# Australian Federal Election - 2016



## piggybank (18 April 2016)

Nice to be the first one of the grid.


----------



## drsmith (18 April 2016)

Stick DD and the date in the thread title.

The ABCC bill is about to get voted down by the Senate for a second time.


----------



## Logique (18 April 2016)

Only 3 votes in it, but nearly 3 weeks of parliam sittings to go. Still, can't see it happening.



> Politics Live: April 18, 2016 - by Stephanie Peatling, Senior writer
> SMH: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...itics-live-april-18-2016-20160417-go8lrk.html
> 
> 6:38pm: Mr Turnbull brought Parliament back for three weeks.
> ...


----------



## luutzu (18 April 2016)

i think Aussies have a better chance of bettering themselves ticking the lotteries than the ballot tickets.

Maybe it's just me but I can't remember what the last couple elections was about. There's the NBN... and there's still the NBN some 6 years later.

I guess at least they're being polite and ask you to vote.


----------



## pixel (18 April 2016)

luutzu said:


> I guess at least they're being polite and ask you to vote.




The Pollied don't *ask* us. Voting is compulsory.
They *order* us to the polls at the set date and accept no excuse.


----------



## Tisme (19 April 2016)

Is there any chance the dissolution can also include dissolving the ALP, LNP and Greens and making them reconstitute with clean sheet policies?

Part of my wants is the banning of:

Tanya Plibersek
Peter Dutton
Penny Wong
Mathius Cormann
Michaelia Cash
Greg Hunt
George Brandis
Bill nodose Shorten
Malcolm the Ditherer
Tony Abbott
Greens

Lobbyists who should be banned from doing so:

LGBT organisation
Chartered institutions
Protected business'
Public service unions
Consultants to govt
Andrew Bolt
Murdoch
ABC


----------



## SirRumpole (19 April 2016)

Tisme said:


> Is there any chance the dissolution can also include dissolving the ALP, LNP and Greens and making them reconstitute with clean sheet policies?
> 
> Part of my wants is the banning of:
> 
> ...




What do you want, Utopia ?


----------



## Tisme (19 April 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> What do you want, Utopia ?






Does it show I have nothing but contempt for the current offerings? True there is a cleanout at the preselections, but does it go far enough?

It's a sad state of affairs when the hi priority agendas are homosexual prerogatives over shadowing the general population's pejoratives, republicanism for the sake of it and then using the monarchistic opportunity to dissolve parliament, sabotaging the grand plan of a unity telecoms network,  bare faced lying about the level of debt and deficit, using human suffering as wedge politics, doing nothing in two years but continue to blame others for their inability to negotiate like adults.

If any of this was going on in a family unit there would be yelling and screaming for an end to it.

Politics taps into the primal core of men and nasty bItches; it's the providence of the weak wanting to be strong and the strong wanting to be stronger. Then there are supermen like me who fly above the minions


----------



## SirRumpole (19 April 2016)

Any election predictions at this stage ?

 I think the LNP may just scrape in by 5 seats or less with another balance of power Senate decided by Nick Xenophon. Lleyonholm, Madigan out, Lambie and Lazarus back, Palmer gone.


----------



## Craton (19 April 2016)

pixel said:


> The Pollied don't *ask* us. Voting is compulsory.
> They *order* us to the polls at the set date and accept no excuse.




Yep, voting is compulsory or just pay the fine/s and/or consequences:-
http://www.aec.gov.au/faqs/voting_australia.htm#not-vote

_What happens if I do not vote?

After each election, the AEC will send a letter to all apparent non-voters requesting that they either provide a valid and sufficient reason for failing to vote or pay a $20 penalty.

If, within the time period specified on the notice, you fail to reply, cannot provide a valid and sufficient reason or decline to pay the $20 penalty, then the matter may be referred to a court. If the matter is dealt with in court and you are found guilty, you may be fined up to $170 plus court costs and a criminal conviction may be recorded against you.
_


----------



## sptrawler (19 April 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Any election predictions at this stage ?
> 
> I think the LNP may just scrape in by 5 seats or less with another balance of power Senate decided by Nick Xenophon. Lleyonholm, Madigan out, Lambie and Lazarus back, Palmer gone.




I don't know which party will win, they are both pretty hopeless. 
However I don't think the independents will do well, voters are over hung parliaments.IMO
Also as both the houses will be voted on at the same time, I think it will lead to a majority in both houses, for one party.
The more experienced independents voted with Liberal to avoid this situation, the less experienced brought it on at their peril, Lambie and  Lazarus will be toast. IMO


----------



## Craton (19 April 2016)

Regarding Mal's DD play. 

