much unemployment as when we started . . . and an enormous debt to boot.” Even the icon of the left, Lord Maynard Keynes, admitted that “the Premiers’ Plan saved the economic structure of Australia”

MYTH: The stimulus packages – which totaled a staggering $79.1 billion – were well spent.

FACT: Can anyone really claim that ‘home insulation’ can restart an economy? Or that tearing down one school hall to build another boosts productivity? Examples of waste are endless: An outback school with one student is among nine tiny schools handed $2.25 million in federal grants to build new halls, libraries and classrooms, even though they face closure. Mulgildie State School west of Bundaberg received $250,000 to build a basic 60sq m shed, after receiving a $29,000 quote from a local shed builder for a similar structure. An undercover playground with concrete floors and no doors costs $1.8 million under the Rudd Government’s schools stimulus funding, 

MYTH: Labor is a “low taxing” government

FACT: Labor has increased taxes a staggering forty three times. That's right - forty three. Should we all be paying the price for their mistakes? 

The facts speak for themselves. 
Kevin Rudd's policies - according to every serious expert - were destructive, damaging, and are destroying our economy. They didn't "save" our economy - instead, they took us to the bring of ruin.

This saturday, let's make sure everyone is aware of the facts.


----------



## bunyip (3 September 2013)

IFocus said:


> Labor are gone.
> 
> But to wave Abbott though while he plays shonks with cuts, costings and debt is a travesty.
> *
> Everyone here thinks he has magic fairy dust that makes all the issues go away.*




Not at all. We just think he’ll be a big improvement on six years of Labor’s stupidity, reckless spending, pathetic record on border protection, lies, in-fighting, inability to balance the budget and control our debt, and general incompetence.

I doubt if there’s a single person here who believes that Abbot will do everything right. I don’t think any of us are kidding ourselves that we’ll agree with everything he does. We just think that Abbot and his team can improve on Labor’s stumbling efforts to govern our country.

Kevin Rudd has already done and is still doing pretty much everything that you’re claiming Abbot will do. And he’s made a hell of a lot of ****-ups that I’m sure Abbot won’t make. Yet I’ve never once heard you refer to Rudd as ‘a brainless tosser', or any of the other colorful descriptions you’ve directed towards Abbot. 

Unlike you, most of us on here recognize the stupidity of re-employing a mob of proven incompetents to run our country down for another three years. Unlike you, most of us on here know that a more intelligent choice is to give someone else a go, and hope they do a better job. Whether they will or won’t do any better remains to be seen.
 But nobody in his or her right mind who looks at the debacle that has been the Labor government of the last six years, is going to say_ ‘Hmmm – I think I’ll vote this crowd back in for another three years even though they’ve done a pathetic job for the last six’._


----------



## dutchie (3 September 2013)

bunyip said:


> Not at all. We just think he’ll be a big improvement on six years of Labor’s stupidity, reckless spending, pathetic record on border protection, lies, in-fighting, inability to balance the budget and control our debt, and general incompetence.
> 
> I doubt if there’s a single person here who believes that Abbot will do everything right. I don’t think any of us are kidding ourselves that we’ll agree with everything he does. We just think that Abbot and his team can improve on Labor’s stumbling efforts to govern our country.
> 
> ...




Well put Bunyip. But your synopsis will go over some peoples head.


----------



## dutchie (3 September 2013)

I'm still trying to work out who is biggest liar Rudd or Gillard 

I think Gillard was way in front before but I think Rudd has taken the lead.


----------



## explod (3 September 2013)

Just had a bit of a yawn through this after a week of abscence, and I must say *it is a big yawn*

The polls are just a wild estimation of a small cross section.  More and more they miss the younger voters who have very different idas to us older ones.  Found this on pre-polling booth last week.  Young women mid 20s in BMW's made straight for the Green ticket on a surprising number of occasions here at Geelong.  Anyway lets see on Saturday.

In my 55 years os following politics the polls have increasingly favoured who they want and not the reality.

So sticking to my guns here as predicted 4 weeks ago, two party preferred 55% versus 45%.   Green vote above 15 %


----------



## johenmo (3 September 2013)

This won't make this election but how about this as an alternative for next time?

African king's 'bizarre' political vision - a monarchial democracy
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/african-kings-bizarre-political-vision-a-monarchial-democracy/story-e6frg6so-1226709998397


----------



## Logique (3 September 2013)

pixel said:


> What's wrong with a woman?
> Tanya Plibersek for example - seems "middle of the road" enough. And cute to boot; Abbott might even say she's got sex appeal.
> Methinks we have a much bigger problem: The backbenches are overcrowded with below-average drongos, who lack the skills to work for a living, so they follow a party leader and take home a big pay cheque for nothing. Some of them may also have vested interests of their own or some minority groups, but lack the broader intelligence to make useful long-term plans.



Middle of the road? Feminista, maternity leave and all the trimmings. Ask her about that poster of Tony Abbott in her electoral office. Bailed on Julia Gillard when most needed.
As with M.Turnbull, OMDB.



> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tanya_Plibersek
> As Minister for the Status of Women in the Rudd Labor Government, Plibersek initiated policies such as convening the National Council to Reduce Violence against Women and their Children in May 2008, and releasing the National Council’s Plan for Australia to Reduce Violence Against Women and their Children in March 2009.[9][10] Plibersek also addressed the 2009 United Nations International Women’s Day event, attended by United Nations.
> 
> ...Following the 2010 federal election where Labor retained government with the support of the Australian Greens and independents, parliamentary numbers were finely balanced. Plibersek was granted a 'pair' by the Coalition so that her absence from the House of Representatives while on maternity leave did not affect the result of votes.[25]


----------



## moXJO (3 September 2013)

Rudd might stay and they wont pass libs direct action through to try and push for a DD and another election. You would think it would buy him another year to slag off Abbott enough to do damage.


----------



## Gringotts Bank (3 September 2013)

Logique said:


> Middle of the road? Feminista, maternity leave and all the trimmings. Ask her about that poster of Tony Abbott in her electoral office. Bailed on Julia Gillard when most needed.
> As with M.Turnbull, OMDB.




You don't like Turnbull?


----------



## qldfrog (3 September 2013)

bunyip said:


> Not at all. We just think he’ll be a big improvement on six years of Labor’s stupidity, reckless spending, pathetic record on border protection, lies, in-fighting, inability to balance the budget and control our debt, and general incompetence.
> 
> I doubt if there’s a single person here who believes that Abbot will do everything right. I don’t think any of us are kidding ourselves that we’ll agree with everything he does. We just think that Abbot and his team can improve on Labor’s stumbling efforts to govern our country.
> ....[/I]



+1 I really do not like Abbott but I really believe it is a matter of economic life or death to stop labor now..Otherwise I see Australia taking the road of my native country which I had to leave 20y ago to have a future.
Sadly a lot of damage has been done already and I only hope Abbot will be strong enough to take the harsh measures needed to clean the mess....


----------



## drsmith (3 September 2013)

moXJO said:


> Rudd might stay and they wont pass libs direct action through to try and push for a DD and another election. You would think it would buy him another year to slag off Abbott enough to do damage.



Tony Abbott returned the carbon tax in his press club speech yesterday I would suggest on the theme of trust.

It's clearly been successful in luring Kevin Rudd in.


----------



## Logique (3 September 2013)

Gringotts Bank said:


> You don't like Turnbull?



Hi GB, no I do not support "Carbon Malcolm" for Liberal leadership!


----------



## wayneL (3 September 2013)

explod said:


> ....in BMW's made straight for the Green ticket




This is the astonishing thing about the so-called Greens. They drive big fast gas guzzlers, flashy SUVs etc, central air conditioning/heating, automated kitchen etc etc... and preach to me on my treadly about global warming etc.

An alliterative string of adjectives would be fun, but only one word actually suffices => Idiots.


----------



## Julia (3 September 2013)

bunyip said:


> A bit of light reading.....make of it what you will.



Source?



Logique said:


> Middle of the road? Feminista, maternity leave and all the trimmings. Ask her about that poster of Tony Abbott in her electoral office. Bailed on Julia Gillard when most needed.
> As with M.Turnbull, OMDB.



Exactly.  She presents as mild mannered and reasonable.   In reality she was one of the most strident supporters of Gillard's confected misogyny rant, and then in the ultimate act of hypocrisy toward the sisterhood, she walked away from Gillard when the latter needed it most.

I'd put her right at the bottom of any list of potential leaders, even below Penny Wong, and she's sure as hell right down there.


----------



## Macquack (3 September 2013)

Logique said:


> Middle of the road? Feminista, maternity leave and all the trimmings.* Ask her about that poster of Tony Abbott in her electoral office*.






> The posters, snapped inside the Sydney electorate office of Health Minister Tanya Plibersek, carry the slogans: "I'm threatened by boats and gays. Gays on boats are my worst nightmare" and also "Note to Ladies: Make me a sandwich".
> Mr Abbott told the Nine Network today: "It's tacky, it's not funny and Tanya Plibersek should be better than that and the Labor Party should lift its game




Who is a big sook?

That story was a beat up by that serial pest and low life Ben Fordham.


----------



## Calliope (3 September 2013)

qldfrog said:


> +1 I really do not like Abbott but I really believe it is a matter of economic life or death to stop labor now..Otherwise I see Australia taking the road of my native country which I had to leave 20y ago to have a future.
> Sadly a lot of damage has been done already and I only hope Abbot will be strong enough to take the harsh measures needed to clean the mess....




I saw a Labor commercial tonight with a stumbling, mumbling, tentative Abbott being interviewed. For God's sake, if he can't look, act and talk like a winner now, will he ever have the guts to institute the savings that will have to be made to reclaim Labor's massive black hole.

He is certainly not giving me the impression of strength enough to take, as you say, harsh measures.

He should adopt the attitude of Muhammad Ali;

"At home I am a nice guy: but I don't want the world to know. Humble people, I've found, don't get very far."


----------



## dutchie (4 September 2013)

Roger Corbett - Chairman of Fairfax Media and Reserve Bank member tells it like it is...

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...udd-says-fairfax-chairman-20130904-2t3x5.html


He is right, Australia won't cop any more of this Labor bullsh#t.


----------



## drsmith (4 September 2013)

Labor can't blame Rupy for this,

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-09-04/fairfax-chairman-roger-corbett-attacks-kevin-rudd/4933128


----------



## bunyip (4 September 2013)

Julia said:


> Source?




Julia

It's supposedly from the 'Australian Taxpayers' Alliance'.


----------



## bunyip (4 September 2013)

A friend of mine (a staunch Labor hater) just sent me the following eamil which is supposedly from Kevin Rudd.
Whether it's for real or is just a scam, I don't know.

I’ve attempted to copy and paste it here, but it hasn’t come out exactly as he sent it to me. Missing are the links you can click on to donate $5.

If this is for real, it shows the desperation of Labor and Rudd.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Dear........


Both sides of politics agree that this election will be won or lost on a knife edge. What we all do in the next few days will make a huge difference.

Tonight at midnight, political advertising on TV and radio stops. Mr Abbott is counting on people to stop listening. He’s counting on us not being able to hold him to account for his plans to cut jobs and services, health and education, our Clean Energy Future and of course, our NBN. We have other plans.

We’re taking our message to millions of people online. Just $5 from you and your friends will help us reach more than 12 million Australians over the next three days through hugely popular platforms like Facebook, where we can still get our message out.

We know Tony Abbott is hoping people will just stop listening. He knows the more they think about his plans to hand out money with one hand, and rip far more away with the other, the worse he’ll fare. During this blackout period, we can let millions of people know about Mr Abbott’s brutal cuts to the bone – but we need to join together to make it happen. 

I’m asking you and five friends to chip in $5 – because truly together we can all make a real difference.

Thanks,

Kevin

Step Up & Donate


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Australian Labor Party
Authorised by G. Wright, Australian Labor, 5/9 Sydney Avenue, Barton ACT 2600


----------



## sails (4 September 2013)

drsmith said:


> Labor can't blame Rupy for this,
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-09-04/fairfax-chairman-roger-corbett-attacks-kevin-rudd/4933128




It's in the Age as well - I don't know if the free to air channels have picked up on it but Corbett's comments from lateline have been shown on Sky News too.

The Age: Labor should have stuck with Julia Gillard instead of a 'discredited' Kevin Rudd, says Fairfax chairman

Here is the lateline link: http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2013/s3840482.htm


----------



## noco (4 September 2013)

sails said:


> It's in the Age as well - I don't know if the free to air channels have picked up on it but Corbett's comments from lateline have been shown on Sky News too.
> 
> The Age: Labor should have stuck with Julia Gillard instead of a 'discredited' Kevin Rudd, says Fairfax chairman
> 
> Here is the lateline link: http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2013/s3840482.htm




Yes I saw it on Late Line last night and Corbett certainly didn't do Rudd any favours.


----------



## IFocus (4 September 2013)

bunyip said:


> Julia
> 
> It's supposedly from the 'Australian Taxpayers' Alliance'.




5 seconds of research will show it to be complete rubbish but hay believe what you want keep the  rant going LOL.


----------



## Country Lad (4 September 2013)

It appears that the smear campaign by Treasurer Bowen and Labor has caught up with Bowen and is starting to backfire as the Australian does some digging. 

It started with Labor denigrating Ray King, and then NSW's most senior police retirees have queued up to defend the King against the unsubstantiated and apparently untrue Labor smears.

Now the table has turned as The Australian has the story of Bowen's involvement in the past Labor dominated local council.  

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...litical-intrigue/story-fn9qr68y-1226710129224

Just a bit of hypocrisy here because Bowen is happy to continue to smear King knowing it is all untrue but then urged The Australian not to publish an article revealing that Bowen voted to keep paying ALP councillor Phuong Ngo while he was on remand for the murder of state Labor MP John Newman in April 1998. 

Cheers
Country Lad


----------



## IFocus (4 September 2013)

Calliope said:


> I saw a Labor commercial tonight with a stumbling, mumbling, tentative Abbott being interviewed. For God's sake, if he can't look, act and talk like a winner now, will he ever have the guts to institute the savings that will have to be made to reclaim Labor's massive black hole.
> 
> He is certainly not giving me the impression of strength enough to take, as you say, harsh measures.
> 
> ...





Simple problem, go for those sort of cuts, take those funds out of the economy and bingo recession, remember them?

Ross Gittins states the obvious that the Abbott love in folk here just cannot get heir heads around

Abbott won't rush into making cuts



> If Tony Abbott wins the election would he ''cut, cut, cut'' to fill the ''$70 billion black hole'' needed to cover the cost of his election promises, as Labor repeatedly claims? Would he follow the Europeans in adopting austerity policies, as others claim?
> 
> No. Why not? Because the man who'd be his treasurer, Joe Hockey, isn't that stupid and Abbott isn't that committed.






> While Labor was in power, Abbott and his colleagues exaggerated the significance of the size of the budget deficit and the level of the public debt because this was the only way to disparage the economic record of a government that had - with much help from the Reserve Bank - done surprisingly well.
> 
> But once the Coalition was back in power its need for fear-mongering about debt and deficit would disappear and it would face the same struggle to get the budget back to surplus that Labor faced.
> 
> ...




Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/comment/abbott-wont-rush-into-making-cuts-20130903-2t33o.html#ixzz2dsOpmBaT


----------



## sails (4 September 2013)

IFocus said:


> Simple problem, go for those sort of cuts, take those funds out of the economy and bingo recession, remember them?
> 
> Ross Gittins states the obvious that the Abbott love in folk here just cannot get heir heads around
> 
> ...





Hmmmm... if labor hadn't spent so wildly over the last six years creating a near $300 BILLION debt (with it's approx $12 billion interest bill), then cuts would not be necessary. Try getting your head around that one, IFocus...

Labor created the problem and now you try to ridicule Abbott over the cuts?  Shame on labor and their twisted propaganda!


----------



## Calliope (4 September 2013)

IFocus said:


> Ross Gittins states the obvious that the Abbott love in folk here just cannot get heir heads around
> Abbott won't rush into making cuts




Yes. It is a refreshing change when even a clown like Gittins agrees that the Rudd mantra of Abbott "cuts-cuts-cuts" is all bullsh!t.

Actually Rudd's scare campaign is scaring no one but Abbott.


----------



## sails (4 September 2013)

So much for Rudd going on about TAFE funding:



> Prime Minister Kevin Rudd savaged state governments for destroying vocational training while simultaneously stripping $111 million set aside for TAFE and university campuses.
> 
> During his campaign launch speech on Sunday, Mr Rudd vowed to protect the national training system from the likes of Queensland, Western Australia and Victoria, which he said had allowed TAFE to start to “wither on the vine”.
> 
> ...




From the AFR: Rudd raids TAFE fund to pay for business tax cuts


----------



## Calliope (4 September 2013)

"The tired, the poor and huddled masses" don't scare easily these days. They know that old softie Abbott couldn't cut butter with a hot  knife.



> How did an unpopular PM like Keating manage to get re-elected in 1993? Via the mother of all scare campaigns on the GST. What's Rudd's tactic today? The mother of all scare campaigns over cuts to spending by the Coalition.
> 
> The difference? The polls reveal it just isn't working in this campaign the way that it did for Keating in 1993.




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...ating-comparison/story-fn53lw5p-1226710071251


----------



## noco (4 September 2013)

In the elctorate of Griffith, Bill Glasson is one step ahead of his opponent.

Read the link to appreciate the comics.



http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...-bit-of-a-muppet/story-fnihsr9v-1226710173910


----------



## Julia (4 September 2013)

Surprisingly, the PUP's support is, according to the ABC, edging up to around 8%.  Not sure if that's national or just in Qld.
The advertising is everywhere.  I'm in a safe National seat and there's a normal amount of advertising from the LNP candidate, but there's a PUP sign on almost every street corner, and massive radio advertising.  I don't watch much TV but have seen a fair bit of Clive there also.

I won't be surprised if he considerably outpolls Katter.

Can't wait to see if Bill Glasson manages to oust Kevin Rudd.  If he does, surely that will have to be the final demise of Rudd?


----------



## bunyip (4 September 2013)

IFocus said:


> Simple problem, go for those sort of cuts, take those funds out of the economy and bingo recession, remember them?



Yes, we remember recessions very well. Now let me see – didn’t the last big one occur under a* Labor government *of which Keating was treasurer?

And then there were the dark days and tough economic times under Whitlam – *another Labor government. *



IFocus said:


> Ross Gittins states the obvious that the Abbott love in folk here just cannot get heir heads around
> 
> Abbott won't rush into making cuts




It’s your Labor heroes, pal, not the LNP supporters in here, who can’t seem to get their heads around the fact that Abbot won’t CUT CUT CUT us into recession, as the Rudd circus is trying to make us believe. 
However, I don’t really think the ALP believe their own bull dust on this issue. 
But heck, when a political party has little to bring to the election campaign except a woeful track record of dysfunction, lies and incompetence, I guess it shouldn’t surprise us when they desperately try to swing support their way by resorting to lies, smears, and scare campaigns against their opponents.


----------



## IFocus (4 September 2013)

bunyip said:


> Yes, we remember recessions very well. Now let me see – didn’t the last big one occur under a* Labor government *of which Keating was treasurer?
> 
> And then there were the dark days and tough economic times under Whitlam – *another Labor government. *




Yep they were responsible for the world oil shocks that help cause them not to mention the breaking of inflation cycle world wide BTW you forgot the one under Fraser in 83 must have been Labors fault to.






> But heck, when a political party has little to bring to the election campaign except a woeful track record of dysfunction, lies and incompetence, I guess it shouldn’t surprise us when they desperately try to swing support their way by resorting to lies, smears, and scare campaigns against their opponents.




Ah that would be the coalition you are talking about then.


----------



## drsmith (4 September 2013)

IFocus said:


> Yep they were responsible for the world oil shocks that help cause them not to mention the breaking of inflation cycle world wide BTW you forgot the one under Fraser in 83 must have been Labors fault to.
> 
> Ah that would be the coalition you are talking about then.



We're not far from this government's last supper now.

Three sleeps to go.


----------



## Ves (4 September 2013)

bunyip said:


> A bit of light reading.....make of it what you will.




I like light reading.   I also like doing further research of the _facts._   Not going to do all of them, because I don't want to commit to the time,  but a few seemed flawed.  



> FACT: Australia’s escaped relatively unscathed from the so-called “Global Financial Crisis” due to the legacy of the Howard Government leaving strong budget surpluses and eliminating the debt - Australia had no net debt federally, and, according to the IMF, some of the lowest gross debt in the world. Furthermore, the Howard government's reforms to industrial relations ensured a flexible labour market and increase productivity. This – combined with some prudent monetary policy (the lowering of relatively-high interest rates by the Reserve Bank giving Australians a higher disposable income, thereby boosting consumption)  and the strength of Australian banks – is what spared us.