While I would like to see our elected upper and lower houses (along with the incumbent govt's elected head) run full term, I reckon the PM is being very crafty with this and could well endear him to the voter as:-

- The DD highlights the debarcle a hung parliament is to this great nation
- The DD highlights that change is needed to remove the stalemate in the upper house
- The DD highlights that any party can use this as an early election trigger
- The DD highlights the need to clear the decks, so to speak, for our great nation to progress
- The DD highlights that there are flaws in our constitution
- The DD highlights that our land is governed by a Figure Head
- The DD highlights the need for a self determining republic

These are just some of the messages that the DD throws out but what a gamble! Touching the nerves from Gough days that are still red raw, although in hindsight I'm sure we are all the wiser for the reasons why that DD was played out, this certainly is a huge power play by our PM. One that could well backfire however; will the upcoming May budget be the LNP's ace-in-the-hole?

If a week is a long time in politics, the remaining months will seem like a eternity.

Meanwhile, I await the carnage.


----------



## SirRumpole (19 April 2016)

sptrawler said:


> I don't know which party will win, they are both pretty hopeless.
> However I don't think the independents will do well, voters are over hung parliaments.IMO
> Also as both the houses will be voted on at the same time, I think it will lead to a majority in both houses, for one party.
> The more experienced independents voted with Liberal to avoid this situation, the less experienced brought it on at their peril, Lambie and  Lazarus will be toast. IMO




Maybe the Independents will do well *because* the major parties are hopeless ?


----------



## drsmith (19 April 2016)

It will depend on how well the government can present an economic narrative and target the opposition's as tax and spend.


----------



## SirRumpole (19 April 2016)

drsmith said:


> It will depend on how well the government can present an economic narrative and target the opposition's as tax and spend.




Maybe it will also depend on how well Labor can target the LNP as spending cutters on health and education in favour of giving the corporates a tax cut.


----------



## Junior (19 April 2016)

Craton said:


> Yep, voting is compulsory or just pay the fine/s and/or consequences:-
> http://www.aec.gov.au/faqs/voting_australia.htm#not-vote
> 
> _What happens if I do not vote?
> ...




Complete this form and tick the first box:  http://www.aec.gov.au/Enrolling_to_vote/pdf/forms/overseas/er022nw-1115.pdf

Your name will be removed from the electoral roll, and it is your responsibility to add your name back onto the roll once you move back to Australia.  They don't need to any evidence or proof that you are overseas.


----------



## sptrawler (19 April 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Maybe it will also depend on how well Labor can target the LNP as spending cutters on health and education in favour of giving the corporates a tax cut.




It also depends on the how the silent majority feel, about more unabated spending on education, with no  improvement in outcomes.
Labor were thrown out because of spiralling debt and a promise of more of the same, they will have to change their song to get any traction.IMO
If Turnbull can convince the public that a bit of pain in the short term, will turn around Australia's fortune, then he will romp it in.
Labor tend to just regurgitate the same old idea of, throw more money at it and hope. That won't cut it today.IMO


----------



## SirRumpole (19 April 2016)

sptrawler said:


> It also depends on the how the silent majority feel, about more unabated spending on education, with no  improvement in outcomes.
> Labor were thrown out because of spiralling debt and a promise of more of the same, they will have to change their song to get any traction.IMO
> If Turnbull can convince the public that a bit of pain in the short term, will turn around Australia's fortune, then he will romp it in.
> Labor tend to just regurgitate the same old idea of, throw more money at it and hope. That won't cut it today.IMO




In theory you may be right, but I've yet to see any evidence that cutting spending on education will improve outcomes. Have you got any ?


----------



## sptrawler (19 April 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> In theory you may be right, but I've yet to see any evidence that cutting spending on education will improve outcomes. Have you got any ?




We have never tried it, spending on education has always climbed, along with pupil free days, school excursions and teachers salaries.
If teachers and schools were tested against their outcomes, as most businesses are, we may see an improvement.

Currently the outcomes, as tested against other countries are falling, we can't say why, unlike when administrators are brought in to a failing company.
IMO the problem with Labors spending on education, it is a bit like asking the trade union, if they would like a pay rise.

It is a bit like saying if we give the Whyalla steel workers a pay rise and more days off, it will make the place more productive.


----------



## Tisme (19 April 2016)

Labor will win if the Libs don't start behaving like governors instead of appending the current campaign to the previous election with the same old bogeymen terror tactics.

The electorate feels denied the promises and urgency made two years ago.


----------



## SirRumpole (19 April 2016)

sptrawler said:


> We have never tried it, spending on education has always climbed, along with pupil free days, school excursions and teachers salaries.
> If teachers and schools were tested against their outcomes, as most businesses are, we may see an improvement.
> 
> Currently the outcomes, as tested against other countries are falling, we can't say why, unlike when administrators are brought in to a failing company.
> ...




I really think that better education outcomes depend on better teachers. That means higher qualifications and standards for teachers which ultimately leads to higher teacher salaries.

Maybe something can be done electronically, delivering classes over the internet and therefore making the best teachers available to a wider audience.

That could lead to an increase in teacher salaries but an overall reduction in costs.

But I'm sure it's a complex issue that requires a greater investment of technology to deliver the classes, so you can't really work out if that approach is more efficient overall.


----------



## PZ99 (19 April 2016)

Didn't take long for Annabel Crabb's witty one liners... 

"A former banker will campaign against the unions and a former unionist will campaign against the banks. There's an uncanny symmetry to Election 2016 right down to the perfectly balanced polls." 

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-04-...l-political-discipline-be-the-decider/7336674


----------



## Ijustnewit (19 April 2016)

I can't wait to see the ar5e end of Turnbull , and I have been a Nationals supporter all my life. I hope and think the Coalition are in for a huge thrashing.


----------



## CanOz (19 April 2016)

Ijustnewit said:


> I can't wait to see the ar5e end of Turnbull , and I have been a Nationals supporter all my life. I hope and think the Coalition are in for a huge thrashing.




Why do you say this? Are you looking forward to a credit rating downgrade and Labor thugs sending the country even further down the toiler?

I'm actually frightened for the country if labor get in. I think the only chance Australia has to reduce the debt of the past if for a liberal government. The problem with this country is no one wants to admit the heap of trouble its in, no one wants to give up 'their entitlements' ... stuff the future, live for the moment

The worst part is, even if they get in, it likely won't be with enough clout to make any difference. The voters here, are like Trump supporters, back woods, poorly educated...


----------



## Tisme (19 April 2016)

CanOz said:


> The worst part is, even if they get in, it likely won't be with enough clout to make any difference. The voters here, are like Trump supporters, back woods, poorly educated...




Based on the current govt?


----------



## sptrawler (19 April 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> I really think that better education outcomes depend on better teachers. That means higher qualifications and standards for teachers which ultimately leads to higher teacher salaries.




Why do primary and secondary school teachers need a better education, aren't they teaching a known subject?

What has changed with the times table or english for that matter, maybe we are confusing interpersonal skills and ability to communicate in an engaging manner, with academic inclination or ability.

Anyway getting off topic, maybe there is a thread regarding falling education standards.


----------



## SirRumpole (19 April 2016)

sptrawler said:


> Why do primary and secondary school teachers need a better education, aren't they teaching a known subject?
> 
> What has changed with the times table or english for that matter, maybe we are confusing interpersonal skills and ability to communicate in an engaging manner, with academic inclination or ability.
> 
> Anyway getting off topic, maybe there is a thread regarding falling education standards.




It's been shown that most secondary maths and science teachers aren't qualified to teach those subjects, so they create unqualified students.


----------



## CanOz (19 April 2016)

Tisme said:


> Based on the current govt?




The current government has no power....wasted votes mate.


----------



## sptrawler (19 April 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> It's been shown that most secondary maths and science teachers aren't qualified to teach those subjects, so they create unqualified students.




Well the teachers should be obtaining some remedial training or be required to do so. 
If you can't do your job does the boss say, oh well i'll give you more money? I don't think so.


----------



## boofhead (19 April 2016)

Sometimes students ask questions relating to the subject but are not 100% spelled out in the text. It's useful to have teachers that can answer the questions where it seems like a reasonable question. Some will have issues admitting they don't know the answer or will give an outdated answer.


----------



## sptrawler (19 April 2016)

boofhead said:


> Sometimes students ask questions relating to the subject but are not 100% spelled out in the text. It's useful to have teachers that can answer the questions where it seems like a reasonable question. Some will have issues admitting they don't know the answer or will give an outdated answer.




Which is the same in any job, a good worker will go and learn the facet of his job, that he has a weakness in if they need to know it.
Be that an electrician, plumber, engineer, teacher, word processor or what ever.

If an electrician has only wired houses, then obtains a job in a large industrial site operating plc's, distributive control systems and complex control ccts, initially  they will find it impossible to carry out their job of fault finding.

It will entail them getting on a steep learning curve and maybe going to night school to broaden their electrical knowledge.

It won't entail the employer saying oh well we know you don't know it, so we will give you more money. 
They are employed as an electrical/instrument tradesman, if they don't understand it, it is up to them to learn it.
It is known as the real world.

Like I said though, it is getting off topic, but did start from talking about education funding.