There was something called the resources super-cycle going and its contribution to Australia's GDP did not slow down until very recently,  at least until after the Global Financial Crisis.

An opinion,  omitting material facts such as this,   should not be labelled fact.   It is safer to say that no government has a massive level of control over the fate of the economy. 



> MYTH: Countries who cut spending did worse between 2008-2013 than those who increased spending
> FACT: In every country where governments cut spending, the economy started to boom. Estonia is a good example of this,  and even  , Sweden – the darling country of the left! - slashed spending which resulted in an “economic miracle”. Other examples are numerous.



Estonia real GDP growth for the period 2008-13 was negative 4.5%.

Unemloyment in Estonia was 5.5% in 2008.  In 2013 it is now 8.3% (after peaking at around 18% in 2010).

Can you please explain how this is a booming economy?

Sweden runs an export economy -  based in hydropower and iron ore and engineering amongst others.   All of which have done especially well in the period mentioned.   Can you please how there is a high correlation between their economic success and slashed gov spending?

What are the other examples?

Did I miss the source of this article?   Since there is no source provided can we assume it is your personal work?


----------



## Miss Hale (4 September 2013)

I don't know if I am typical (probably not) but I really have had zero interest in this election. It feels like it has been an eternity in coming and I just can't wait for Saturday to be over.  I could partly be because it has come at the business end of the footy season and I am pretty preoccupied with that (dumb choice of dates by both Gillard and Rudd) but it just seems like a everyone is going through the motions.


----------



## bunyip (4 September 2013)

Ves said:


> I like light reading.   I also like doing further research of the _facts._   Not going to do all of them, because I don't want to commit to the time,  but a few seemed flawed.
> 
> 
> Estonia real GDP growth for the period 2008-13 was negative 4.5%.
> ...




I don’t have the slightest interest in explaining anything to you in relation to that article.
I didn’t write it, I have expressed neither agreement nor disagreement with any of it, I simply posted it here for the interest of this forum. As I said, make of it what you will.





Ves said:


> Did I miss the source of this article?   Since there is no source provided can we assume it is your personal work?



Sure, you can assume that if you want, but your assumption would be wrong. Julia asked me for the source of the article, and I provided it.


----------



## Ves (4 September 2013)

bunyip said:


> I don’t have the slightest interest in explaining anything to you in relation to that article.
> I didn’t write it, I have expressed neither agreement nor disagreement with any of it, I simply posted it here for the interest of this forum. As I said, make of it what you will.



You don't have any interest in checking the actual facts of articles that you share on a public forum?

That sounds absurd to me.  What does interest you, if not the truth?  



> Sure, you can assume that if you want, but your assumption would be wrong. Julia asked me for the source of the article, and I provided it.



Supposedly?  You don't even know for sure.


----------



## burglar (4 September 2013)

Miss Hale said:


> ... I just can't wait for Saturday to be over ...




Perhaps it will be safe to surf TV once more.


----------



## drsmith (4 September 2013)

How it's looking for Labor in Queensland.



> MATT WORDSWORTH: It's not just Forde that looks lost for Kevin Rudd in Queensland; Labor's head office is privately describing internal polling as grim and deteriorating. After the leadership change, they were talking of winning back seats lost in 2010. Now they're facing losing up to half the eight they now hold.
> 
> Even Kevin Rudd is at risk of losing his seat of Griffith to former AMA chief Dr Bill Glasson.




http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2013/s3841334.htm


----------



## bunyip (4 September 2013)

Ves said:


> You don't have any interest in checking the actual facts of articles that you share on a public forum?
> 
> That sounds absurd to me.  What does interest you, if not the truth?
> 
> ...




Like you, I’m not prepared to commit the time to looking into each of the opinions expressed in the article. 
I’ll post something on here if I think it will be of interest to the forum. If I don’t, I won’t. 
If you’re OK with that, great. If you’re not OK with that, too bad - you'll get over it.

It was supposed to be from the Australian Taxpayers' Alliance, according to the bloke who sent it to me. I’d never heard of them, which is why I used the word ‘supposedly’ in describing the source of the article.

I have just now Googled it, and it appears that it was in fact the Australian Taxpayers Alliance that put out the article. Here’s the link. 
https://www.taxpayers.org.au/factcheck-did-kevin-save-us-from-the-gfc/


----------



## drsmith (5 September 2013)

Is this the first sign of the electoral rout to come for Labor ?

http://catallaxyfiles.com/2013/09/0...s-has-an-electoral-wipe-out-already-occurred/


----------



## Aussiejeff (5 September 2013)

drsmith said:


> Is this the first sign of the electoral rout to come for Labor ?
> 
> http://catallaxyfiles.com/2013/09/0...s-has-an-electoral-wipe-out-already-occurred/




They must already know the result. The numbers of pre-polling day voters turning out to vote early has been massive as far as I can tell. All parties have their analysts out in the field gauging what is going on. The Laborious Party would know beyond doubt even now that they are doomed to an inglorious wipeout. 

Blind Freddy could even see this. Yet the pretense is played out right till the last siren at tax payer's expense.

What a joke.


----------



## Judd (5 September 2013)

As Anthony Green indicates in his election blog:



> The instructions say you must fill in every square, but the savings provision of the act require that only 90% of the squares be filled in, and will allow a maximum of three sequencing errors. A sequencing error is any doubling up of numbers and any break in the number sequence.
> If you want to be ultra safe, fill in below the line and the fill in one of the above the line squares. The below the line vote takes priority, but if proves to be informal, the ballot paper will revert to the above the line option.




How people can vote in the Senate without directing their preference, if you consider them equally bad or a mixture, to either major party? The answer to this is that you only have to fill in 90% of the boxes when voting BTL, so you can deliberately exhaust your vote without it reaching either major. That said, there are many candidates who are probably much worse than both majors, and that it is worth preferencing both majors just to put the others last.

Basically if you vote 1 for someone who is going to get a quota or likely to get a quota, and your preferences between parties differ wildly from how your partly has allocated its above-the-lines, then you run a huge risk that at some point of the count your preferences will be effectively wasted or a candidate you like even harmed. What I like to do is vote 1 for a complete no-hoper - in the case of the Senate a #2 or #3 candidate from a very obscure microparty that I don't have a problem with. That way my vote is no longer getting trapped in anyone's surplus off the first count. 

Beyond that strategic voting gets very tricky for the Senate.

What I have done, tedious as it was, is to use http://www.belowtheline.org.au/ as it has links to the parties web-sites and policies which I read.  Then used https://www.clueyvoter.com/ to generate a sample voting paper.  Following that, and using great care, highlight the numbers generated by clueyvoter and changed them according to my views in regard to each party's policies.  Then print.  It will be take in to the voting booth, but not left behind, as my Aide-mÃ©moire.

Obviously, I take my vote seriously.  I view “How to Vote Cards” as “How you don't have to think cards.”


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (5 September 2013)

Many pre-pollers are committed and probably reflect the voting intentions of 3-6 months ago.

Where it will matter are with the undecided on the day in the marginals.

I am told it does not look good for the ALP, as there is a definite swing on in pre-polling.

gg


----------



## McLovin (5 September 2013)

I'm looking forward to Monday morning, we can finally get this dreary campaign behind us. Having the Libs back in, for all their flaws, has to be better than the current mob. 

Bring on Saturday.


----------



## Logique (5 September 2013)

drsmith said:


> We're not far from this government's last supper now.
> 
> Three sleeps to go.



Two now Doc. A bottle of red cordial on the counter. 

But will the market sell the news.


----------



## IFocus (5 September 2013)

Labor lost the house of reps some time ago what will be interesting will be the Senate. 

I don't expect Labor to fair as badly, looking like the greens will hold or improve on their position with independents possibly holding the balance.

Given Abbott's comments earlier in the week on the carbon tax I assume Liberal internal polling to be showing just that.


----------



## Calliope (5 September 2013)

Rudd should come clean with the electors of Griffith and tell them whether he intends to stick around after he loses the election or do what former Qld Premier Anna Bligh did and resign rather that face the humiliation of leading a rump party.

FEDERAL Labor is likely to hand the leadership to Bill Shorten after a devastating election defeat on Saturday as it seeks to put the Kevin Rudd era firmly behind it.



> Senior Labor sources across the factions have told The Australian that Mr Shorten is expected to get the nod to fill the Prime Minister's shoes in opposition -- despite resentment about what they consider his duplicitous role in the dumping of Julia Gillard in June.
> 
> Mr Shorten is still not on speaking terms with factional allies within Labor, including Wayne Swan and Stephen Conroy.
> 
> ...




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...-to-replace-rudd/story-fn9qr68y-1226710919763
And;


> As he tries to capture the electoral momentum flowing his way, Mr Abbott warned Mr Rudd's constituents they could face a by-election if Labor lost but the PM retained his seat.
> 
> "If he does lose the election but holds his seat there will swiftly be a by-election in Griffith and that's the last thing that people want," Mr Abbott said.



http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...rudd-in-griffith/story-fnho52jo-1226710938137


----------



## Craton (5 September 2013)

Thankfully I'll be out of state come Saturday and have already submitted my vote. I had a really good giggle at some of the parties offering themselves for election.

Two that really pricked my ears up are the Sex Party and the HEMP Party. More curious are the two no name parties. They seemed really on the ball and with it so, they go my vote, j/k.....


----------



## IFocus (5 September 2013)

What a complete sham


Tony Abbott defends not having 'bulletproof' climate change and broadband policies costed



> Opposition Leader Tony Abbott has defended the Coalition's decision not to have two of its major policies independently costed, saying the measures are "bulletproof".




http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-09-05/abbott-says-costings-are-bulletproof/4937130

- - - Updated - - -



Craton said:


> Thankfully I'll be out of state come Saturday and have already submitted my vote.





Me to I'll be some where deep in the jungles of Central Kalimantan Borneo so wont actually hear the result until some time next week.


----------



## drsmith (5 September 2013)

IFocus said:


> Tony Abbott defends not having 'bulletproof' climate change and broadband policies costed



Tony Abbott's climate change policies have been costed. He's not going to spend any more than he's budgeted.

How's the rollout of Labor's NBN going ?

Two more sleeps.


----------



## sydboy007 (5 September 2013)

drsmith said:


> Tony Abbott's climate change policies have been costed. He's not going to spend any more than he's budgeted.
> 
> How's the rollout of Labor's NBN going ?
> 
> Two more sleeps.




How's MTs free handover of Telstra copper going?  An asseet ont heir books at some $30B from memory.


----------



## drsmith (5 September 2013)

sydboy007 said:


> How's MTs free handover of Telstra copper going?



They're not in office yet, but they will be next week.

The valid comparison will be what they achieve over the next six years relative to what Labor has achieved in the past six.


----------



## noco (5 September 2013)

Calliope said:


> Rudd should come clean with the electors of Griffith and tell them whether he intends to stick around after he loses the election or do what former Qld Premier Anna Bligh did and resign rather that face the humiliation of leading a rump party.
> 
> FEDERAL Labor is likely to hand the leadership to Bill Shorten after a devastating election defeat on Saturday as it seeks to put the Kevin Rudd era firmly behind it.
> 
> ...





In all my days I have never seen this once great Labor Party in so much termoil.

After the election defeat for Labor, they could be without a leader for 4 weeks due to recent new caucas agreemnets.

I think the major players in the Labor Party are hoping Rudd will be defeated in his own electorate to make it easier for the appointment of a new leader.

Come what may Labor will be devoid of any talent to take on any duties of shadow ministry positions.


http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...comes-opposition/story-fn9qr68y-1226710918267


----------



## IFocus (5 September 2013)

sydboy007 said:


> How's MTs free handover of Telstra copper going?  An asseet ont heir books at some $30B from memory.




LOL maybe he is using Hockeys magic calculator


----------



## Judd (5 September 2013)

noco said:


> Snip:
> 
> In all my days I have never seen this once great Labor Party in so much termoil.




I'd have to agree.  Almost akin to the death throws of a sinking ship.

It has been the most shambolic, chaotic campaign I can recall and has, in some ways, been going on for over three years.  Awful.

I am not enamored by any of the groups participating.  None of them have been great in my view.  Evasive and unrealistic.  I feel totally disheartened for what purports to be political leadership. Zilch, nuthen, zip.


----------



## McLovin (5 September 2013)

Judd said:


> It has been the most shambolic, chaotic campaign I can recall and has, in some ways, been going on for over three years.  Awful.




I blame the media. What a sorry lot they are. They ask the most superficial questions and seem to spend their whole time trying to get the candidates to make "gaffes". There was a report on 7:30 last week about the media following Abbott, they are treated like mushrooms. 

The pinnacle of superficiality has to be have been Kevin's walk through Melbourne yesterday where a rent-a-crowd just kept asking for "selfies".


----------



## Judd (5 September 2013)

I don't put the blame on the media as such.  I view it as a factor of the population wants quick grabs and the participants salivate at the prospect of using the media for getting their faces noticed and their words out.  They are all in the same playpen kicking sand in each others face.

It's a game and nothing more than that really - apart from the high stakes which are on the table - but it is being badly played.


----------



## sydboy007 (5 September 2013)

drsmith said:


> They're not in office yet, but they will be next week.
> 
> The valid comparison will be what they achieve over the next six years relative to what Labor has achieved in the past six.




Lets see how they cope with our manufacturing sector

NB Australia is at the RHS

Oh and GDP per capita has dropped to 0.1% for the qtr, so it's doubtful households can go on another debt fuelled binge like the Howard years.  No GST increasing at 8% a year, so the states can't do much for final demand, and please no negative household savings rate again.

I don't envy the Govt trying to steer the economy through the largest fall in the ToT since the Korean wool boom, but seems only fair that the one who rode the ToT coattails on the way up should help to manage things when they go in reverse.

How many deficits for the Coalition before their economic management skills become doubtful?  They've pretty much said they'll have a minimum of 3.  I suppose if they hit 6 then they'll not be able to complain about Labor too much any more?

Lets see if an Abbott Govt is able to achieve real per capita GDP growth of around 4.5% over the next 6 years as Labor did (15% nominal), keep work place deaths at the lowest rate in at least a decade, maybe even achieve a further ~50% reduction in work place deaths.  The dysfunctional nature of the Govt has hidden quite a few of their achievements.


----------



## noco (5 September 2013)

At last the Coalititons costing are out for Labor to look for black holes or will they be game?

It is good to note the Coalition has cut back on foreign aid. Charity begins at home.

If the Carbon tax is scrapped there will be more savings on the 10% of the carbon tax which is paid to the UN Climate Change committee.



http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...y-darling-scheme/story-fnho52jo-1226711731026


----------



## MrBurns (5 September 2013)

noco said:


> At last the Coalititons costing are out for Labor to look for black holes or will they be game?
> It is good to note the Coalition has cut back on foreign aid. Charity begins at home.
> If the Carbon tax is scrapped there will be more savings on the 10% of the carbon tax which is paid to the UN Climate Change committee.
> http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...y-darling-scheme/story-fnho52jo-1226711731026




If Labor weren't so reckless we wouldn't have had to cut foreign aid, they'll point the finger at the Libs but we all know who's to blame.


----------



## Calliope (5 September 2013)

MrBurns said:


> If Labor weren't so reckless we wouldn't have had to cut foreign aid, they'll point the finger at the Libs but we all know who's to blame.




Dear oh dear..."slash and burn", "vicious cuts" and "cuts to the bone."

About $31.6 billion in savings were already known but today's main new cuts listed include:

*$4.5 billion cut from foreign aid.

*$650 million by "rephasing" Murray Darling Water Buyback Scheme funding over six years instead of four years

*$428 million through a further 0.25 per cent efficiency dividend on the public service which it flags will be from cutting advertising, consultancies and travel.

*$185 million from suspending connecting renewables to the grid plan until committed demand is identified.

*$200 million for not proceeding with further increase in the instant asset write-off for business to $10,000.

*$42 million from discontinuing the ACT pokie trial.

*$13 million from cutting Community Cabinet events.

*$45 million from reducing the former Department of Climate Change.

*$42 million from reducing National Low Emissions Coal Initiative.


----------



## drsmith (5 September 2013)

Calliope said:


> *$4.5 billion cut from foreign aid.



I'm yet to see the detail on this but from what I've heard on ABC radio,  it's a reduction in the rate of increase of foreign aid.

One thing I did note during the press conference is that Joe Hockey was sweating a lot. He, like most of the politicians I would suggest is looking forward to the end of this campaign.

EDIT:

The Coalition's costings.

http://resources.news.com.au/files/2013/09/05/1226711/803880-costings-table.pdf

The increase in foreign aid is being reduced to CPI.


----------



## drsmith (5 September 2013)

For those wanting to keep track of polls, Reachtel are continuing to do them.

http://www.reachtel.com.au/category/tags/market-research

The latest two shows Labor continuing to go backwards overall and Geoff Lyons in the Labor held Tasmanian seat of Bass looks like he's going to be smashed with a massive 15% swing again him based on these numbers.


----------



## Julia (5 September 2013)

McLovin said:


> I blame the media. What a sorry lot they are. They ask the most superficial questions and seem to spend their whole time trying to get the candidates to make "gaffes". There was a report on 7:30 last week about the media following Abbott, they are treated like mushrooms.



+1.   ABC devoted about three days to commentary and interviews with predictable subjects over Mr Abbott's light hearted comment about Fiona Scott having sex appeal.
For god's sake, it was a throw away remark between friends.
Rudd even dramatically declared if such a remark had been made in the commercial workplace, it would be so serious as to merit the resignation of the person making the remark.

This sort of absolute rubbish has typified Kevin Rudd's whole campaign, i.e. massive overreach.
They have persisted in claiming a $70 billion black hole for the Opposition in the face of absolutely no evidence for this.  Even today, with the costings largely presented, Rudd was still refusing to admit this was wrong.
He must think the average voter is a complete idiot.



noco said:


> At last the Coalititons costing are out for Labor to look for black holes or will they be game?
> 
> It is good to note the Coalition has cut back on foreign aid. Charity begins at home.



As drsmith notes below, they have not cut back on foreign aid at all, simply reduced the rate at which foreign aid is increased in order to improve vitally necessary infrastructure here in Australia.



drsmith said:


> I'm yet to see the detail on this but from what I've heard on ABC radio,  it's a reduction in the rate of increase of foreign aid.


----------



## MrBurns (5 September 2013)

Julia said:


> +1.   ABC devoted about three days to commentary and interviews with predictable subjects over Mr Abbott's light hearted comment about Fiona Scott having sex appeal.
> For god's sake, it was a throw away remark between friends.
> Rudd even dramatically declared if such a remark had been made in the commercial workplace, it would be so serious as to merit the resignation of the person making the remark.
> 
> ...




Well said Julia, agree completely.


----------



## So_Cynical (5 September 2013)

MrBurns said:


> If Labor weren't so reckless we wouldn't have had to cut foreign aid, they'll point the finger at the Libs but we all know who's to blame.




You guys are incredible, when Labor's in Govt its all there fault, everything, when the Libs are in its still Labor's fault.

Why do you insist on posting politicly bias dribble? seriously what's the point?

------------------

One can only hope that the forces of light and hope control the Senate past June 30 - 2014, and give em hell in the mean time...pass nothing.


----------



## Calliope (5 September 2013)

So_Cynical said:


> You guys are incredible, when Labor's in Govt its all there fault, everything, when the Libs are in its still Labor's fault.
> 
> Why do you insist on posting politicly bias dribble? seriously what's the point?
> 
> ...




It's strange that you ask these silly questions to people you say you have on "ignore".


----------



## MrBurns (5 September 2013)

So_Cynical said:


> You guys are incredible, when Labor's in Govt its all there fault, everything, when the Libs are in its still Labor's fault.
> 
> Why do you insist on posting politicly bias dribble? seriously what's the point?
> 
> ...




Fair enough after the election our debt becomes the fault of the Coalition, you really deserve for them to win so Labor can strip you of the last of your personal wealth to pay their bills.


----------



## wayneL (6 September 2013)

So_Cynical said:


> You guys are incredible, when Labor's in Govt its all there fault, everything, when the Libs are in its still Labor's fault.
> 
> Why do you insist on posting politicly bias dribble? seriously what's the point?
> 
> ...




Forces of Light an Hope???? LMAO

Who are you accusing of bias?


----------



## Tink (6 September 2013)

Thanks for that poll counter, dr smith. 
It seems a few in Victoria in safe Labor seats may be going down.

Music to my ears this morning with this headline
*Labor heading for landslide loss*

One more day to go


----------



## MrBurns (6 September 2013)

Lead story on the ABC web site, if ever there was evidence of ABC bias this is it, a nothing story blown way out of proportion by Labor willingly assisted by the ABC



> Labor says Coalition backflip on internet filter is proof of hidden agendas
> 
> Labor has seized on a stunning Coalition backflip on plans to enforce an opt-out internet filter, saying it shows the party has hidden agendas.




http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-09-06/labor-seizes-on-coalition-filter-backflip/4939818

What a load of crap.


----------



## bunyip (6 September 2013)

Tink said:


> Thanks for that poll counter, dr smith.
> It seems a few in Victoria in safe Labor seats may be going down.
> 
> Music to my ears this morning with this headline
> ...




Music to my ears too, Tink.
What I’m really hoping for here in Queensland, (apart from the ALP getting absolutely routed), is for Rudd to lose his seat of Griffith, Swan to lose his seat of Lilley, and Beattie to get mauled in his attempt to win the seat of Forde.
Rudd was parachuted back in to the leadership in the hope that his so-called ‘popularity’ (LOL) in Queensland would swing the tide for Labor. Ditto for Beattie being parachuted in as the ALP candidate for Forde. Both of these clowns were popular enough in Queensland in their day, but their day has long past. Rudd and Beattie will be wiping the egg off their faces for years if voters give them a good hard kick in the teeth that expels the popularity myth surrounding this dastardly pair.
As for Swan, the sooner that clown’s political career comes to an end, the better for everyone.


----------



## moXJO (6 September 2013)

One more sleep, time sure does fly. It doesnt seem that long ago that Gillard called the election. I suppose it couldnt happen fast enough for some.


----------



## noco (6 September 2013)

Julia said:


> +1.   ABC devoted about three days to commentary and interviews with predictable subjects over Mr Abbott's light hearted comment about Fiona Scott having sex appeal.
> For god's sake, it was a throw away remark between friends.
> Rudd even dramatically declared if such a remark had been made in the commercial workplace, it would be so serious as to merit the resignation of the person making the remark.
> 
> ...




Julia, call it what you like but it is still a saving of $4.5 billion plus the saving on interest on money that would have had to been borrowed from the Chinese to fund it.

It is sad that you have to pin prick on such a statement I made. It just does not become of you. 


http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...orruption-claims/story-fnho52jo-1226712591329


----------



## Gringotts Bank (6 September 2013)

Betfair has Libs at $1.05.  I guess this is ok value.  I should have been on much sooner but didn't even think of it.


----------



## Julia (6 September 2013)

noco said:


> Julia, call it what you like but it is still a saving of $4.5 billion plus the saving on interest on money that would have had to been borrowed from the Chinese to fund it.
> 
> It is sad that you have to pin prick on such a statement I made. It just does not become of you.



You are misunderstanding the purpose of my correction.  The difference is important.  Labor has been busily saying the Coalition is 'cutting foreign aid'.  That is completely different from not increasing foreign aid.

Would you prefer to go along with Labor's implied suggestion that the Coalition are actually withdrawing already budgeted aid?


----------



## Calliope (6 September 2013)

Gringotts Bank said:


> Betfair has Libs at $1.05.  I guess this is ok value.  I should have been on much sooner but didn't even think of it.




A 5% dividend for one day, that's still great value.  And there's a great bonus. The Last Selfie.


----------



## MrBurns (6 September 2013)

The Age is backing Labor............idiots.



http://www.theage.com.au/


----------



## noco (6 September 2013)

Julia said:


> You are misunderstanding the purpose of my correction.  The difference is important.  Labor has been busily saying the Coalition is 'cutting foreign aid'.  That is completely different from not increasing foreign aid.
> 
> Would you prefer to go along with Labor's implied suggestion that the Coalition are actually withdrawing already budgeted aid?




Of course I would not prefer to go along with Labor's suggestion.

That is a ridiculous statement to make. I was referring to the $4.5 Billion saving.

I don't really understanding why you are purporting to be an authority on the subject or are you doing it just to belittle me. 

You appear to be trying to make something out of nothing.


----------



## Calliope (6 September 2013)

Kevin Rudd has threatened to stay on if he loses the election but retains his seat. The voters of Griffith have a big responsibility. Only they, can rid us of this serial liar. I think they will do the right thing for the country.


----------



## bellenuit (6 September 2013)

Julia said:


> Labor has been busily saying the Coalition is 'cutting foreign aid'.  That is completely different from not increasing foreign aid.




The ABC (News Radio) have been saying the same thing all morning. About 1 in every 10 of their statements regarding the Libs foreign aid policy say they are cutting the INCREASE in foreign aid, but the 9 in between blatantly simply say they are cutting foreign aid. I have never heard it so bad. It is not just the foreign aid issue, but many other issues. Almost all their coverage has been using Labor spokespeople commenting on Liberal policy, with no attempt made to allow the Libs to comment. You might as well have Albanese running the show.


----------



## Logique (6 September 2013)

Gringotts Bank said:


> Betfair has Libs at $1.05.  I guess this is ok value.  I should have been on much sooner but didn't even think of it.



I just looked it up on Waterhouse, he has:

Win:
Liberal - 1.01
Labor - 14.00


----------



## drsmith (6 September 2013)

Calliope said:


> Kevin Rudd has threatened to stay on if he loses the election but retains his seat. The voters of Griffith have a big responsibility. Only they, can rid us of this serial liar. I think they will do the right thing for the country.



Where did you see/hear/read that ?

I'd like to see the expression on his face when he said that. That would be like the expression someone would have when at the moment when they realise they can't walk on water.

Withy the betting odds, Sportsbet is $1.03 to $11 in favour of the Coalition, but interestingly, the handicap has blown out to 34.5 seats and the shortest odds for seats won by the major parties are in the 50's for Labor and the 90's for the Coalition.


----------



## Julia (6 September 2013)

noco said:


> Of course I would not prefer to go along with Labor's suggestion.
> 
> That is a ridiculous statement to make. I was referring to the $4.5 Billion saving.
> 
> I don't really understanding why you are purporting to be an authority on the subject or are you doing it just to belittle me.



Don't be silly.  I don't have to be any sort of 'authority' to simply report what the policy is, rather than go along with the impression the ABC is trying so hard to make.



> You appear to be trying to make something out of nothing.



Not at all.  When you hear Tim Costello and others lamenting the fact that the viciousness and cruelty of the Coalition's policy of *cutting foreign aid* will result in hundreds of thousands of children dying, and other emotive stuff, they need to not be permitted to get away with such a wrong assertion.
No one is cutting existing foreign aid.  They are simply reducing the previously scheduled increase in it.
If you can't see how relevant that difference is, there's nothing more I can do to explain it to you.

See bellenuit's post below.




bellenuit said:


> The ABC (News Radio) have been saying the same thing all morning. About 1 in every 10 of their statements regarding the Libs foreign aid policy say they are cutting the INCREASE in foreign aid, but the 9 in between blatantly simply say they are cutting foreign aid. I have never heard it so bad. It is not just the foreign aid issue, but many other issues. Almost all their coverage has been using Labor spokespeople commenting on Liberal policy, with no attempt made to allow the Libs to comment. You might as well have Albanese running the show.


----------



## Judd (6 September 2013)

drsmith said:


> Where did you see/hear/read that ?
> 
> I'd like to see the expression on his face when he said that. That would be like the expression someone would have when at the moment when they realise they can't walk on water.
> 
> Withy the betting odds, Sportsbet is $1.03 to $11 in favour of the Coalition, but interestingly, the handicap has blown out to 34.5 seats and the shortest odds for seats won by the major parties are in the 50's for Labor and the 90's for the Coalition.




50 seats?  Damn.  There goes my chance to flog my old 22-seater Toyota Coaster to the ALP so they could hold their Caucus meetings in comfort.


----------



## psailagroup (6 September 2013)

If liberal win the election (Hope they do) do you think the first week of trading with a new prime minster will effect the market in a positive manner?


----------



## Whiskers (6 September 2013)

Abbott seemed to be doing pretty well according to the polls (with their limitations) up to the release of their last few policy costings.  

I'm curious why such apparently benign policies were left sooo late, fuelling the cynicism Labor is pushing. 

Remembering the old adage, 'it's not over till the fat lady sings', is it possible the LNP can lose the unlosable election... again?

Their strategy of making a small target of releasing as little policy detail as possible and as late as possible, in contrast to Hewson, might just have played into the hands of Labor cynisicm by not recognising the voter backlash with this strategy with subsequent Howard and coalition state governments stating no cutbacks pre election and proceeding to do just the opposite after. 

Could they be relying too heavily on their so called and arguably over rated 'economic prowess' and the economic blunders of Labor.


----------



## tech/a (6 September 2013)

Fat lady has been singing for weeks and has left the building.
Abbott will smash Rudd and Rudd will lose his own seat.
20 seat loss min.

You heard it first from the DUCK!


----------



## noco (6 September 2013)

Julia said:


> Don't be silly.  I don't have to be any sort of 'authority' to simply report what the policy is, rather than go along with the impression the ABC is trying so hard to make.
> 
> 
> Not at all.  When you hear Tim Costello and others lamenting the fact that the viciousness and cruelty of the Coalition's policy of *cutting foreign aid* will result in hundreds of thousands of children dying, and other emotive stuff, they need to not be permitted to get away with such a wrong assertion.
> ...




Julia, I can see you don't like to beaten so I will let have the last word just to make you happy.


----------



## Whiskers (6 September 2013)

tech/a said:


> Fat lady has been singing for weeks and has left the building.
> Abbott will smash Rudd and Rudd will lose his own seat.
> 20 seat loss min.
> 
> You heard it first from the DUCK!




That's exactly why I'm a bit nervous! It seems a forgone conclusion such as the demise of NSW and Qld Labor... but Rudd at least did facilitate some fundamental change in Labor internal practices and policy, where the state's failed to do. 

Given that neither Abbot or Rudd is highly respected or trusted, the fear that the LNP might win control of both houses again and force through unpalatable change, a-la workchoices, asset sales and severe spending cuts, might cause a late counter swing to the 'reformed' Rudd, the lesser of two evils, which might over correct to prevent LNP control of both houses and inadvertently vote Rudd back.

The other factor is the historic high number of minor parties, where their preferences will go and who they will support on key policies.

I just have a bit of a concern with the LNP not putting their most popular (and arguably most respected) leader to the public and they haven't played their most respectful and strongest policy hand.


----------



## drsmith (6 September 2013)

Whiskers said:


> I just have a bit of a concern with the LNP not putting their most popular (and arguably most respected) leader to the public and they haven't played their most respectful and strongest policy hand.



That debate's been long since had and long since won and lost.

While the electorate overall still has reservations about an Abbott government, the reality is that it has many more about another term of Labor in government and with good reason given their record in office.

----------------------------------------

With the main game over, it's every Labor politician for themselves.

Chris Bowen scraping the floor of the pig pen in an attempt to save his political skin.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...mcmahon-ray-king/story-fn9qr68y-1226713449025


----------



## sails (6 September 2013)

Whiskers said:


> That's exactly why I'm a bit nervous! It seems a forgone conclusion such as the demise of NSW and Qld Labor... but Rudd at least did facilitate some fundamental change in Labor internal practices and policy, where the state's failed to do.
> 
> Given that neither Abbot or Rudd is highly respected or trusted, the fear that the LNP might win control of both houses again and force through unpalatable change, a-la workchoices, asset sales and severe spending cuts, might cause a late counter swing to the 'reformed' Rudd, the lesser of two evils, which might over correct to prevent LNP control of both houses and inadvertently vote Rudd back.
> 
> ...





Whiskers, it is generally acknowledged that Abbott has been a highly effective opposition leader and probably that is why so many attacks have been made against him personally.  He's clearly not a misogynist and yet I heard him say recently that he noticed Julia Gillard in an airport (I think) and he went up to her and acknowledged kindly it had been a bit rough lately.  I think I heard that on the Kitchen Cabinet Show.  After the way she persistently slimed him, it shows the strength of character he has to acknowledge her when she was going through something tough, imo.

He has run a well disciplined campaign, albeit with the odd minor stuff up, but it has overall been a well oiled and planned machine.  Totally in a different league to Rudd's shooting from the hip, policies on the run and making nonsense up about the opposition.

If you are referring to Turnbull, I don't know that he could have pulled this off against Rudd.  His own polling when Rudd and he were leaders was going down dismally (see newspoll archives).  After Abbott took  over, the preferred PM figures started improving for Abbott compared to Turnbull and the polls for the libs began to overtake labor and have been pretty consistently in front ever since.

I have been unsure how Abbott would transition from opposition leader, but he has gained respect from me during this campaign with very little negative coming from him about Rudd.  It seems he has already started to move out of the negativity required in opposition to a more positive potential PM.

Interestingly, it is Rudd who has behaved more like an opposition leader with so much negativity while Abbott has been the positive leader. And labor gave in to the popularity contest and brought the previously popular Rudd back as leader and look at where that's got them.  I am glad the libs did not play musical leaders game!


----------



## wayneL (6 September 2013)

tech/a said:


> View attachment 54277
> 
> 
> 
> ...




First?

This has been obvious for some time. I spoke to Glasson and his mob two weeks ago.... reckoned they were going to roll KRudd then.

I hope the prophecy comes to pass, it will be an event worthy of literature.


----------



## McLovin (6 September 2013)

The most interesting number to watch will be the primary vote to the two main parties. It could go under 80% for the first time in a long time. It will highlight just how dissatisfied so many are, myself included, with the choice presented this election.


----------



## Whiskers (6 September 2013)

McLovin said:


> The most interesting number to watch will be the primary vote to the two main parties. It could go under 80% for the first time in a long time. It will highlight just how dissatisfied so many are, myself included, with the choice presented this election.




In a nutshell, that's it!

It's a bit reminiscent of, way back when, Don Chip started the Democrats. Similarly, when Hansen started One Nation... when there is considerable dissatisfaction with the big two, there is typically an initial considerable swing away from the big two towards promising new blood and out of the rut of either of the big two party machines.    

I can't help but note; There are three types of lies -- lies, damn lies, and statistics... and Facts are stubborn things, but statistics are pliable. 

Further; The TPP assumes a two-party system, i.e. that after distribution of votes from less successful candidates, the two remaining candidates will be from the two major parties.

Note the assumption, preference flow based on 2010 election. Are all the polls using same assumption?

Given the considerably changed party and candidate paradigm since 2010, how valid are the polls!?


http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/polling
NEWSPOLL STATISTICS: Sample size: 1112 | Uncomitted: 6.00% | Refused: 3.00% | Error Rate: 3.00%


----------



## sydboy007 (6 September 2013)

This is what Turnbull has to say on Direct Action, oops I mean alternatives to an ETS:

_Because most capital equipment, especially in the energy sector, has lives running into many decades, the business is going to require assurance that the government subsidy will match the life of the asset – so running well beyond 2020.

Which is why a subsidy scheme which terminates in 2020 will achieve very little….

Having the government pick projects for subsidy is a recipe for fiscal recklessness on a grand scale and there will always be a temptation for projects to be selected for their political appeal.

In short, having the government pay for emissions abatement, as opposed to the polluting industries themselves, is a slippery slope which can only result in higher taxes and more costly and less effective abatement of emissions.

-----------------

However, if a scheme operates whereby the government pays the firm to reduce its emissions intensity, leaving aside its impact on the budget and taxes, there is firstly going to be a substantial and contentious debate about what the correct baseline is, then whether it will be actually be reduced.

… Arguments, of considerable ferocity, will arise as to whether a new piece of equipment would have been bought anyway with the risk that the government ends up funnelling billions of dollars to companies to subsidise their profits without achieving any real additional cuts in emissions.

Now, all of us know in this House that industries and businesses, attended by an army of lobbyists, are particularly persuasive and all too effective at getting their sticky fingers into the taxpayer's pocket._

----------------

I wonder what's made Abbott think it will be any different (beside become opposition leader)???


----------



## switesh (6 September 2013)

*AU Federal Election 2013*

Here's a snapshot of the Australian Federal Election 2013 from Betfair.





Betfair market seems too optimistic on Tony Abbot, and his big trump card is *elimination of Carbon Tax *and *scraping Mining Tax*.

Judging by these facts and market sentiments, I want to check if the stock price of leading O&G, and Mining companies will sore during the weekend and open with big spike on Monday's opening bell should Tony Abbot win the election.

Does anyone know where I can get a price check of all leading listed companies in O&G sector, & Mining sector. 
Can anybody recommend where I might be able to pull the stock price of all companies in these sectors?

I tried asx.com.au but no luck. ADVFN_AU doesn't offer free delayed data either. Doing it manually via yahoo/google finance will take ages.

Also, what do traders/investors on this forum think about how the outcome of the election could influence the price of O&G stocks, and Mining Stocks over this weekend?


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (6 September 2013)

wayneL said:


> First?
> 
> This has been obvious for some time. I spoke to Glasson and his mob two weeks ago.... reckoned they were going to roll KRudd then.
> 
> I hope the prophecy comes to pass, it will be an event worthy of literature.




Fat lady will not sing until 6pm tomorrow. By 6.45pm I reckon tech's prophesy will have come to fruition. I would not celebrate until then, but what a celebration it will be.

gg


----------



## drsmith (6 September 2013)

*Re: AU Federal Election 2013*

For a proxy as to which party Mr Market is expecting to win the election, you can't go past McMillan Shakespeare (MMS). 

http://www.asx.com.au/asx/research/companyInfo.do?by=asxCode&asxCode=MMS


----------



## skyQuake (6 September 2013)

*Re: AU Federal Election 2013*

Shouldn't be much effect on the markets either way as a coalition win is effectively a given.

What will be interesting is any policy shifts and Tony Abbott ® surprises that come out post election.

Also, Markets are closed wkends!


----------



## drsmith (6 September 2013)

At the start of the campaign, I thought 45 to 55% 2PP to the Coalition. Nail me down now to a specific number and I'll say 55%.

It's time to start blowing up the balloons.


----------



## CanOz (6 September 2013)

Who do you all reckon will be the deputy Prime-minster should Tony win? Turnbull?

Sorry for my ignorance i really have no idea...


----------



## wayneL (6 September 2013)

CanOz said:


> Who do you all reckon will be the deputy Prime-minster should Tony win? Turnbull?
> 
> Sorry for my ignorance i really have no idea...




Warren Truss... Leader of the National Party


----------



## drsmith (6 September 2013)

The latest Age/Nielsen survey suggests 54 per cent of the nation's 14.7 million electors are embracing the Coalition.

Labor's primary vote has slumped to 33 per cent, with the Coalition on 46 per cent

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...ll-confirms-labor-wipeout-20130906-2taew.html


----------



## Julia (6 September 2013)

noco said:


> Julia, I can see you don't like to beaten so I will let have the last word just to make you happy.



On the contrary, I'm always  happy to acknowledge if I'm wrong and have no need for, as you put it, the last word.  By all means, tell me (and bellenuit who has made the same point) where we err.  I await your correction with interest.



sails said:


> Whiskers, it is generally acknowledged that Abbott has been a highly effective opposition leader and probably that is why so many attacks have been made against him personally.  He's clearly not a misogynist and yet I heard him say recently that he noticed Julia Gillard in an airport (I think) and he went up to her and acknowledged kindly it had been a bit rough lately.  I think I heard that on the Kitchen Cabinet Show.  After the way she persistently slimed him, it shows the strength of character he has to acknowledge her when she was going through something tough, imo.
> 
> He has run a well disciplined campaign, albeit with the odd minor stuff up, but it has overall been a well oiled and planned machine.  Totally in a different league to Rudd's shooting from the hip, policies on the run and making nonsense up about the opposition.
> 
> ...



Great post, sails.  You've said all I'd like to have and much better.


----------



## Smurf1976 (6 September 2013)

*Re: AU Federal Election 2013*



skyQuake said:


> Shouldn't be much effect on the markets either way as a coalition win is effectively a given.




I'll just observe that at least three significant operators in the electricity industry have been assuming a Coalition win for over 12 months. All three are large scale generators of electricity in their respective states, and all have adjusted their physical operations on the assumption of a Coalition win and repeal of the carbon tax (general assumption being that the tax would remain in place until 30 June 2014). There are probably others who have taken the same approach, but in the case of these 3 it is very obvious to those in the industry what is going on and the companies have actually gone as far as contracting with their rivals to make it work (and yes such arrangements are perfectly legal). 

I'd take a guess that most others affected by the carbon and mining taxes would be doing the same at least in terms of planning future operations (not necessarily affecting current operations - the ability to do that is somewhat unique to a few specific electricity companies) and that the market has likely factored this into share prices already.

I think the market would react far more strongly if the Coalition doesn't win a majority, even more if the Greens end up holding the balance of power in a hung parliament. 

That said, the Senate is also a very relevant factor in all of this - it's one thing for the Coalition to want to change taxation policy but another thing entirely to get that past the Senate. That could lead to some interesting times ahead.....


----------



## So_Cynical (6 September 2013)

*Re: AU Federal Election 2013*

I certainly hope a MOD will move this to the appropriate thread.


----------



## bellenuit (6 September 2013)

drsmith said:


> The latest Age/Nielsen survey suggests 54 per cent of the nation's 14.7 million electors are embracing the Coalition.
> 
> Labor's primary vote has slumped to 33 per cent, with the Coalition on 46 per cent
> 
> http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...ll-confirms-labor-wipeout-20130906-2taew.html




The Guardian's poll result is interesting. It is way out of kilter with what the others are indicating.

_*Labor gains ground on Coalition, says new mobile-only poll*

Guardian Lonergan poll points to Coalition win but two-party preferred vote narrows to 50.8% to 49.2%_

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/06/two-party-preferred-vote-narrows


----------



## sydboy007 (6 September 2013)

wayneL said:


> Warren Truss... Leader of the National Party




Gosh I hope not.  We don't need an agrarian socialistic with that much power whispering in Abbotts ear.


----------



## drsmith (6 September 2013)

sydboy007 said:


> Gosh I hope not.  We don't need an agrarian socialistic with that much power whispering in Abbotts ear.



Don't be silly Syd.

The deputy leader is the seat warmer.

Just ask Wayne Swan.


----------



## sails (6 September 2013)

bellenuit said:


> The Guardian's poll result is interesting. It is way out of kilter with what the others are indicating.
> 
> _*Labor gains ground on Coalition, says new mobile-only poll*
> 
> ...





Not long to wait now and we will get the poll that really matters and then we will know how accurate this one might have been.  Allr pollsters presumably will be extremely careful so close to an election as they all want the reputation of being within a certain margin so it is strange that the Guardian's poll is so far out from the others.


----------



## noco (6 September 2013)

CanOz said:


> Who do you all reckon will be the deputy Prime-minster should Tony win? Turnbull?
> 
> Sorry for my ignorance i really have no idea...




Warren Truss from the Nationals will be Abbotts deputy.


----------



## drsmith (6 September 2013)

sails said:


> Not long to wait now and we will get the poll that really matters and then we will know how accurate this one might have been.  Allr pollsters presumably will be extremely careful so close to an election as they all want the reputation of being within a certain margin so it is strange that the Guardian's poll is so far out from the others.



That Guardian had Labor's primary support at 34% and the Greens at 14%.


----------



## McLovin (6 September 2013)

Final Newspoll out tomorrow has ALP at 33% and Lib/NP at 46%. 46/54 2pp.


----------



## cynic (7 September 2013)

Wake up everybody it's election day!!!
Hi Ho! 
Hi Ho! 
It's off to the polls we go,go, GO!!!


----------



## wayneL (7 September 2013)

sydboy007 said:


> Gosh I hope not.  We don't need an agrarian socialistic with that much power whispering in Abbotts ear.




Would that be those "far right wing" agrarian socialists Syd? :


----------



## Tink (7 September 2013)

Interesting, I thought Julie Bishop was Abbotts right hand woman.

Yes, time to go to the polls, the day has finally arrived.
Labor is still running the scare campaign, but no ones listening.
Everyone knows with Labor its more debt and lies.
Labor have sold their souls, they stand for nothing.

Will be watching Rudds seat, a nice farewell if it all falls into place.


----------



## Judd (7 September 2013)

The entire process will be absorbing as has the entire campaign from the major parties.  Labor's efforts were a shambles in my view but then what did it actually have to run with?  There appeared to be was a general feeling by many, although Labor could promise things, it has an inability to actually implement then or where implemented, it was done poorly.  The focus seemed to turn to what the Liberals will do but that party is still in opposition so it hasn't done anything and until it forms Government, what it says and what it will actually do is, again in my view, an unknown.  The probability it will enact those policies is high but it has yet to take place.

The Liberals focused on failures by Labor and what it will do about the deficit.  Nothing was said about the budgets' structural deficiencies which have to be addressed at some stage.  That is where real pain could commence.

As for the Greens, some of it's policies I actually like but, physically, the candidates have not been sighted by me in my electorate.  While Bob Brown may say that Ms Milne ran a splendid campaign, it isn't a great one if the candidates are totally invisible.  Maybe they borrowed Harry Potter's invisibility cloak and were simply walking behind me all the time.

Whoever is your preferred candidate all the best and chill.  You get another go in three years or so.


----------



## Logique (7 September 2013)

Tink said:


> Interesting, I thought Julie Bishop was Abbotts right hand woman....Will be watching Rudds seat, a nice farewell if it all falls into place.



Foreign Minister presumptive. Yes Rudd's seat will be an interesting one, but also how the Senate numbers pan out.

Watch Chris Bowen's seat too, he could be on shaky ground.


----------



## dutchie (7 September 2013)

Baseball bats a ready, a routs a comin'


----------



## moXJO (7 September 2013)

Fairfax running its final scare campaign against libs. They left an cover of not being biased a long time ago. I hope the polls have it right.


----------



## bunyip (7 September 2013)

Judd said:


> The entire process will be absorbing as has the entire campaign from the major parties.  Labor's efforts were a shambles in my view but then what did it actually have to run with?  There appeared to be was a general feeling by many, although Labor could promise things, it has an inability to actually implement then or where implemented, it was done poorly.




Yes, a ‘shambles’ is a perfect description of Labor’s election campaign. 
By all reports there are some pretty disillusioned people at ALP campaign headquarters who are disgusted with the way that Rudd was pretty much a one man band right throughout the campaign, aided and abetted by his campaign director Bruce Hawker.  The main complaint seems to be that Rudd would wake up in the morning with a new idea, run it past Hawker who would usually agree with him, and they’d announce it as policy without first discussing it with the rest of the team, or even letting them know.
But I guess that shouldn’t come as any surprise, given that one of the main complaints from Rudd’s colleagues right from the first days of his primeministership six years ago was that he was a one man band who failed to consult/communicate with the rest of his team.
Despite Rudd's campaign slogan of ‘*Labor – a new way’*, it was clear from the outset that it was the same old Rudd with the same old attitudes and the same old grandiose plans, but little practical ability in implementing them.
As Judd points out, no matter what Labor promised, people who looked at their track record decided that they'd probably **** up whatever policies they tried to implement anyway. 
I mean, the abysmal record of the Rudd/Gillard government hardly inspires the confidence of the electorate that they’ll be able to do what they say they’ll do.

Anyway, I just wish Slim Dusty was still with us – I’d vote for the Slim Party if there was one.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ajb4MzV9KsM

One part of Slim’s policy that I really liked is.....

If I was in power I’d shorten the hours
And double our whole blasted pay mate
With a free beer ration and a flamin good bashin’
For the blighters who grizzled then eh mate

Sounds pretty good to me – now I wonder if we can talk Tony into adopting Slim’s policies once he becomes PM!


----------



## MrBurns (7 September 2013)

I've never looked forward to voting as much as I am today...........what a relief.


----------



## sails (7 September 2013)

Tink said:


> Interesting, I thought Julie Bishop was Abbotts right hand woman.
> 
> Yes, time to go to the polls, the day has finally arrived.
> Labor is still running the scare campaign, but no ones listening.
> ...




Tink, I understand that, because the Libs and Nats are in coalition, the leader of the Nats always becomes the deputy of the coalition if they form government.  It's a shame is I think Julie Bishop is well suited to the deputy position, but she should do very well in foreign affairs and Warren Truss is an experienced politician.

Yes, let's hope Glasson wins Griffith!


----------



## sydboy007 (7 September 2013)

wayneL said:


> Would that be those "far right wing" agrarian socialists Syd? :




No idea how right wing they are, but you have to admit the Nationals seem to fear free markets than embrace them.

I see the nationals as the right leaning "greens" in that is how much benefit they offer the community.  Must admit, the Nationals do love their pork .  Anyone know how many of them have used the Darwin Adelaide rail line they told us would magically open the export markets of Asia?


----------



## Calliope (7 September 2013)

All the Abbott haters get their comeuppance today including this particularly nasty one.:

David Marr, Quarterly Essay, in September 2012:

"AUSTRALIA doesn't want Tony Abbott. We never have."

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...e-false-prophets/story-fn72xczz-1226713594267


----------



## Calliope (7 September 2013)

sails said:


> Tink, I understand that, because the Libs and Nats are in coalition, the leader of the Nats always becomes the deputy of the coalition if they form government.  It's a shame is I think Julie Bishop is well suited to the deputy position, but she should do very well in foreign affairs and Warren Truss is an experienced politician.
> 
> Yes, let's hope Glasson wins Griffith!




Sails, Griffith has a sizable gay population. Rudd's recent conversion to advocacy of gay marriage was a deliberate ploy. If he does hold the seat by the skin of his teeth he will owe it to them.

It is interesting that Glasson is also supportive of gay marriage.


----------



## McLovin (7 September 2013)

moXJO said:


> Fairfax running its final scare campaign against libs. They left an cover of not being biased a long time ago. I hope the polls have it right.






The Herald and the AFR both endorsed Abbott yesterday.


----------



## bunyip (7 September 2013)

I postal voted a week ago, but I’ve just been down to the local school check out the action. I got talking to the lady manning the LNP stand. (or should that be ‘womaning’ the LNP stand). 
Anyway, she said she’d been manning/womaning the Lib stand for the last 17 years, and one thing she noticed today is that a lot of people aren’t taking ‘how to vote’ cards from any of the parties. She was at a loss to explain why this is, but wondered if they’ve already checked online or through some other source how to vote for their preferred party.
Only three parties were represented by people handing out how to vote cards – LNP, ALP, and Katter’s mob. Mind you, this is in a tiny country village. I’m sure the other parties are better represented at the larger polling places.
The Labor bloke was a union rep in a local abattoir – now why doesn’t that surprise me. And he was wearing a red shirt, which I thought was rather appropriate!


----------



## McLovin (7 September 2013)

bunyip said:


> Only three parties were represented by people handing out how to vote cards – LNP, ALP, and Katter’s mob. Mind you, this is in a tiny country village. I’m sure the other parties are better represented at the larger polling places.
> The Labor bloke was a union rep in a local abattoir – now why doesn’t that surprise me. And he was wearing a red shirt, which I thought was rather appropriate!




I had the Greens, ALP and Turnbull. I say Turnbull because they were wearing hats and tshirts that didn't have anything Liberal party on them. It's a one horse race around here anyway.

It was like banner on his website. 
http://www.malcolmturnbull.com.au/


----------



## Calliope (7 September 2013)

McLovin said:


> I had the Greens, ALP and Turnbull. I say Turnbull because they were wearing hats and tshirts that didn't have anything Liberal party on them. It's a one horse race around here anyway.




I was descended on by huge swarm all yelling at me like sideshow barkers. There was a pretty little girl chatting with the Liberal guy, handing out Senate flyers for Family First. Rather than disappoint her, I took her flyer as well as the Liberal one. She gave me a cheery wave when i came out.

Family First is the only minor party I would ever consider voting for, and their preferences go to the LNP.


----------



## sydboy007 (7 September 2013)

Calliope said:


> I was descended on by huge swarm all yelling at me like sideshow barkers. There was a pretty little girl chatting with the Liberal guy, handing out Senate flyers for Family First. Rather than disappoint her, I took her flyer as well as the Liberal one. She gave me a cheery wave when i came out.
> 
> Family First is the only minor party I would ever consider voting for, and their preferences go to the LNP.




They're also the ONLY party that has a housing policy that COULD help and doesn't pander to the current vested interests.

Saying that, there's about as much chance of me winning lotto as any of their policies being enacted.


----------



## Calliope (7 September 2013)

sydboy007 said:


> They're also the ONLY party that has a housing policy that COULD help and doesn't pander to the current vested interests.
> 
> Saying that, there's about as much chance of me winning lotto as any of their policies being enacted.




They may pick up a seat in another state, but not in Qld. The last spot here could go to PUP (Thick as a Brick) Glen Lazuras or Katter's hillbilly singer James Blundel.


----------



## McLovin (7 September 2013)

Calliope said:


> They may pick up a seat in another state, but not in Qld. The last spot here could go to PUP (Thick as a Brick) Glen Lazuras or Katter's hillbilly singer James Blundel.




Jesus. Those two will need how to vote cards once they're in the senate.


----------



## springhill (7 September 2013)

Labor, Greens nor any other party except the Libs at the booth I was at this morn.


----------



## Calliope (7 September 2013)

Getting ready for the party?


----------



## Julia (7 September 2013)

McLovin said:


> Jesus. Those two will need how to vote cards once they're in the senate.



 +1.  I heard both of them being interviewed on Qld Local Radio a week or so ago.   
It's just beyond me how people like this can even get preselected.


----------



## Calliope (7 September 2013)

Roy Morgan exit poll 2PM;

http://www.roymorgan.com/findings/5170-morgan-federal-election-exit-polls-201309070155


----------



## sptrawler (7 September 2013)

I see a record 3million people voted before the election.

As we have been saying for 12months, everyone is over this lot. 

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...f-hanger-results/story-fn9qr68y-1226713606793

This Labor Government will go down as the most fragmented, devious, devisive, nasty and self centred government in Australian history.IMO 
Their constant personal attacks on Abbott has been their undoing, whoever came up with that plan should be taken out the back and sorted out.


----------



## McLovin (7 September 2013)

Calliope said:


> Roy Morgan exit poll 2PM;
> 
> http://www.roymorgan.com/findings/5170-morgan-federal-election-exit-polls-201309070155








> PALMER UNITED PARTY IS POLLING 9.5% IN QUEENSLAND & 5% IN NEW SOUTH WALES & WESTERN AUSTRALIA




He could pick up a couple of seats if the prefs flow to him.


----------



## dutchie (7 September 2013)

I've got the champers on ice.  :bananasmi:bier::bananasmi


----------



## bunyip (7 September 2013)

sptrawler said:


> I see a record 3million people voted before the election.
> 
> As we have been saying for 12months, everyone is over this lot.
> 
> ...




Yeh, it’s quite incredible that having witnessed how Anna Bligh fared after her constant attacks on Campbell Newman in the QLD election campaign, that fool Rudd just copied Bligh’s mistakes instead of learning from them.
His other big mistake has been in telling one lie after another on issues where he looked like a complete goose once the truth came out. The most notable of these was perhaps his claim that Treasury had found a 7 billion dollar hole in Abbot’s figures, and next thing a couple of treasury officials come out and refute Rudd’s claim! LOL 
Whatever tiny amount of credibility Rudd may have had was completely blown out of the water by that rather comical incident.

Anyway, no doubt the lying, scheming Rudd will be at church tomorrow, pretending he’s a good Christian. Somebody should point out to him  that one of the ten commandments is ‘_Thou shalt not lie’._


----------



## Ves (7 September 2013)

McLovin said:


> He could pick up a couple of seats if the prefs flow to him.



Both of the two big major parties seem to be getting a slightly lower % of the vote this year too as a result of this.   Hopefully it is a long-term trend as people get sick of the entitlement society that those two parties continually create and nurture through their vote buying practices.


----------



## McLovin (7 September 2013)

Ves said:


> Both of the two big major parties seem to be getting a slightly lower % of the vote this year too as a result of this.   Hopefully it is a long-term trend as people get sick of the entitlement society that those two parties continually create and nurture through their vote buying practices.




If the exit polling is to be believed it's way down. They're pulling in ~76% of the vote, they've never been below 80%. I imagine the informal vote will jump up too.

Good to see the people are speaking.


----------



## Ves (7 September 2013)

McLovin said:


> Good to see the people are speaking.



My vote technically doesn't matter much in the result of the election,   but the idea behind it seems to be gaining traction.  That is something at least!


----------



## MrBurns (7 September 2013)

Which channel will you be watching ?, think I'll switch between Kerry O'Brien, who gets more interesting as the red goes down, and Laurie Oaks on 9.

I am sooooooooooooooooo glad this is over.
The Labor party have been a headache for years.


----------



## Macquack (7 September 2013)

Where is your election victory celebration party at, Burns?

Invite me over.

p.s. I am a sore loser.


----------



## MrBurns (7 September 2013)

Macquack said:


> Where is your election victory celebration party at, Burns?
> 
> Invite me over.
> 
> p.s. I am a sore loser.




Just a quite one at home Mac.......I'm just relieved it's all over, it's been a long time coming.

The party ? 34 Wagner St Sunbury Vic, you're welcome, ohhh hang on that's the address of Hells Angels.


----------



## MrBurns (7 September 2013)

MrBurns said:


> Just a quite one at home Mac.......I'm just relieved it's all over, it's been a long time coming.
> 
> The party ? 34 Wagner St Sunbury Vic, you're welcome, ohhh hang on that's the address of Hells Angels.




Try quiet


----------



## Miss Hale (7 September 2013)

Well my tip for tonight is Port Adelaide to beat Collingwood, oh hang on, I mean Abbott to beat Rudd   Glad to have football to distract me from politics though. Have only seen a bit of the coverage but it seems Craig Thomson is polling very badly, what a shame 

Our local Labor member was at the polling booth when I went to vote so I made sure my Coalition 'How to Vote' card (the only one I took) was clearly on display when she was near me. In front of me in the queue were three very young voters who clearly had no idea what they were supposed to do, I was going to educate them but since they were planning to vote Greens I didn't bother :evilburn:

I am also having a quiet celebratory drink at home Mr B  (maybe you can tell  )


----------



## Macquack (7 September 2013)

MrBurns said:


> Just a quite one at home Mac.......I'm just relieved it's all over, it's been a long time coming.



Thought your were being humble for a second, my mistake.



MrBurns said:


> The party ? *34 Wagner St Sunbury Vic*, you're welcome, ohhh hang on that's the address of Hells Angels.




Everybody knows you live in "Toorak", were you swindled some old widow out of her mansion by being the "gun" real estate agent who did not even put the property to market.


----------



## Aussiejeff (7 September 2013)

Well, well. An ABSOLUTE SHELLACKING. Who woulda thunk it?   :dance::bier:corn::aus::thankyou:


----------



## MrBurns (7 September 2013)

Miss Hale said:


> I am also having a quiet celebratory drink at home Mr B  (maybe you can tell  )




and well deserved Miss Hale after putting up with Gillard then Rudd, it's been a nightmare, Cheers to you



Macquack said:


> Thought your were being humble for a second, my mistake.
> 
> Everybody knows you live in "Toorak", were you swindled some old widow out of her mansion by being the "gun" real estate agent who did not even put the property to market.




Oh Mac she put up a hell of a fight but I got her into the nursing home quicker than you can say "sign here"
Lovely house and so cheap too


----------



## sptrawler (7 September 2013)

Explod, may have blown his money. If he backed his prediction.


----------



## Whiskers (7 September 2013)

Aussiejeff said:


> Well, well. An ABSOLUTE SHELLACKING. Who woulda thunk it?   :dance::bier:corn::aus::thankyou:




It looked like a record routing from all the 'experts' commenting from early results in... but ignoring the commercial channels who keep switching to damn social media comments, Anthony Green has been winding back the LNP lead all night as preferences come in and having quite a bit of trouble estimating preferences with the significant strength of minor parties in some key seats.

Still looks like a LNP win... BUT, has Christopher Pine got the pre poll numbers wrong? He claims they will be, because they are typically, strongly LNP. Given Labor support was much stronger earlier and the exceptionally large number of pre poll this time, the result could be a lot closer than many expected... and probably not  quite a routing in the order the NSW and Qld Labor got.

Looks like Barnaby Joyce is in. Don't agree with everything he says... but he's the straight talking type we need in parliament.


----------



## Miss Hale (7 September 2013)

Just checked the AEC website and was happy to see that my electorate which I thought was a safe Labor seat is listed as 'in doubt', this is going better than I thought


----------



## sptrawler (7 September 2013)

Miss Hale said:


> Just checked the AEC website and was happy to see that my electorate which I thought was a safe Labor seat is listed as 'in doubt', this is going better than I thought




Yes, I think Rudds selfies and group huggs with the kids on a twitter, didn't have much effect on the silent majority.


----------



## So_Cynical (7 September 2013)

Bowen and Rudd look like keeping their seats, the wipe out in Western Sydney didn't happen losing only 4 or 5 seats...disappointing but far from a disaster, not much of a rout.

Tanya Plibersek for PM a reckon.


----------



## sptrawler (7 September 2013)

So_Cynical said:


> Bowen and Rudd look like keeping their seats, the wipe out in Western Sydney didn't happen losing only 4 or 5 seats...disappointing but far from a disaster, not much of a rout.
> 
> Tanya Plibersek for PM a reckon.





Looks like you did well.lol
Did you short them.

Tanya as PM, you have a better chance of the hole in your, healing up.


----------



## banco (7 September 2013)

Miss Hale said:


> Well my tip for tonight is Port Adelaide to beat Collingwood, oh hang on, I mean Abbott to beat Rudd   Glad to have football to distract me from politics though. Have only seen a bit of the coverage but it seems Craig Thomson is polling very badly, what a shame
> 
> Our local Labor member was at the polling booth when I went to vote so I made sure my Coalition 'How to Vote' card (the only one I took) was clearly on display when she was near me.




Boy you really showed her.


----------



## Julia (7 September 2013)

Well, some surprising results, especially in Qld where the predicted rout has simply not happened, and many Labor seats were retained.

Clive Palmer seems to have done extraordinarily well and looks like actually getting a seat.  God help us.
He certainly saturated the media with his promises of $2500 (I think that was the amount) given out to everyone.  No accountability for any budget considerations.
It must be terrific to be a minority candidate - you can promise anything at all, and the idiots in the electorate will simply believe you!!

Perhaps additional results will change the picture, but at this stage, the national result is not at all a rout, and will leave Labor with some of their key players, viz Chris Bowen, Wayne Swan.  Kevin Rudd also looks like retaining his seat.  Peter Beattie must be really regretting allowing himself to be persuaded back into the race, given his resounding defeat.

Good to see the Greens' vote down.

I felt quite sorry for the Labor volunteer at my local polling booth today.  He was all on his own, surrounded in all directions by jubilant LNP people.  No representatives of any other candidate other than some motoring enthusiast party.

There seems to me to be a sense of anticlimax now.  Perhaps that's just as a result of the extraordinary length and bitterness of the campaign.


----------



## Calliope (7 September 2013)

I am listening to his concession speech;  

*DOES THIS GUY EVER SHUT UP?*


----------



## dutchie (7 September 2013)

Australia has spoken - Kevin and Labor - shut up!


----------



## sptrawler (7 September 2013)

Yes Kev summed it up well "I gave it my all, but it wasn't enough".

To cover up for six years of stupidity.


----------



## bunyip (7 September 2013)

Rudd has said he won’t stay on as Labor leader. A wise move on his part – otherwise he would have been savaged by his own party.

Thought I heard Abbot say that this was the lowest ALP vote in 100 years – would that be right? I could be mistaken – I was nodding off in my recliner at the time.

Did Labor make the right move in ousting Gillard and reinstating Rudd to contest the election? I think so – under Gillard I feel they would have lost by a considerably greater margin.

Full marks to Wayne Swan for retaining his seat.
I thought he was pretty damn pathetic as treasurer, but credit where credit is due -  he’s been the member for Lilley since 1995 apparently, and the people of his electorate obviously think he’s doing a good job for them if they’ve stuck with him for 18 years and are now supporting him for another three.
Ditto for Rudd – a pathetic PM, but the people of his electorate must feel he’s doing a good job in representing their interests, otherwise he wouldn't have retained his seat.

I’m pleased to see Barnaby Joyce collar the seat of New England – my only regret is that we didn’t see that villain Tony Windsor stand against him and get annihilated.


----------



## McLovin (7 September 2013)

I'm glad that the Libs didn't run away with it in both houses. Personally, I'm amazed that the Libs have had a larger swing against them than Labor in NSW (the ridiculous senate BP has something to do with this I think). It looks as though with PUP around, the protest vote no longer flows straight to the Greens, which can't be a bad thing. The swing against Labor in Victoria turned out to be far worse than the non-event in Western Sydney. 

I don't hold high hopes for Abbott but hopefully he'll surprise to the upside.

I've travelled to plenty of countries and most of the world's population don't have the luxury of voting out an unpopular government. As I got my sausage and lamington at the sausage sizzle outside the polling booth I remembered what a great country this is. Not because we can whinge and moan about the government but because we can take for granted the right to have an opinion and express it.

Goodnight.


----------



## So_Cynical (7 September 2013)

bunyip said:


> Thought I heard Abbot say that this was the lowest ALP vote in 100 years – would that be right? I could be mistaken – I was nodding off in my recliner at the time.




Lowest primary vote since the 30's - interesting that the Liberal primary vote increase this election is only 1.3% the Primary Labor vote shifted to independents, also at least 8 seats where the swing was to Labor.

---------

We seriously need to move to some sort of electronic voting, the NSW senate ballot paper was crazy, i was writing 3 figure numbers in a tiny little box, we need to move to some sort of terminal where voters can click or touch a screen to populate the boxes...wont happen under a Liberal government though.


----------



## Whiskers (7 September 2013)

So_Cynical said:


> Bowen and Rudd look like keeping their seats, the wipe out in Western Sydney didn't happen losing only 4 or 5 seats...disappointing but far from a disaster, not much of a rout.




Looks like the Gillard, independents and greens alliance was probably the biggest factor, looking at the hiding in Tas in particular with the strong history of the greens forcing everyone to unreasonably pander to them at the fed and state levels... capped off with the leadership and party disunity.



Julia said:


> Well, some surprising results, especially in Qld where the predicted rout has simply not happened, and many Labor seats were retained.
> 
> Clive Palmer seems to have done extraordinarily well and looks like actually getting a seat.  God help us.




As mentioned earlier, an expected protest vote to a new party. Can't see him repeating this form next time.

Abbott has to be careful now. Ãt's not so much that he won as labor lost this election. It seems he doesn't have control of the new senate... although the greens appear to have lost their bargaining power. It's arguably a typical cautious support (by not overwhelming the senate) for Abbott at least for one term. If the LNP should loose a senate seat to any of the others, it would be a sure sign of caution for Abbott.

Abbott has the government to lose now. Assuming Labor appoints some fresh blood, free of strong faction or union affiliation, all things otherwise being equal next time, they will surely win back some of their seats. 

As mentioned previously he made a small target of himself, successfully. He now really needs to be very true to his word and make no surprise decisions or construe any of his vague policies to anything substantially different to what was perceived. He just needs to clean out a bit of bureaucratic dead wood and improve efficiency in the near term.

Assuming almost anyone except Bill Shorten becomes leader, Labor would be a real threat for next election. So theoretically, with everyone resuming their seats knowing that it was probably more a protest vote against the Labor, Greens fiasco than support for the LNP... they should be on their best behaviour and achieve some good government for the next three years.

Oh, and btw good riddens to Oakshot!


----------



## Smurf1976 (7 September 2013)

With reference to Rudd's rather long speech.....

It's a Saturday night. Some will be sitting at home watching the TV election coverage but there will also be many people out and about at restaurants, pubs, nightclubs and otherwise partying for completely non-political reasons.

I'd take a guess that there will be people who caught a glimpse of the news coverage whilst in a shop etc and will now honestly be thinking that Labor has won the election. I mean that seriously - if someone saw a minute or two of Rudd and nothing else, they'd go away thinking he was claiming victory. It won't be until sometime tomorrow that they find out that this is not actually the case.

This would surely be the most ridiculous, drawn out election campaign we've ever had. Incredibly long, a change of Prime Minister during the campaign, and the loser makes what could easily be mistaken for a victory speech.

As for the actual results, I'm not surprised that Palmer has attracted a significant vote. I suspect that much of this is a "protest vote" against Labor / Liberal rather than a vote for Palmer as such and that would especially be so outside of Palmer's own electorate. That the Greens vote declined suggests that a considerable amount of their support is also a protest vote, some of which has now gone to Palmer. 

So what happens now? Listening to the TV coverage I suspect that the new government faces a tough time in the Senate especially with regard to the carbon tax issue. Time will tell, but comments from various Labor members pointed that way.

The one thing I really don't like, is that representatives from both Labor and the Coalition (think I saw this on Channel 7 or it might have been the ABC - I watched some of both) were suggesting that there's a good chance of Pauline Hanson being elected once again. That's probably the only point they agreed on - this is not a good development for Australia to have her back on the scene.

Another interesting observation, that being the Greens seeming to acknowledge Palmer as a legitimate alternative. I can't think of two parties further apart politically, but credit to the Green (can't remember his name) who made the point. No real comment really, I just think it's an interesting situation given how different their policies and philosophy are.

My real hope, specific issues and parties aside, is that 3 years from now we have an election based on actual policy and substance rather than the fluff that has dominated the past few months.


----------



## Tink (7 September 2013)

Congratulations to Tony Abbott and the Coalition  
I think he will make a good PM.

Labor only have themselves to blame and I am glad its over.


----------



## Smurf1976 (7 September 2013)

Whiskers said:


> Looks like the Gillard, independents and greens alliance was probably the biggest factor, looking at the hiding in Tas in particular with the strong history of the greens forcing everyone to unreasonably pander to them at the fed and state levels... capped off with the leadership and party disunity.



There's an interesting split within Tas too.

In short, independent Andrew Wilkie has retained Denison (Hobart an inner suburbs) whilst Labor has retained Franklin (basically the outer suburbs in all directions). But the Liberals have won the other 3 electorates in Tas (ie everwhere not near Hobart).

The significance of this, in my opinion, is that:

1. Andrew Wilkie is a stong, outspoken and seemingly effective MP. He won as such.

2. Labor retained a traditional working class seat which includes all of the "welfare suburbs" in that part of the state (Hobart) where most public servants also happen to be based.

3. Liberal won the rest, noting that the Tas economy is pretty much stuffed especially in the northern half of the state (Launceston isn't so bad, but apart from that it's stuffed). 

The really strange thing and my main point is that, in Tas at least, Liberal is effectively now the default "workers party" with the strongest support in the more economically depressed parts of the state. Concern about pay and conditions (ie vote Labor) has given way to concern about having a job at all (ie vote Liberal). I think that's an interesting situation to have arisen where Liberal represents the workers and the key supporters of the Greens are those in the wealthiest suburbs.


----------



## moXJO (8 September 2013)

McLovin said:


> The Herald and the AFR both endorsed Abbott yesterday.




AFR not so much but the others had one article that conceded a labor defeat and the rest with digs at Abbott. One in the SMH basically called Australians stupid for voting for Abbott. SMH and others have been consistent with daily negative Abbott articles filling their news.

Labor supporters are very feral at the moment and are almost trying to claim a win because they didn't have a total wipeout. Personally I do not see politics getting any better in the near future while the senate is hostile. Even though I wasn't expecting a labor thrashing it would have been nice to clear more dead wood out of labor. While I am cautiously optimistic that the libs won it was more about getting rid of Rudd/Gillard.

,


----------



## So_Cynical (8 September 2013)

Smurf1976 said:


> There's an interesting split within Tas too.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




I see it as the Labor/green alliance screwing rural Tasmania, and the locals voting accordingly, i used to live in a isolated forestry based seat (NSW) and its easy for the locals to vote like they are outcasts, and that's because they are outcasts.

The main stream marginalises them, screws them and the locals just have to cop it...and they don't like it.


----------



## Aussiejeff (8 September 2013)

The only reason Labor were not _*annihilated*_ in this election is thanks solely to PUP and his preferences.

That's right, Mr Clive Palmer who has so far polled 5.6% of the national vote, almost as much as the Greens, saved Labor's :arsch: in QLD..pure and simple. There's a bunch of Labor seats that hung on for no other reason than PUP's preferences flowing to them in QLD. How does that make Labor feel? Elated? What a joke. Not one word from Labor polly-wafflers thanking Mr Palmer for his wonderful support?

Worst primary vote for Labor since the 1930's (a piddling 33.8%) :fan yet myopic Labor acolytes are falling over themselves with self-praise? That victory speech by Rudd was the most selfish, petty concession speech I've ever had the misfortune to witness. Appalling selfie-agrandisement. Even worse, most of the remaining flotsam, jetsam and Union hacks from the Gillard-Rudd debacle years are still in power in the Party backrooms. Absolutely doomed for_ at least_ another election rout in 3 years - unless 50% of those dead-wooders get the boot before then, or take the honorable road and "retire".

Not a disaster for Labor? Get real and sniff the daisies. Better still, get the knives out and remove the cancer within completely.

Laughable.


----------



## Logique (8 September 2013)

Aussiejeff said:


> The only reason Labor were not _*annihilated*_ in this election is thanks solely to PUP and his preferences.
> 
> That's right, Mr Clive Palmer who has so far polled 5.6% of the national vote, almost as much as the Greens, saved Labor's :arsch: in QLD..pure and simple. There's a bunch of Labor seats that hung on for no other reason than PUP's preferences flowing to them in QLD....



PUP preference deals might also save Greens Sen SHY in SA. 

In NSW, Pauline Hanson remains a chance for a Senate seat. 

Overall:   


> Sweetest of Victories:
> http://www.news.com.au/national-new...er/story-fnho52qo-1226714322041#ixzz2eF8F1688
> 
> ...This is a victory over a cultural elite that mocked him, and Labor, which vilified him as a "misogynist"and bigot.
> ...


----------



## Smurf1976 (8 September 2013)

So_Cynical said:


> I see it as the Labor/green alliance screwing rural Tasmania, and the locals voting accordingly, i used to live in a isolated forestry based seat (NSW) and its easy for the locals to vote like they are outcasts, and that's because they are outcasts.
> 
> The main stream marginalises them, screws them and the locals just have to cop it...and they don't like it.



Agreed. I'm not sure what the situation is in the other states, but that's certainly true in Tas. The Liberals have won every electorate not in or near the capital city. That is, those electorates where agriculture, forestry (which is stuffed...), mining (which the Greens are trying to stop), manufacturing (much of which is already gone and it's no secret that the Greens are long term opponents of two large heavy industrial employers in northern Tas) have all gone to the Liberals.

Without knowing the economic details of electorates in other states it's harder to comment on those, although I did notice that the only win for the Greens was in inner Melbourne (ie office workers, students etc not miners and farmers) and that Labor seems to have done reasonably in the urban area of Sydney (again a similar underlying economic base).

So basically, I'm seeing that those who live in regions dependent on farming, mining, forestry, heavy industry, energy etc have gone to the Liberals. Not an unexpected result in view of policy, the ironic thing being that it was Labor governments who got many of those industries up and running in the first place many years ago and they employ many of Labor's tradtitional "blue collar" supporters. Meanwhile the "clean, Green" vision of the Greens has an implicit link to food production but that doesn't translate to actual support in farming areas.

So there's a degree of "city versus the bush" in all of this it would seem, environmental issues being the underlying basis.


----------



## bunyip (8 September 2013)

Tink said:


> Congratulations to Tony Abbott and the Coalition
> I think he will make a good PM.
> 
> Labor only have themselves to blame and I am glad its over.




Yes. Labor have only themselves to blame.

How could this Labor government seriously expect to be voted back in after six years of lies, character assassination, dysfunction and infighting, reckless spending, budget deficits, spiraling debt, and general incompetence. Not to mention an election campaign in which they continually resorted to lies, deceit, and negativity.

The criticisms that could be legitimately leveled at the Rudd/Gillard Labor government are almost endless.
For the next fifty years or more this government will be viewed with anger and contempt by a lot of people, just like the Whitlam government of the 1970’s is still despised by many today.
And the contempt won’t just be on account of their economic incompetence either – some people have more personal reasons to despise this government. Like, for example, the family of the woman who was killed when a truck squashed her car on the Toowoomba range.
Her granddaughter was trapped in the car for two hours beside her dead grandmother before she could be cut free – she is still traumatized to this day.
The dead woman was a lovely person, a mother, wife, grandmother, and now she’s gone.
What’s this got to do with the Rudd government?
When Rudd came to power he scrapped the 700 million dollars that the Howard government had allocated for the new Toowoomba range crossing. He could find 20 billion dollars for his stupid school halls project, more billions for roof insulation, 12 billion to waste on illegal boat people. But he couldn’t find a relatively paltry 700 million to replace one of the busiest and most dangerous sections of road in the country. Result –  people have been getting killed on this section of range since Rudd became PM six years ago.
There were deaths on this road before Rudd came to power too, but at least something was going to be done about it. But not by Rudd – even though he’s a Queenslander who lives only an hour and a half from this problem section of road, and even though it’s one of the most commercially important roads in the country, Rudd has adopted a ‘couldn’t care less’ attitude to the problem.
The families of the many people killed on this road would be justified in viewing Rudd with absolute contempt.

These are the personal tragedies that can result from a bad government – Rudd and Gillard have a lot more to answer for than just stuffing up Australia.
Thank goodness Australians have had the sense to throw them on the scrap heap where they belong. Good riddance to the scourge that has been the Rudd/Gillard Labor government.


----------



## Judd (8 September 2013)

For me it was relatively simple - if anything to do with politics is simple.

I am in favour of a number of Labor's policies more so than those proposed by the Liberals or other candidates.  So why did I not vote for my local Labor member?  Because I no longer had confidence the leader of the Labor Party had the ability to effectively implement those policies.  I had hoped Ms Gillard would have done so but when she was replaced by Mr Rudd, my voting inclination changed.  Noting more and nothing less than that.


----------



## Calliope (8 September 2013)

*ONLY IN QUEENSLAND*

Only Queenslanders could inflict on their fellow Australians such nutters and nasties as Katter, Rudd and Hansen and now Palmer and his stooge Glen Lazarus. 

Nowhere else could a conservative electorate like Fairfax deliver a 29% primary vote to an absolute lying buffoon like Palmer.

Last night in his "victory" speech to applause from his wife and the noisy mob Rudd made this despicable statement; 

"Bill Glasson, eat your heart out" 

First preferences Glasson, 42.4%
                        Rudd,    40.7%
Rudd back courtesy of the Green nutters.

There is a little light at the end of the tunnel. Rudd probably won't hang about for long and in the ensuing by-election Glasson will romp in.


----------



## nioka (8 September 2013)

Calliope said:


> There is a little light at the end of the tunnel.




You now have what you have been squarking about for a long time. When we see the dust settle and we see which promises were "non core" (a liberal party definition of lies) and which are fair dinkum then we can make a judgement. It is a long tunnel and that light may just end up a flood light at the end of the mine.


----------



## Julia (8 September 2013)

McLovin said:


> It looks as though with PUP around, the protest vote no longer flows straight to the Greens, which can't be a bad thing.



Yes and no.  The Greens at least stand for something they genuinely believe in.  Clive Palmer, with all his money (full page advertising in all the main dailies plus saturation on radio and TV), is simply amusing himself, a bit like his silly dinosaurs and the model of the Titanic.  If he does gain Fairfax, it's my bet his voting pattern will reflect his personal dislikes of individuals, rather than any consideration of what's best for the country.
He's even more duplicitous than Rudd with his promises of handing out huge tax cuts, cash, and pension increases.  This is the sort of rubbish that these people with no accountability do and the suckers actually swallow it.



> I don't hold high hopes for Abbott but hopefully he'll surprise to the upside.



I think we all feel pretty much like this.   Let's hope the Abbott bashers can hold off for a while.  He'll probably be less than great until he gets confidence in the job.  I'd like to think we can give him a decent chance.



> I've travelled to plenty of countries and most of the world's population don't have the luxury of voting out an unpopular government. As I got my sausage and lamington at the sausage sizzle outside the polling booth I remembered what a great country this is. Not because we can whinge and moan about the government but because we can take for granted the right to have an opinion and express it.



Yes, indeed.  And we do take our privileged status for granted.



Smurf1976 said:


> I'd take a guess that there will be people who caught a glimpse of the news coverage whilst in a shop etc and will now honestly be thinking that Labor has won the election. I mean that seriously - if someone saw a minute or two of Rudd and nothing else, they'd go away thinking he was claiming victory. It won't be until sometime tomorrow that they find out that this is not actually the case.



Exactly what my reaction was.  He has the most astonishing capacity for self deception.  And Labor are congratulating themselves all over the place about 'how well they did'.


----------



## basilio (8 September 2013)

nioka said:


> You now have what you have been squarking about for a long time. When we see the dust settle and we see which promises were "non core" (a liberal party definition of lies) and which are fair dinkum then we can make a judgement. It is a long tunnel and that light may just end up a flood light at the end of the mine.




Plus 10.  

It will be  interesting to see
1) Just what promises are kept
2) How well the Liberals govern ie good governance, effective management

Time will tell.


----------



## springhill (8 September 2013)

nioka said:


> You now have what you have been squarking about for a long time. When we see the dust settle and we see which promises were "non core" (a liberal party definition of lies) and which are fair dinkum then we can make a judgement. It is a long tunnel and that light may just end up a flood light at the end of the mine.






basilio said:


> Plus 10.
> 
> It will be  interesting to see
> 1) Just what promises are kept
> ...




Can I offer you some salt with those wounds?

Funny how you can both predict doom and gloom under Tony Abbott ahead of time, but you couldn't see the disaster right in front of your noses.....


----------



## Calliope (8 September 2013)

springhill said:


> Can I offer you some salt with those wounds?
> 
> Funny how you can both predict doom and gloom under Tony Abbott ahead of time, but you couldn't see the disaster right in front of your noses.....




Plus 11...just to add a little more salt for bas while busily licking her wounds.


----------



## Miss Hale (8 September 2013)

banco said:


> Boy you really showed her.




It was mainly a tactic so that she didn't approach me as she was talking to everyone in turn in the queue and I didn't want to engage with her.  Sure I could have abused her about the terrible job Labor have done since 2007 but I will leave the abuse to those on the left   As for 'showing her', actions speak louder than words and I made my intentions clear once I got to the ballot box.


----------



## Logique (8 September 2013)

Smurf1976 said:


> ...those who live in regions dependent on farming, mining, forestry, heavy industry, energy etc have gone to the Liberals.
> So there's a degree of "city versus the bush" in all of this it would seem, environmental issues being the underlying basis.



Smurf and So Cynical, so for broader Tasmania, the penny has finally dropped. Better late than never.

Perhaps there was some resonance in '..what they did to Tasmania, they'll do to the rest of us..'

QLD wasn't the rout of Labor that many predicted, but SA, Vic and Tas reacted savagely to the coup against Julia Gillard.


----------



## Whiskers (8 September 2013)

Smurf, thanks (from a cane toad) for a better insight into Tas.

I would pick you up on one little (maybe typo) error... our former Country Party, come Nationals up here ( and apparently more so in the west) formed an alliance with the Libs, the LNP, and sometimes get a bit touchy when the Libs try to take all the credit and power. 



Smurf1976 said:


> So basically, I'm seeing that those who live in regions dependent on farming, mining, forestry, heavy industry, energy etc have gone to the *Liberals*. Not an unexpected result in view of policy, the ironic thing being that it was Labor governments who got many of those industries up and running in the first place many years ago and they employ many of Labor's tradtitional "blue collar" supporters.






Calliope said:


> *ONLY IN QUEENSLAND*
> 
> Only Queenslanders could inflict on their fellow Australians such nutters and nasties as Katter, Rudd and Hansen and now Palmer and his stooge Glen Lazarus.




Pretty strong words against your fellow humans Calliope, which you no doubt resent others directing similar towards you.

Excessive adjectives aside, one would reasonably argue that apart from Rudd, none of the others actually had or are likely to "inflict" anything on the greater Australian community, apart from a lot of huff and puff in the media.

I'd suggest, while the Greens supporters, principally in the south of the country may have meant well, the far left element of the Greens party are probably more responsible for inflicting nutter and nasty decisions on their fellow Australians than anyone else... especially after they won significant influence in the Gillard Government. The live sheep and cattle export markets are probably the best example of a knee jerk reaction to something that required much better diplomacy.

It clearly caused a dysfunctional Labor to corrupt their core values and better judgement, which even influenced the LNP to match or out do some of their welfare policies in particular in order to cause a change in government.



Julia said:


> I think we all feel pretty much like this.   Let's hope the Abbott bashers can hold off for a while.  He'll probably be less than great until he gets confidence in the job.  I'd like to think we can give him a decent chance.




I agree, in all the circumstances he deserves a fair go to prove himself, one way or the other.


----------



## wayneL (8 September 2013)

basilio said:


> Plus 10.
> 
> It will be  interesting to see
> 1) Just what promises are kept
> ...




1) There are many of their promises I hope they don't keep.
2) Going by the nauseating comments on social media from the malignant baying reds, I am not hopeful of a balanced assessment from the same.


----------



## Calliope (8 September 2013)

They will have to do something about the ridiculous Senate ballot paper, but I have high hopes the Queensland PUP voters, who are obviously of low intelligence, will have stuffed it up and voted informal.


----------



## Calliope (8 September 2013)

Whiskers said:


> Pretty strong words against your fellow humans Calliope, which you no doubt resent others directing similar towards you.




Not at all. If I were like them, and a political aspirant, I would expect to be a target of derision. Which of them do you have praise for? Be my guest. By the way I overlooked Bjelke Peterson in my list.

And you say they can do no harm. Only if you are anti-LNP.



> Anxiety was high for the Coalition in NSW, where Arthur Sinodinos, who could be a senior figure in the new government, was in a life-and-death struggle with One Nation's Pauline Hanson for the state's sixth seat. Despite a primary vote of only 1.25 per cent, a very strong preference flow appeared likely to get Ms Hanson across the line, although three-quarters of the vote remained to be counted last night.




Read more: http://www.canberratimes.com.au/fed...tony-abbott-20130907-2tcqu.html#ixzz2eGyipOFJ


----------



## noco (8 September 2013)

How low can this slimy Slipper go to get votes on shirt tails of the LNP?




http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...-on-election-day/story-fnihsrf2-1226714665034


----------



## bunyip (8 September 2013)

I wonder how much Labor have learnt from their loss. About the only thing any of them have talked about during the election post mortem is how disunity cost them government.
They’ve made no mention of the lies, smears and character assassination against their opponents, their dishonesty in relation to the carbon tax, their reckless spending, their spiraling debt and their inability to produce a single budget surplus in six years while all the time telling us they were on track to do so, their self-created illegal boat people debacle, their cuts to essential services and infrastructure while splashing money around wildly on school halls and pink batts and the like. And no mention of their disjointed election campaign that repeatedly showed them to be serial liars.

If Labor ever want to be taken seriously again, then they need to start showing a bit of character by facing up to all their faults, and committing to fixing them rather than just hiding behind the excuse that it was just their disunity that brought them undone.


----------



## dutchie (8 September 2013)

bunyip said:


> I wonder how much Labor have learnt from their loss. About the only thing any of them have talked about during the election post mortem is how disunity cost them government.
> They’ve made no mention of the lies, smears and character assassination against their opponents, their dishonesty in relation to the carbon tax, their reckless spending, their spiraling debt and their inability to produce a single budget surplus in six years while all the time telling us they were on track to do so, their self-created illegal boat people debacle, their cuts to essential services and infrastructure while splashing money around wildly on school halls and pink batts and the like. And no mention of their disjointed election campaign that repeatedly showed them to be serial liars.
> 
> If Labor ever want to be taken seriously again, then they need to start showing a bit of character by facing up to all their faults, and committing to fixing them rather than just hiding behind the excuse that it was just their disunity that brought them undone.




No! Let them stay delusional! All the better for the Coalition.


----------



## So_Cynical (8 September 2013)

LOL at ^ the delusional, expecting a budget surplus during the worst economic crisis since the depression, boat people crisis that wasn't actually a crisis, spiralling debt that wasn't and isn't spiralling, no mention of AAA+ ratings, low unemployment, high currency, low debt to GDP, the disability scheme, tax reform, the lift in super, taking responsibility for GHG emissions (and actually achieving a reduction) Education spending increases, record low interest rates..  

-------------

The primary vote swing to the Liberal party was +1.26% nationally...and this is against the so called "worst Govt in Australian history" any lessons to be learnt for the noalition with that result?


----------



## AAA (8 September 2013)

So_Cynical said:


> LOL
> -------------
> 
> The primary vote swing to the Liberal party was +1.26% nationally...and this is against the so called "worst Govt in Australian history" any lessons to be learnt for the noalition with that result?




LOL at the ALP who got their lowest primary vote in a hundred years.


----------



## Julia (8 September 2013)

So_Cynical said:


> LOL at ^ the delusional, expecting a budget surplus during the worst economic crisis since the depression,



There was no call for a budget surplus from the electorate or from informed commentators.  The latter, in fact, largely suggested a rush to surplus was unnecessary.
So Labor's declaration  of not just an intention to return to surplus, *but actually announcing the achievement of a surplus*  long before they had even appropriately planned for it, was all their own work.

Might be time to wake up to your idols, So Cynical.


----------



## wayneL (8 September 2013)

AAA said:


> LOL at the ALP who got their lowest primary vote in a hundred years.




Indeed.

Amazing how SC applies different rules to the Coalition win than to Labor in 2010.


----------



## nioka (8 September 2013)

Calliope said:


> They will have to do something about the ridiculous Senate ballot paper, but I have high hopes the Queensland PUP voters, who are obviously of low intelligence, will have stuffed it up and voted informal.




You must tell us which state you must belong to to have that superior intelligence. (Being born in townsville I guess I have not inherited sufficient intelligence to work that out for myself.) Then again how did Palmer make his fortune if he also has the low intelligence that you suggest. :silly:


----------



## Ijustnewit (8 September 2013)

The biggest surprise for me was the re-election of Wayne Swan , don't the people of Lilley in Brisbane have any memory or were living under a rock the last 6 years ? This clown was one of Labor's worst offenders . 

Secondly Chris Bowen , 40,000 illegals under his watch , same bloody thing for his electorate !! What no TV's and radios out there or something ?? X2  :1zhelp:


----------



## Smurf1976 (8 September 2013)

Whiskers said:


> Smurf, thanks (from a cane toad) for a better insight into Tas.
> 
> I would pick you up on one little (maybe typo) error... our former Country Party, come Nationals up here ( and apparently more so in the west) formed an alliance with the Libs, the LNP, and sometimes get a bit touchy when the Libs try to take all the credit and power.



It's just a reflection on common language differences between the states I think. Since the National party isn't significantly active around here, most people here just use the term "Liberal" to mean the Coalition.


----------



## wayneL (8 September 2013)

Ijustnewit said:


> The biggest surprise for me was the re-election of Wayne Swan , don't the people of Lilley in Brisbane have




I drive through Wayne Swine's electorate 4 days per week. 

The most noticeable thing was that he had all but disowned the ALP in his campaign material. Not a Labor party logo to be seen (without a microscope) anywhere... not even the traditional red. 

It was like he was an independent.

That tac may have saved his @ss.


----------



## Tink (9 September 2013)

Yes, I am thrilled, bunyip, that a majority voted the Labor Government out and that the Coalition are in for the next 3 years at the least. 
A friend of mine was working in one of the booths and sent me a message saying, happy to inform you, alot of Lib voters 

I am not surprised by the big swings in Victoria and Tasmania, though I expected one more to lose here in Victoria. Its very close, with a swing of 8%.

I was glad that Rudd stood down from the leadership -- the message was sent loud and clear.  

My preference has always been the Coalition at a Federal level, even though I can be a swinging voter.


----------



## Calliope (9 September 2013)

nioka said:


> You must tell us which state you must belong to to have that superior intelligence. (Being born in townsville I* guess I have not inherited sufficient intelligence to work that out for myself.*)




Obviously. The Sunshine Coast is in Qld.


----------



## Logique (9 September 2013)

Rupert Murdoch's summation.


> Australian born media mogul Rupert Murdoch also took to Twitter on Saturday night to offer his analysis of why the Labor party had been tossed from power.
> 
> "Aust election public sick of public sector workers and phony (sic) welfare scroungers sucking life out of economy. Others nations to follow in time," he wrote.
> 
> Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/federal-po...lias-new-pm-20130908-2tdra.html#ixzz2eLP88vJ1


----------



## noco (9 September 2013)

Andrew Bolt outlines the 5 myths that killed the Labor Party's campgnain.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...poses-five-myths/story-fnho52qp-1226714757063


----------



## nioka (9 September 2013)

Calliope said:


> Obviously. The Sunshine Coast is in Qld.




The Sunshine Coast is in Queensland BUT it hosts plenty of southerners that move there physically but maintain that they are superior to the "natives". (That is why Queensland State of Origin teams win out in the end.)


----------



## Calliope (9 September 2013)

nioka said:


> The Sunshine Coast is in Queensland BUT it hosts plenty of southerners that move there physically but maintain that they are superior to the "natives".




More nitpicking.

Evidence?

I am Queensland born and bred. But I won't indulge in parochialism.


----------



## Whiskers (9 September 2013)

AAA said:


> LOL at the ALP who got their lowest primary vote in a hundred years.



“He who knows all the answers has not been asked all the questions.” 
― Confucius​
and

_“Let no man pull you so low as to hate him.” 
― Martin Luther King Jr.,_​
It clouds your interpretation of the facts and the power of the information gleaned from them.

_“Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect.” 
― Mark Twain _​
and...

_“Never laugh at live dragons.” 
― J.R.R. Tolkien _​
*Preferential Voting System v first past the post*
Firstly, know the rules of the game you play. This is a preferential voting system. Often a candidate doesn't win a clear majority in their own right. Hence, the person running second on primary votes often wins the seat on preferences. It's wise to understand the consequences of that. 

You might have more people who will fight for you to the death than any one opponent, but if your opponents dislike you more than each other... you have a problem... you are outnumbered. That's the advantage of being diplomatic with more empathy.

*Primary votes in particular does not equal seats in Parliament.*
As someone mentioned earlier the primary vote for the two (actually it's three... the LNP is a coalition of Lib and National Party) main parties has been falling for some time to below 80%. Look at the history of Aus elections, particularly the differential between primary vote, even 2PP and seats held. 

*Senate must approve new legislation*
The senate is still an obstacle to the LNP getting everything they want. Does your interpretation of the facts in a holistic interpretation of the information not suggest the people didn't give the LNP open slather to do what they want... ie they put conditional approval on the change of government?

_
“I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones.” 
― Albert Einstein _

I think what he is saying is if you fight with hate in your heart, to win it all for the sake of winning... you ultimately destroy much or all of what people have worked to achieve... civilisation (or party unity and respect).

It's not the Political Party that's most important, but who they are and what they stand for... in the eyes of the only voters that count... the swing voter.

Respect the swing voter, for otherwise little or nothing will ever change or improve. 

Do you really think the facts point to a total resounding affirmation for the coalition or a large part as swing to minors (including preferences) in protest against Labor disunity?

If you are gloating that Labor is crippled, my advice is watch your every step and keep a close watch on your back.

I'm sure Abbott is not banking on a 'crippled' labor. He carefully played a small target and avoided any knockout hits.

It's a "tricky" (pardon the pun) situation where I'm sure he knows he can make or break a longer term LNP government from the protest vote against Labor with the decisions he makes in the next three years. 

It's the swing voters, esp those who swung from Labor that he must appease to in the first instance to last longer than one term, especially if Labor appoints a new well respected leader untainted from the back room faction dealing. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics_of_Australia


----------



## Calliope (9 September 2013)

AAA said:


> LOL at the ALP who got their lowest primary vote in a hundred years.




It is obvious you have been ticked off and lectured, AAA, for stating the obvious. How dare you further upset the losers.:shake:


----------



## Whiskers (9 September 2013)

Calliope said:


> It is obvious you have been ticked off and lectured, AAA, for stating the obvious. How dare you further upset the losers.:shake:




Sounds familiar to someone else with a domineering attitude, heart full of hate and defining criteria in life are winner and loser!

“If you win, you need not have to explain...If you lose, you should not be there to explain!” 
― Adolf Hitler​

... and look where that got him!


----------



## wayneL (9 September 2013)

Whiskers I'm sure the Labor party might benefit from your repertoire of slogans and anecdotes, but as far as the coalition is concerned, they have a mandate to fulfil... and their supporters deserve to enjoy a bit of gloating, having been the victims of the same.

That said, over the decades the coalition side has revealed itself far more gracious than those opposite. It's the Fabians that need your help.


----------



## Calliope (9 September 2013)

Just a case of much ado about nothing. You seem very bitter. The Hitler comparison is not very nice. You'll just have to  move on. Take heart from Rudd's "victory" speech.


----------



## bunyip (9 September 2013)

So_Cynical said:


> LOL at ^ the delusional, expecting a budget surplus during the worst economic crisis since the depression, boat people crisis that wasn't actually a crisis, spiralling debt that wasn't and isn't spiralling, no mention of AAA+ ratings, low unemployment, high currency, low debt to GDP, the disability scheme, tax reform, the lift in super, taking responsibility for GHG emissions (and actually achieving a reduction) Education spending increases, record low interest rates..




Still beating the drum for the dead horse, eh Cynno!  That’s the spirit, lad – keep up the good work! LOL

I’m delighted to be among the 'delusional' who tossed the Labor government on to the scrap heap where they belong.
Long live the LNP!


----------



## bunyip (9 September 2013)

Ijustnewit said:


> The biggest surprise for me was the re-election of Wayne Swan , don't the people of Lilley in Brisbane have any memory or were living under a rock the last 6 years ? This clown was one of Labor's worst offenders .




That surprised me too. I can only suggest that irrespective of Swan’s incompetence as treasurer, the people of Lilley must consider that he’s done a reasonable job of achieving things for their electorate.




Ijustnewit said:


> Secondly Chris Bowen , 40,000 illegals under his watch , same bloody thing for his electorate !! What no TV's and radios out there or something ?? X2  :1zhelp:




Bowen’s stamping ground in western Sydney contains a substantial migrant population by all accounts. Perhaps these people, being migrants themselves, are heavily in favour of migration and are therefore unfazed by the 40 thousand or so illegals who came in under Bowen’s watch.


----------



## Whiskers (9 September 2013)

wayneL said:


> Whiskers I'm sure the Labor party might benefit from your repertoire of slogans and anecdotes, but as far as the coalition is concerned, they have a mandate to fulfil... and their supporters deserve to enjoy a bit of gloating, having been the victims of the same.
> 
> That said, over the decades the coalition side has revealed itself far more gracious than those opposite. It's the Fabians that need your help.




Wayne, a bit of light hearted gloating is fine, however as a swinging voter (the only type that really count) my hope is for better public administration, not for dominance of the political scene by any politician or political party. One doesn't have to look far to see the consequence of politicians abusing large swings in real, assumed or manipulated popularity, and self assumed authority, eg Rudd, Gillard, Howard....  and at the very extreme the aforementioned Hitler... a classic example of a hater, gloater and delusional selfrightness imposed on others.  

If the LNP won control of the Senate one could claim an unequivocal  mandate... _authorization to act in a particular way on a public issue given by the electorate to its representative_... BUT, they did not.

However, even if they do in the future, I'm advocating (for predictable and progressive public service) to avoid the fate of Howards selfrightness who went berserk with control of both houses, Rudd with his own importance and Gillard with her she 'knows what is best for us', her form of selfrightness. 

What I'm advocating is the LNP don't underestimate the opposition and particularly the voting public, if you want to avoid the same fate as Labor and LNP under Howard.

Gloat if you wish, but an eye for an eye is hardly good sense if your focus is better government as opposed to winning for the sake of winning or your own (un-mandated) agenda... my original point! Probably not registering with the party faithful!


----------



## Smurf1976 (9 September 2013)

Whiskers said:


> However, even if they do in the future, I'm advocating (for predictable and progressive public service) to avoid the fate of Howards selfrightness who went berserk with control of both houses, Rudd with his own importance and Gillard with her she 'knows what is best for us', her form of selfrightness.



Something that has been shown time and time again throughout history, is that anything which goes too far to one extreme ends up going in the exact opposite direction.

Recent examples in national politics include the high popularity of Rudd and Labor just 6 years ago. Climate change is another one - it was everywhere in the news 5 or so years ago, basically saturation coverage, and so public interest went the other way and people have just elected a government with a key policy of not doing much about that particular issue.

The same goes for practically anything. Unions are a classic example - arguably a good thing up to a point, but go too far and everyone loses including their own members. Same with just about everything.

It's worth noting that the Coalition didn't win so much as Labor lost this election. It's not as though the Coalition received a huge jump in their share of the vote, there was swing in that direction but it wasn't of monumental scale. They were elected largely because their primary opponents fell in a heap. That's a bit like winning a sporting match (any sport) because your opponent plays badly - it doesn't necessarily mean that you are actually a great player as such, just that you weren't as bad as your opponent on the day.

Keep things reasonable and Abbott may well be PM 3, 6, 9 or however many years from now. Take things to an extreme however and we could well end up with a hung parliament at the next election and a Labor government at the one after that.

As for what the Coalition could foreseeably do to an extreme, industrial relations comes immediately to mind. Taken too far, voters will go back to Labor. No matter how badly organised Labor may seem today they will inevitably present a professional, well organised alternative at some point in the future just as the Coalition has after previous defeats.


----------



## Whiskers (9 September 2013)

bunyip said:


> That surprised me too. I can only suggest that irrespective of Swan’s incompetence as treasurer, the people of Lilley must consider that he’s done a reasonable job of achieving things for their electorate.
> 
> Bowen’s stamping ground in western Sydney contains a substantial migrant population by all accounts. Perhaps these people, being migrants themselves, are heavily in favour of migration and are therefore unfazed by the 40 thousand or so illegals who came in under Bowen’s watch.




That's probably part of the story, but if people are going to change they tend to want to change to something better. 

People usually don't throw the baby out with the bathwater on purpose.

...which gets back to the point of my rant... if your are in the business of 'popularity' be careful not to offend the populous. Being on the favourite team doesn't guarantee you'll win, if you aren't 'popular'. There were a few examples where the vote went for the candidate rather than the party trend.

In Qld, the nationals in particular had a record of disendorsing candidates who didn't toe the party line. It worked so far as people had no doubt about what the party stood for... but often the 'popular' support went with the candidate on principles and local issues rather than with the party.


PS: Agree with your wisdom again Smurf. 

I just wish more people would so we can get out of this cycle of extremes and uncertainty in the administration of the country.


----------



## wayneL (9 September 2013)

Whiskers said:


> Wayne, a bit of light hearted gloating is fine, however as a swinging voter (the only type that really count) my hope is for better public administration, not for dominance of the political scene by any politician or political party. One doesn't have to look far to see the consequence of politicians abusing large swings in real, assumed or manipulated popularity, and self assumed authority, eg Rudd, Gillard, Howard....  and at the very extreme the aforementioned Hitler... a classic example of a hater, gloater and delusional selfrightness imposed on others.
> 
> If the LNP won control of the Senate one could claim an unequivocal  mandate... _authorization to act in a particular way on a public issue given by the electorate to its representative_... BUT, they did not.
> 
> ...




I don't think the coalition under Abbott will be partaking in any eye for eye actions, I reckon our Tones has too much class for that. I have the sense they will be careful and steady, but we shall see of course.

But the LNP is still fighting off the viscious barbs of the Fabians, even in defeat... and as Yogi Berra once said, the best defense is offense.

Like I said, it's the Labor muppets who need your council.


----------



## Whiskers (9 September 2013)

wayneL said:


> I don't think the coalition under Abbott will be partaking in any eye for eye actions, I reckon our Tones has too much class for that. I have the sense they will be careful and steady, but we shall see of course.




Agree there.




> But the LNP is still fighting off the viscious barbs of the Fabians, even in defeat... and as Yogi Berra once said, the best defense is offense.




The best defence is offence if winning for winning sake is your goal... But I think Abbott's winning tactic was more of making himself (and the LNP) a smaller target, ie while necessarily making plenty of noise about unpopular Labor decisions, but not opening up too many new frontiers (going too strongly on the offensive).



> Like I said, it's the Labor muppets who need your council.




On the contrary, I'm not in a hurry for them to get back in power. They need to demonstrate they get it, as opposed to presenting just a new face in fresh clothes.

We have what appears to be a capable new government. I'm cautioning against getting too over-roared with their "win", self importance and mandate from the voter and propelling the government into more of the same.

The only mandate I would suggest they have is for stable government according to stated policy as tempered by the Senate.

Remember, governments typically loose elections rather than opposition winning. Any Gov and especially their hard core supporters needs to keep a cool head if they want the respect of the only voters who can toss them out... the swing voter.


----------



## Macquack (9 September 2013)

Logique said:


> Rupert Murdoch's summation.




Don't post that f*cking low-life's opinion on ASF, he has his own media empire to do that.

I suggest Murdoch stop "tweeting" so much and concentrate on his marriage. Oops, to late Wendy Deng has flown the coop.


----------



## Calliope (9 September 2013)

Whiskers said:


> Wayne, a bit of light hearted gloating is fine, however as a swinging voter (the only type that really count)




It's perfectly understandable that you're cranky because you swung the wrong way. You could still enjoy a bit of the sick gloating that Rudd indulged in after beating Bill Glasson...a man superior to him in every way.


----------



## So_Cynical (9 September 2013)

bunyip said:


> Bowen’s stamping ground in western Sydney contains a substantial migrant population by all accounts. Perhaps these people, being migrants themselves, are heavily in favour of migration and are therefore unfazed by the 40 thousand or so illegals who came in under Bowen’s watch.




Unlike red necks living far from any migration and yet constantly whinning about it even though it has 0 impact on them.


----------



## Julia (9 September 2013)

Calliope said:


> It's perfectly understandable that you're cranky because you swung the wrong way. You could still enjoy a bit of the sick gloating that Rudd indulged in after beating Bill Glasson...a man superior to him in every way.



That was particularly distasteful and ungracious and it goes to the essence of Rudd's character (or perhaps lack of it.)


----------



## Whiskers (9 September 2013)

Calliope said:


> It's perfectly understandable that you're cranky because you swung the wrong way. You could still enjoy a bit of the sick gloating that Rudd indulged in after beating Bill Glasson...a man superior to him in every way.




How on earth you concluded from the paragraph from which you extracted that line, that I'm cranky beggars belief!

Note I do write in paragraphs for a reason. Here's the rest of that paragraph which clearly repudiates you **** stirring  misrepresentation.

_"my hope is for better public administration, not for dominance of the political scene by any politician or political party. One doesn't have to look far to see the consequence of politicians abusing large swings in real, assumed or manipulated popularity, and self assumed authority, eg Rudd, Gillard, Howard.... and at the very extreme the 
aforementioned Hitler... a classic example of a hater, gloater and delusional selfrightness imposed on others." _

You have no idea who I voted for! But if you knew anything at all about me and many others in the community you might appreciate why predictability and stability of government is far more important than any political candidate or party... or simply engaging in blow for blow insults with extremists.


----------



## sptrawler (9 September 2013)

Whiskers said:


> How on earth you concluded from the paragraph from which you extracted that line, that I'm cranky beggars belief!
> 
> Note I do write in paragraphs for a reason. Here's the rest of that paragraph which clearly repudiates you **** stirring  misrepresentation.
> 
> ...




+1 great quote whiskers


----------



## dutchie (10 September 2013)

Since the election I have not heard one word of complaint about the timing of the release of the Coalitions costings.


----------



## bunyip (10 September 2013)

So_Cynical said:


> Unlike red necks living far from any migration and yet constantly whinning about it even though it has 0 impact on them.





Nobody in Australia, redneck or otherwise, lives ‘far from any migration’. Even the most remote outposts such as Alice Springs have quite a few immigrants these days.

Nobody in Australia is unaffected by immigration to our country. It affects all of us, sometimes positively, sometimes negatively.

An example of negative impact of immigration is the 12 billion dollars the Labor government has poured into those arriving illegally by boat as a result of Rudd’s crazy decision to abandon the Pacific Solution. 
That 12 billion could have been better spent on defense, roads, health, customs, universities etc. But what happened instead – Rudd and Gillard ran short of dough because of their irresponsible decisions, reckless spending and crazy borrowing, resulting in substantial funding cuts to these areas.
The money flowing into the illegal immigrant problem hasn’t stopped yet either, and will continue for some time even if Abbot stops the boats. More millions or billions will need to be spent in dealing with those who are detained in camps awaiting processing.
Next time you hear of more money being poured into fixing this particular mess that Labor created – money that could otherwise be spent to the benefit of all Australians – ask yourself if you still think that immigration has zero impact on some of us.


----------



## pixel (10 September 2013)

dutchie said:


> Since the election I have not heard one word of complaint about the timing of the release of the Coalitions costings.




Have they really been released yet? 
I'm quite sure that we'll see a year of arguments "We inherited a much bigger mess ..." and "It's all Labor's fault that we can't deliver ..." The only issue all will agree on is another increase in remuneration and Super entitlements for parliamentarians.


----------



## bunyip (10 September 2013)

It hasn’t taken long for the Rudd haters in the ALP to start laying into him.
Craig Emerson let loose at Rudd yesterday, and another Labor bloke joined in today. There will almost certainly be others who are keen to nail Rudd's miserable hide to the wall.

There must be very few politicians who have been so strongly disliked by their colleagues as Rudd is by his.
This bloke has dished out plenty to his party over the last six years - many of them will now relish the chance to give him a dose of his own medicine.


----------



## noco (10 September 2013)

Whilst I am no fan of this windbag Clive Palmer, I must confess he has a valid point in the way elections are held and a lot of reforming needs to be implimented. 

In this modern world of electronics I am amazed at the way these elections are conducted using pencils and the way the electoral roll is marked off.

There is nothing to stop anyone from voting at ten different polling booths. I was aked on Saturday if I had voted at any other polling booths. They would not have known any difference..

Inthe 2010 elections, I tested the system out, much to the discust of my of my wife, by giving the name of a friend who had passed away. Without any hesitation the attendant was about to mark me off when I told her the truth. She was higly embarrassed through no fault of hers but the way the system is carried out. Voters should be asked for some ID before voting and have it recorded on an electronic system hooked up to all polling booths.

So yes this is one thing I do agree with that does need reforming and it is something I did take up with my local MP three years ago.



http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...s-corrupt8217/comments-fnho52jo-1226715514962


----------



## stewiejp (11 September 2013)

noco said:


> There is nothing to stop anyone from voting at ten different polling booths. I was aked on Saturday if I had voted at any other polling booths. They would not have known any difference..




While there is nothing to stop you doing this, and all 10 votes would be counted, you would be fined (more than the $20 fine for not voting) once the big books were all collated.


----------



## Tink (11 September 2013)

bunyip said:


> It hasn’t taken long for the Rudd haters in the ALP to start laying into him.
> Craig Emerson let loose at Rudd yesterday, and another Labor bloke joined in today. There will almost certainly be others who are keen to nail Rudd's miserable hide to the wall.
> 
> There must be very few politicians who have been so strongly disliked by their colleagues as Rudd is by his.
> This bloke has dished out plenty to his party over the last six years - many of them will now relish the chance to give him a dose of his own medicine.




Yes, we have had quite a few in Victoria from Labor having their say, calling it a toxic soap opera.

With the state election due next year, they are concerned.


----------



## sails (11 September 2013)

stewiejp said:


> While there is nothing to stop you doing this, and all 10 votes would be counted, you would be fined (more than the $20 fine for not voting) once the big books were all collated.





Stewiejp, it seems nothing is done about it.  I wonder how many voted more than once in some of the marginal seats this election.  Something should be done to prevent people voting more than once and stop people stealing the votes of dead people.  And I  heard on a current affairs program some time back that fake addresses have been used. Surely something as important as our democracy should have much tighter identity checks and a system that at least makes fraud much more difficult.



> AS many as 16,000 Australians got away with voting more than once in the 2010 razor's edge federal poll.
> 
> Dozens may have voted three times or more, but only three copped a slap on the wrist, the Herald Sun reported.
> 
> The Australian Electoral Commission has admitted to a Senate committee its own records make it difficult to tell who is flouting electoral laws. And it has been revealed little can be done if voters deny it.




Read more from news.com:  AEC admits it can't establish who is flouting electoral laws


----------



## noco (11 September 2013)

stewiejp said:


> While there is nothing to stop you doing this, and all 10 votes would be counted, you would be fined (more than the $20 fine for not voting) once the big books were all collated.




This voting at 10 different polling booths has been done before and has been challenged by the AEC only to find they could find no proof of the illicit act of the person/persons involved.

Some of these so called smart people also follow who has recently deceased and use the deceased name to cast their vote, not once but multiple times. 

So it is quite easy to avoid the fines.

This why I aggree with Clive Palmer.... The system needs a very big shake up.


----------



## drsmith (11 September 2013)

Sophie Mirabella was catching up to her independent competitor in the seat of Indi until a counting error was discovered today.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-09-...-mcgowans-lead-over-mirabella-in-indi/4951666

Not a major loss for the Libs in my view.


----------



## noco (11 September 2013)

drsmith said:


> Sophie Mirabella was catching up to her independent competitor in the seat of Indi until a counting error was discovered today.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-09-...-mcgowans-lead-over-mirabella-in-indi/4951666
> 
> Not a major loss for the Libs in my view.




+1 Doc....she never impressed me either.


----------



## Calliope (11 September 2013)

noco said:


> +1 Doc....she never impressed me either.




Tony Windsor hated her too.



> SOPHIE Mirabella can lay claim to a new, but likely unwelcome gift, bestowed yesterday by outgoing federal independent MP Tony Windsor.
> 
> Mr Windsor gave the member for Indi “the nasty prize” via an appearance yesterday morning on the ABC TV program Insiders with fellow independent Rob Oakeshott.
> 
> ...




http://www.bordermail.com.au/story/1607598/windsor-gives-mirabella-the-nasty-prize/


----------



## stewiejp (12 September 2013)

There's a fairly simple solution to people voting more than once - 
1. make people produce ID at the polling stations, and if they don't have ID, or enough ID - ask a few questions to validate their identity (DOB, Address, Mothers maiden name, previous address should do the trick - something like that)

2. make the electoral role a "live" electrical document (computer spreadsheet) rather than printing off countless thousands of books each year - that way when the person attempts to vote for the second time you can "nab him" then and there.


----------



## IFocus (13 September 2013)

wayneL said:


> I don't think the coalition under Abbott will be partaking in any eye for eye actions, I reckon our Tones has too much class for that. I have the sense they will be careful and steady, but we shall see of course.
> 
> But the LNP is still fighting off the viscious barbs of the Fabians, even in defeat... and as Yogi Berra once said, the best defense is offense.
> 
> Like I said, it's the Labor muppets who need your council.




The dumping of Bracks is telling of the school yard mentality of the Coalition, no one  behaves with arogance like a Liberal and or its supporters.


----------



## sails (13 September 2013)

IFocus said:


> The dumping of Bracks is telling of the school yard mentality of the Coalition, no one  behaves with arogance like a Liberal and or its supporters.




IF. you clearly didn't see Rudd at work as the hatchet man when Goss got into power in Qld. I understand it was pretty brutal. 

 It's not uncommon for an incoming government to replace  staff with those they trust.  So don't try to make this something only the libs do...LOL

Why do you try to spin things so much IF?  Do you think we won't notice?


----------



## MrBurns (13 September 2013)

IFocus said:


> The dumping of Bracks is telling of the school yard mentality of the Coalition, no one  behaves with arogance like a Liberal and or its supporters.




Really who cares if a Labor person gets dumped from a $250K pa bludge.........I don't


----------



## bellenuit (13 September 2013)

sails said:


> It's not uncommon for an incoming government to replace  staff with those they trust.  So don't try to make this something only the libs do...




Another thing to note is that Bracks campaigned for Labor AFTER being nominated. Government appointees are expected to not take political sides after being nominated. Their job is to carry out the wishes of the government of the day and put politics aside. If Bracks had followed that practice and also, as he would only be assuming the role after the election, showed the courtesy of discussing his appointment with the coalition, something which Gillard refused to do, he might have been dealt with more favourably by Bishop.


----------



## Logique (14 September 2013)

drsmith said:


> Sophie Mirabella was catching up to her independent competitor in the seat of Indi until a counting error was discovered today.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-09-...-mcgowans-lead-over-mirabella-in-indi/4951666
> 
> Not a major loss for the Libs in my view.



Except that her opponent and now likely winner, turns out to be a pretend conservative Doc. Backed by the left, within a organization she herself formed.  Indi will welcome Mirabella back with open arms, wait and see.


----------



## Calliope (14 September 2013)

Logique said:


> Except that her opponent and now likely winner, turns out to be a pretend conservative Doc. Backed by the left, within a organization she herself formed.  Indi will welcome Mirabella back with open arms, wait and see.




I am not too sure why Doc takes that view. She was very useful to Abbott. She could say things about the Labor female  nasties that Abbott couldn't say for fear of the misogyny attacks.

Besides, she is hated by Windsor, so she can't be all that bad. He set up support for her opponent in Indi so as to inflict on Indi a "pretend conservative" in his own nasty image. 

http://www.news.com.au/national-new...la-actually-said/story-fncynjr2-1226718988535


----------



## sails (14 September 2013)

Logique said:


> Except that her opponent and now likely winner, turns out to be a pretend conservative Doc. Backed by the left, within a organization she herself formed.  Indi will welcome Mirabella back with open arms, wait and see.




I read something about this recently and it seems there may be other "independents" interested in using her model to take seats from the coalition in the future.  It appears the plan is to deceive the electorate into thinking they are conservative.

If so, hopefully this situation in Indi will bring it to the the light and help prevent voters from being conned.


----------



## sydboy007 (14 September 2013)

MrBurns said:


> Really who cares if a Labor person gets dumped from a $250K pa bludge.........I don't




But you have no problem with a Liberal person getting a $250K bludge?

Personally I'd prefer them to earn the $, but I suppose as long as it's someone from the right getting the easy money that's fine and dandy?

This kind of behaviour in the corporate world isn't acceptable.  Sacking someone because they're from the wrong side of politics in the corporate world opens you up to litigation.

Using justifications because they did it when they go into power last time.  2 wrongs don't make a right.

i think it's this kind of behaviour that lead so many people to vote for the alternatives to the 2 major parties.


----------



## IFocus (14 September 2013)

bellenuit said:


> Another thing to note is that Bracks campaigned for Labor AFTER being nominated. Government appointees are expected to not take political sides after being nominated. Their job is to carry out the wishes of the government of the day and put politics aside. If Bracks had followed that practice and also, as he would only be assuming the role after the election, showed the courtesy of discussing his appointment with the coalition, something which Gillard refused to do, he might have been dealt with more favourably by Bishop.




Peter Costello has whats the differance?

Bracks was nonminated by a goverment well outside of any convention required consulting with Bishop was not required, by all accounts he had a water tight case for wrongfull sacking but chose not to run it.


----------



## noco (14 September 2013)

IFocus said:


> Peter Costello has whats the differance?
> 
> Bracks was nonminated by a goverment well outside of any convention required consulting with Bishop was not required, by all accounts he had a water tight case for wrongfull sacking but chose not to run it.




What did he expect when he bit the hand that was feeding him. Serves him right.


----------



## bellenuit (14 September 2013)

IFocus said:


> Peter Costello has whats the differance?
> 
> Bracks was nonminated by a goverment well outside of any convention required consulting with Bishop was not required, by all accounts he had a water tight case for wrongfull sacking but chose not to run it.




Needing to consult with Bishop was not a convention but a courtesy since he would be assuming the role when the coalition would potentially, and as we knew then, very likely be the government of the day. The convention that was not followed was appointing someone to fill a position when the government was, for all practicable purposes, in caretaker mode. Just as Labor tried to put timebombs in place that were only there to frustrate the opposition carrying out its policy should it regain power (long term NBN contracts, funding commitments that went through the term of the next government), they also tried to make appointments that were only going to come into effect after the next government took power. Fair play to the coalition for not putting up with such nonsense.


----------



## sails (14 September 2013)

And it looks like Bracks has brought some of this on himself:




> STEVE Bracks has played a role in his own demise as after losing the confidence of the Abbott Government by actively fundraising and campaigning against it.
> 
> Mr Bracks has been axed from the prestigious $250,000-a-year posting ... because he campaigned against [the Coalition]. Mr Bracks was the star billing at a fundraising event and involved in the Hotham pre-selection contest…
> 
> ...




Andrew Bolt also notes that "Former Labor leader Kim Beazley, though, will stay on as our ambassador to Washington until the end of next year."

Coalition does to Bracks what he did first


----------



## drsmith (15 September 2013)

Logique said:


> Except that her opponent and now likely winner, turns out to be a pretend conservative Doc. Backed by the left, within a organization she herself formed.  Indi will welcome Mirabella back with open arms, wait and see.



In terms of her public media performances, she didn't impress me. She struck me as seeing herself as being a cut above everyone else.

Regardless of the background of the independent candidate, something obviously went severely wrong with Sophie's campaign bearing in mind the swing against her relative to the rest of the state.


----------



## Calliope (17 September 2013)

Will Palmer get his comeuppance.?



> THE Queensland seat of Fairfax is on a knife edge, with only 64 votes separating Clive Palmer and Liberal National Party rival Ted O'Brien.



- See more at: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...y-fn3dxiwe-1226720710688#sthash.3MPvh11n.dpuf


----------



## drsmith (17 September 2013)

Calliope said:


> Will Palmer get his comeuppance.?
> 
> 
> - See more at: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...y-fn3dxiwe-1226720710688#sthash.3MPvh11n.dpuf



It will be a bellyache and a half from Clive if he doesn't get up.

Sophie Mirabella too is now less than 400 votes behind the independent candidate for Indi. This could also go down to the wire. 

McEwen has been going the other way with the Labor candidate having taken the lead and is now about 300 votes in front. 

http://www.abc.net.au/news/federal-election-2013/results/electorates/#seats-in-doubt


----------



## Julia (17 September 2013)

Even when he was miles ahead, Clive was insisting the AEC was corrupt and that he would demand a new election.
God knows what he'll be on about if he actually loses.

He gets nuttier by the day, with his conspiracy theories that the scrutineers are all taken from the defence forces.
I've just googled how scrutineers are appointed and there's no support in the AEC material for this suggestion.
Incredibly, on Q & A where he again aired this theory, not one of the panel members or Tony Jones countered it.

Hopefully, the LNP candidate will scrape home in Fairfax.


----------



## drsmith (18 September 2013)

Sophie Mirabella has conceded her seat with I would say, good grace.



> "This election is over and the responsibility for the outcome is mine.
> 
> "Despite the closeness of the count I have decided not to seek a recount. I unreservedly accept the decision of the democratic process."
> 
> The decision came as she trailed by 387 votes with little more than 1000 to be counted.




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...to-cathy-mcgowan/story-fn9qr68y-1226721804748


----------



## Whiskers (18 September 2013)

Julia said:


> Even when he was miles ahead, Clive was insisting the AEC was corrupt and that he would demand a new election.
> God knows what he'll be on about if he actually loses.
> 
> He gets nuttier by the day, with his conspiracy theories that the scrutineers are all taken from the defence forces.
> ...




Hey Julia... take it a bit easy on ole Clive!

I'm not a fan or active supporter of the man, but he does make some reasonable points that deserve a reasonable response... and not just swept under the carpet like so many bureaucratic bungles in the past.

While not personally worked in an electoral office I know many who have, and even seen some of the complacent practices and procedures with potential  for electoral fraud or at least negligent misrepresentation of results, aired on this forum. 

I don't recall any results being exactly the same after a recount. Often there is a hundred or so difference. We expect our bank account to be exact to the cent, so why in the day and age can we not do an exact vote count first time! A vote is either valid or not. So if validated is it not reasonable to expect that a vote in a contemporary system to then be allocated exactly 100% accurately like an atm can distinguish between a $5 and $50 note, or business and government agencies use scanning technology to derive information from specially designed forms like a ballot paper?

With the speed and efficiency of modern technology it's becoming more apparent how the big parties have exploited 'the system' to maintain the lions share of political positions. The recent election of some senators in particular on a coordinated preference arrangement has highlighted how easy the system is to abuse.

The ability to vote a number of times at a number of booths, whether in your own name or a recently deceased name or both is glaringly obvious and deserves a simple fix such as first glance, computerised referencing of the roll.

This sort of rorting was loudly condemned in the union movement long ago... so it's not unreasonable to ask why such an easy fix to an often raised issue (although not often getting the media attention that Clive attracts) has not been legislated, given the AEC has to have legislation before it can change it's ways.


----------



## drsmith (18 September 2013)

Clive does deserve a certain amount of credit in netting a significant protest vote. Although what comes out of his mouth is sometimes rather silly, his mastery of this aspect of the political process shows he's no dill.

He'll find turning that into a long term support base more challenging though I suspect. That will require much more detailed policy work than he's currently done and it will be interesting to see how he manages party discipline.


----------



## Julia (18 September 2013)

Whiskers said:


> Hey Julia... take it a bit easy on ole Clive!
> 
> I'm not a fan or active supporter of the man, but he does make some reasonable points that deserve a reasonable response... and not just swept under the carpet like so many bureaucratic bungles in the past.



The problem is that almost all the media is doing just that, Whiskers, ie "taking it easy on ole Clive", presumably because he's entertaining.
I'm not so kind.   I think it's just absolutely wrong that he has apparently got away with his full page advertisements saying if he's elected

pensioners will receive a 20% increase to the age pension
taxes will be cut
every person will receive cash of $2500

and various other promises.
There are plenty of people who will have read this, and truly believe that if they vote for him, the above will actually happen.

I couldn't care less about Clive Palmer in any sense other than that the gullibility of some of the electorate has distorted the electoral process, and I don't believe he is being properly scrutinised by the media.

The good news is (imo, of course) is that the count for Fairfax is now showing him behind the LNP candidate.



> While not personally worked in an electoral office I know many who have, and even seen some of the complacent practices and procedures with potential  for electoral fraud or at least negligent misrepresentation of results, aired on this forum.



By all means have a recount.  I haven't commented on that.  What I said was that he was asserting that he would be expecting a *new election* in Fairfax.  That's just symptomatic of his absolute egocentricity and arrogance.


----------



## spooly74 (18 September 2013)

Julia said:


> The good news is (imo, of course) is that the count for Fairfax is now showing him behind the LNP candidate.




He was this morning, but now has taken a whopping 3 vote lead when it was last updated.

http://vtr.aec.gov.au/HouseDivisionFirstPrefs-17496-160.htm


----------



## pixel (18 September 2013)

spooly74 said:


> He was this morning, but now has taken a whopping 3 vote lead when it was last updated.
> 
> http://vtr.aec.gov.au/HouseDivisionFirstPrefs-17496-160.htm




LOL ! What a hoot!
A difference of less than 100 would lead automatically to a recount.
But I do hope "good ole Clive" does get in. Not because I believe he has a chance of becoming PM and pushing his ideas through. Nor do I believe that any of his pre-election utterings could be misconstrued as promises along the line of "Vote for me and you'll get 20% more pension" etc. 
The reason I want him in the House and some like him in the Senate is: I am dead-set against the Parliament being dominated by Old Boys, School Ties, and Lawyers. Hearing a self-made Billionaire, no matter how eccentric, pit his own arrogance against the arrogance of the equally self-centered 2-Party establishment will be a breeze of fresh air - IMHO.


----------



## Whiskers (18 September 2013)

Julia said:


> By all means have a recount.  I haven't commented on that.  What I said was that he was asserting that he would be expecting a *new election* in Fairfax.  That's just symptomatic of his absolute egocentricity and arrogance.




I understand your frustration Julia... but try not to get too worked up that you end up playing the person instead of the ball, if I may use that analogy, recalling the infamous Greg and Trevor Chappell under arm bowl to beat the Kiwi's in the cricket. It was legal, but just not cricket! The poor ole Kiwi batsman stood there starring down the pitch in disbelief and horror, while if he'd been focused he had plenty of time to snap out of it and just do what he was a second or two earlier, fully intending to do... just play the ball, hit the damn thing as hard as he could to give the team a chance to win.  

The reason why I'm paying a bit more attention to the seat result, more than the man, as time goes by is because a bloke of his notoriety and financial resources makes enough noise he may well just cause a review of the AEC act and proceedures. That would be a good thing.

If he can make a legal case of 'beyond reasonable doubt' or the lower burden of proof 'on the balance of probabilities' (I not familiar with what law governs this) he may well cause a re-election. 

The downside from that, assuming Abbott doesn't act quickly to rectify the flawed electoral system, is Abbott will score a black eye and Palmer and others may get a boost in the name of, or just guise of standing up for better accountability. 



pixel said:


> LOL ! What a hoot!
> A difference of less than 100 would lead automatically to a recount.
> But I do hope "good ole Clive" does get in. Not because I believe he has a chance of becoming PM and pushing his ideas through. Nor do I believe that any of his pre-election utterings could be misconstrued as promises along the line of "Vote for me and you'll get 20% more pension" etc.
> The reason I want him in the House and some like him in the Senate is: I am dead-set against the Parliament being dominated by Old Boys, School Ties, and Lawyers. Hearing a self-made Billionaire, no matter how eccentric, pit his own arrogance against the arrogance of the equally self-centered 2-Party establishment will be a breeze of fresh air - IMHO.




You're a wise ole soul pixel. 

I agree with you... sometimes when one (the traditional establishment) does not do what one ought to do,  'fate' kicks in and does it for you. 

I think it's called natural justice.


----------



## Julia (18 September 2013)

Pixel and Whiskers,  I'm happy for you to enjoy the eccentric Mr Palmer.
I am, however, entirely unmoved in terms of being persuaded as to his usefulness.

And, Whiskers, any cricketing analogies are quite wasted on me.


----------



## MrBurns (18 September 2013)

Julia said:


> Pixel and Whiskers,  I'm happy for you to enjoy the eccentric Mr Palmer.
> I am, however, entirely unmoved in terms of being persuaded as to his usefulness.
> 
> And, Whiskers, any cricketing analogies are quite wasted on me.




His latest statement leave me wondering how he runs a company at all, his supporters must feel terribly let down.


----------



## Calliope (19 September 2013)

Julia said:


> Pixel and Whiskers,  I'm happy for you to enjoy the eccentric Mr Palmer.
> I am, however, entirely unmoved in terms of being persuaded as to his usefulness.
> 
> And, Whiskers, any cricketing analogies are quite wasted on me.




If Pixel thinks that Palmer is a "breeze of fresh air" he must be living in a very polluted atmosphere indeed.


----------



## bunyip (19 September 2013)

I just wish JuLIAR Gillard had led the Labor party to the election instead of Rudd. I was delighted to see Rudd get flogged, but I would have been even more delighted if that red-haired monster Gillard had led them to an even bigger hammering than Labor copped in the NSW and QLD elections. And that’s exactly what would have happened if they’d stuck with Gillard.
My perfect scenario would have been to see Gillard lead the ALP to the biggest landslide defeat in Australian political history, Rudd take over as opposition leader, and the ALP under Rudd get pounded again at the next election in three years time.


----------



## Logique (19 September 2013)

drsmith said:


> It will be a bellyache and a half from Clive if he doesn't get up......http://www.abc.net.au/news/federal-election-2013/results/electorates/#seats-in-doubt



The polling place staff might be getting nervous, Palmer is very litigious, with deep pockets.


----------



## Whiskers (19 September 2013)

Julia said:


> Pixel and Whiskers,  I'm happy for you to enjoy the eccentric Mr Palmer.
> I am, however, entirely unmoved in terms of being persuaded as to his usefulness.




I'm sure Labor might find him, with his history from membership of the LNP, useful as a poisoned chalice of the LNP "brand", of good ship Newman and Abbott. 

I refer to party membership and donations. Labor took the moral high ground some time ago refusing to accept tobacco money. Palmer had been a very strong supporter of the LNP esp in Qld until they had a falling out. 

It will be interesting to see what comes out of a full blown political brawl if Clive becomes elected. I'm sure he knows a lot more about the inner working than he has spilt so far... and I expect if he gets into a parliamentary seat he will, not so much spill information, but use his intimate knowledge and financial resources to much more effect inflicting much pain on the LNP brand and probably Abbotts government. 



> And, Whiskers, any cricketing analogies are quite wasted on me.




Ok... I don't know the net ball equivalent , so simple translation, sometimes even good neighbours and mates can rub each other up the wrong way a bit in terms of who's the best... and if the animosity festers, always, always expect the unexpected.

Hence my caution that Tony Abbott is hanging to power by a thread which can potentially be broken pretty easily with a reinvigorated Labor and some turmoil by p!ssed off former loyal supporters like Clive.



Logique said:


> The polling place staff might be getting nervous, Palmer is very litigious, with deep pockets.




Apparently Palmer has surged ahead a bit more!

Did the AEC staff find another box with those missing votes in!?


----------



## waza1960 (19 September 2013)

> Hence my caution that Tony Abbott is hanging to power by a thread




 I don't know what your smoking but a 35 seat majority is hardly a "thread"
 And most of the Independent Senators IMO will support Abbott's mandate.


----------



## Whiskers (19 September 2013)

waza1960 said:


> I don't know what your smoking but a 35 seat majority is hardly a "thread"




It is when you note that nationally the swing to the LNP is less than half the swing away from Labor. 

Statistically, and pragmatically, if you look at the states and particular seats Labor lost, except for a few seats in Tas, the overwhelming swing was to minor parties. 

*Statistically again, and especially considering the number of narrow margin seats, a 1.9% swing against the LNP will see them gone. *

Do you not see the sensitivity here... While Labor lost 4.5% which makes it hard, but not too difficult to get that back in one election,* the LNP only needs a relatively minor backlash to either Labor or 'others' to loose office. * hence my preoccupatuion with not putting a foot wrong and making the very most of every opportunity to build on support.

But as mentioned earlier and on other threads, there is potential LNP conflict looming on a couple of fronts.

Labor needs a swing to them of 4.5% to return the status quo. 

Remembering, the golden rule that Governments tend to loose office rather than oppositions winning.



> And most of the Independent Senators IMO will support Abbott's mandate.




How so? Have you studied their policy positions? I doubt they will recognise any mandate and bargain for their own cause which on face value I suspect goes pretty hard against the grain of Abbots core beliefs.

Abbott will need to win over at least 4 others, on present indications, to pass anything.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (20 September 2013)

Logique said:


> The polling place staff might be getting nervous, Palmer is very litigious, with deep pockets.




I would agree that Clive likes using lawyers, however I would challenge the latter comment. 

It will be interesting to see his Parliamentary register of interests. Very, very, very interesting.

If I were the poor sod, I wouldn't have run for parliament.

gg


----------



## drsmith (21 September 2013)

Clive Palmer's lead has been reduced from 111 vote to 45 votes this morning although it's unclear from the article below what proportion of the last 450 votes to be counted that includes.

In the absence of a counting error, I suspect Clive has this in the bag.



> Businessman Clive Palmer's lead over his LNP rival Ted O'Brien has shrunk to just 45 votes after he started the day 111 votes ahead.
> 
> The last ballot papers will be counted in the Sunshine Coast seat of Fairfax today, but a winner is unlikely to be declared.
> 
> ...




http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-09-...ed-in-clive-palmer27s-bid-for-fairfax/4972790


----------



## IFocus (21 September 2013)

drsmith said:


> Clive Palmer's lead has been reduced from 111 vote to 45 votes this morning although it's unclear from the article below what proportion of the last 450 votes to be counted that includes.
> 
> In the absence of a counting error, I suspect Clive has this in the bag.
> 
> ...





Looking forward to Clive in Canberra he will have some thing to say and I see Abbott implementing his proposals rejected before the election. 



> Downer, Santoro to consider Liberal Party links amid push for lobbying code of conduct





http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-09-20/early-success-for-pm-on-lobbying-code-of-conduct/4971586


----------



## drsmith (21 September 2013)

IFocus said:


> Looking forward to Clive in Canberra he will have some thing to say and I see Abbott implementing his proposals rejected before the election.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-09-20/early-success-for-pm-on-lobbying-code-of-conduct/4971586



The differences between Tony Abbott and Clive Palmer ran a little deeper than that if the policies of the two parties are anything to go by.

It will be very interesting to see how Clive adapts to life as a politician.


----------



## IFocus (21 September 2013)

drsmith said:


> The differences between Tony Abbott and Clive Palmer ran a little deeper than that if the policies of the two parties are anything to go by.
> 
> It will be very interesting to see how Clive adapts to life as a politician.




I am sure he will steal headlines and drop clangers but occasionally he has some thing worth listening to and hopefully he will be a complete pain in the proverbial for Abbott.


----------



## drsmith (21 September 2013)

IFocus said:


> I am sure he will steal headlines and drop clangers but occasionally he has some thing worth listening to and hopefully he will be a complete pain in the proverbial for Abbott.



I would hope he that he would be fair an impartial to all parties an politicians and not specifically target one party or leader with being a pain in the proverbial.


----------



## Whiskers (21 September 2013)

drsmith said:


> I would hope he that he would be fair an impartial to all...




Don't we all wish this of all politicians!

To expect him to not be either biased or disproportionate "with being a pain in the proverbial" ... even if he was the sole reservoir of knowledge and truth... has got to be unreasonable. 

Even God or the next best thing in our society with any legitimate claim to being fair an impartial to all parties , a Judge, has to be "a pain in the proverbial" disproportionally to get things done.


----------



## AAA (21 September 2013)

IFocus said:


> I am sure he will steal headlines and drop clangers but occasionally he has some thing worth listening to and hopefully he will be a complete pain in the proverbial for Abbott.




I don't know how much of an influence Palmer can be on this government. He won't have much sway in the house of reps due to the clear majority the coalition has. I also can see him getting booted from question time frequently due to him ranting and raving. 

Depending on the final makeup of the senate he mightn't have much of an influence on the senate. Tony Abbott has the threat of a double disolution if he can't get his way. How many of these newly elected minor party senators would want their 6 year senate stint reduced to under 12 months.


----------



## nulla nulla (21 September 2013)

AAA said:


> I don't know how much of an influence Palmer can be on this government. He won't have much sway in the house of reps due to the clear majority the coalition has. I also can see him getting booted from question time frequently due to him ranting and raving.
> 
> Depending on the final makeup of the senate he mightn't have much of an influence on the senate. Tony Abbott has the threat of a double disolution if he can't get his way. How many of these newly elected minor party senators would want their 6 year senate stint reduced to under 12 months.




His maiden speech should be interesting.


----------



## Ves (21 September 2013)

drsmith said:


> I would hope he that he would be fair an impartial to all parties an politicians and not specifically target one party or leader with being a pain in the proverbial.



Politicians aren't elected to be impartial.   Why do you think the left and right dichotomy exists in the first place? Because we all agree?


----------



## Mickel (21 September 2013)

This is the result in Fairfax today when all the votes have been counted. However, as the two party preferred vote margin is less than 100 votes, there will be an automatic recount by the AEC. So Clive isn't there yet with a provisional margin of only 36 votes.



PALMER, Clive Frederick....ORD.......%......ABSENT..%....PROV..%......PRE-P...%......POSTAL..%....TOTAL......%
Palmer United Party.........35,683..51.04...2,284..56.56...148..73.63..1,782..42.32..2,470..38.97...42,367...50.02 
O'BRIEN, Ted 
L N P of Queensland........34,227..48.96...1,754..43.44.....53..26.37..2,429..57.68..3,868...61.03...42,331...49.98


----------



## drsmith (21 September 2013)

Whiskers said:


> Don't we all wish this of all politicians!
> 
> To expect him to not be either biased or disproportionate "with being a pain in the proverbial" ... even if he was the sole reservoir of knowledge and truth... has got to be unreasonable.
> 
> Even God or the next best thing in our society with any legitimate claim to being fair an impartial to all parties , a Judge, has to be "a pain in the proverbial" disproportionally to get things done.






Ves said:


> Politicians aren't elected to be impartial.   Why do you think the left and right dichotomy exists in the first place? Because we all agree?



Oopsy.

I seem to have got my conversations confused. I thought I was commenting about Barrie Cassidy.

Time for a Coopers and to watch the footy.


----------



## Ves (21 September 2013)

drsmith said:


> Oopsy.
> 
> I seem to have got my conversations confused. I thought I was commenting about Barrie Cassidy.
> 
> Time for a Coopers and to watch the footy.



Enjoy the game.


----------



## noco (22 September 2013)

Palmer in general is a bit of a wind bag but there is one thing I do agree with him and that is we need electoral reform...Our system is so out dated...I can remember the same system when I turned 21 and that was many moons ago and at the time you had to be 21 years of age to vote.

I have my doubts we will see him at every parliamentry sitting as he leads a busy business life.

He used to be a life member of the Liberal Party until he fell fowl with the state Liberal Government over some mining venture in Queensland of which he was asking some favors. Because he was refused he took his bat and ball and left. Can you imagine the media up roar had the State Government given in to him?

So in forming his own  PUP he was after revenge on the Liberals.

Money and politics...... it really is a bad combination.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (22 September 2013)

If you have ever spoken to anyone from the AEC, they are more aware of the deficiencies in the system than Palmer.

Reform is in the air, but it won't come from any suggestions from a muppet such as CP.

gg


----------



## drsmith (30 September 2013)

Clive Palmer has won Fairfax by 15 votes on the recount.

http://vtr.aec.gov.au/HouseDivisionFirstPrefs-17496-160.htm

The original count had a 42 vote difference in favour of Clive.


----------



## drsmith (30 September 2013)

drsmith said:


> Clive Palmer has won Fairfax by 15 votes on the recount.
> 
> http://vtr.aec.gov.au/HouseDivisionFirstPrefs-17496-160.htm
> 
> The original count had a 42 vote difference in favour of Clive.



I'll have to take that back. The recount is still going. 

Clive now ahead by only 3 votes.


----------



## IFocus (30 September 2013)

drsmith said:


> I'll have to take that back. The recount is still going.
> 
> Clive now ahead by only 3 votes.





I read that the recount for some technical reason would go against Clive


----------



## noco (30 September 2013)

drsmith said:


> I'll have to take that back. The recount is still going.
> 
> Clive now ahead by only 3 votes.




Geez Doc, if he does not win he will go beserk with his legal eagles.


----------



## drsmith (1 October 2013)

noco said:


> Geez Doc, if he does not win he will go beserk with his legal eagles.



The recount put him ahead by 7 votes in the end. 

There will now be another recount of all votes. The above result is only after a recount of preferences.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-10-...on-orders-recount-for-seat-of-fairfax/4992130


----------



## sptrawler (1 October 2013)

drsmith said:


> The recount put him ahead by 7 votes in the end.
> 
> There will now be another recount of all votes. The above result is only after a recount of preferences.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-10-...on-orders-recount-for-seat-of-fairfax/4992130




Sounds like the re counts will continue untill the next election.


----------



## sptrawler (5 October 2013)

We haven't heard much from the 'Australia Republican' movement, about the fiasco unfolding in the U.S.

In our 'Westminster' system both houses would be disolved and a general election called. 
That ensures that petty self interests, don't override public opinion.


----------