----------



## Logique (19 April 2016)

PZ99 said:


> Didn't take long for Annabel Crabb's witty one liners...
> "A former banker will campaign against the unions and a former unionist will campaign against the banks. There's an uncanny symmetry to Election 2016 right down to the perfectly balanced polls."
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-04-...l-political-discipline-be-the-decider/7336674



Say what people may of Annabel, she can write. Thoughtful and incisive.


----------



## moXJO (19 April 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> In theory you may be right, but I've yet to see any evidence that cutting spending on education will improve outcomes. Have you got any ?




Education went backwards under labor,  did they spend on education during their time in govt? 
PISA showed we had fallen in maths,  science and other subjects. Not by a little either.


----------



## Macquack (19 April 2016)

CanOz said:


> The voters here, are like Trump supporters, *back woods, poorly educated...*




Golden rule number one, "when in Rome do as the Romans do". That translates to, "don't insult the locals".

You CanOz have the luxury of high tailing it out of here at any time, if you so please. WE DON'T. So a bit of diplomacy is in order.


----------



## drsmith (19 April 2016)

Is Bill Shorten auditioning for PM or a reprise of One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest ?





http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-04-19/abc-politics-blog-april-19/7336698


----------



## wayneL (19 April 2016)

Macquack said:


> Golden rule number one, "when in Rome do as the Romans do". That translates to, "don't insult the locals".
> 
> You CanOz have the luxury of high tailing it out of here at any time, if you so please. WE DON'T. So a bit of diplomacy is in order.




Are locals allowed to insult the locals?

You don't seem to hold back. When in Rome?


----------



## Ijustnewit (19 April 2016)

CanOz said:


> Why do you say this? Are you looking forward to a credit rating downgrade and Labor thugs sending the country even further down the toiler?
> 
> I'm actually frightened for the country if labor get in. I think the only chance Australia has to reduce the debt of the past if for a liberal government. The problem with this country is no one wants to admit the heap of trouble its in, no one wants to give up 'their entitlements' ... stuff the future, live for the moment
> 
> The worst part is, even if they get in, it likely won't be with enough clout to make any difference. The voters here, are like Trump supporters, back woods, poorly educated...




I think Labor has a real plan this time and hopefully  learnt a valuable lesson the Coalition hasn't. Respect the election results and even if your doing poorly don't stab your Captain and leave him / her there to go down with the ship. 
I must admit I don't trust Labor on border protection , but they have a better plan for education and hospitals.        I don't mind coughing up some of my dollars in extra tax to pay for it either. 
Just out of interest did you mean " Back Woods " or " Backwards "  in regard to the poorly educated comment ?


----------



## CanOz (19 April 2016)

Ijustnewit said:


> I think Labor has a real plan this time and hopefully  learnt a valuable lesson the Coalition hasn't. Respect the election results and even if your doing poorly don't stab your Captain and leave him / her there to go down with the ship.
> I must admit I don't trust Labor on border protection , but they have a better plan for education and hospitals.        I don't mind coughing up some of my dollars in extra tax to pay for it either.
> Just out of interest did you mean " Back Woods " or " Backwards "  in regard to the poorly educated comment ?




I agree in that education and health care are important, happy of pay taxes for that, for everyone and especially for those that cannot provide. I'm actually quite socialist. It just seems that Australia is falling for the populist trap, like the US is and Argentina did...

Yes, I said back Woods. Perhaps UNWORLDLY is better. My point is that people don't make an effort to form their own opinions outside the influence of the mainstream media. 

Malcolm Turnbull is a smart, we'll educated man. It's a shame he was Banker, as that has lost its nobility as a profession. He's likely a lawyer as well, but that's what you get in politics. The labor party is full of unionists for God's sake! At least there are a few school teachers in there....but unionists? Please...

It's a funny old world, I'm a Democrat ala Bernie if I were voting in the US, a liberal in Canada but concerned about Trudeaus business skills and a liberal here simply because the alternative is so scary. Oh, I might not be able to vote in this election, but by God I'll be voting in the next one!

Mac quack, how's that for diplomacy?


----------



## drsmith (19 April 2016)

I heard Bill Shorten on the ABC's AM current affairs program this morning.

On it he was referring to their spending policy on education as investment rather than spending. This is typical Labor fluff on economic management. This shallow reference is an attempt to avoid the critical question, value for money.

A very interesting question is going to be Labor's spending as a proportion of GDP. They're clearly intent on spending most, if not all of the proceeds of their announced revenue measures with the  budget repair side the subject of further measures to be announced after the government's budget.

Another wildcard for Labor on which it has been very quiet is it's ETS. A genuine ETS unlike their previous carbon tax would not see the revenue flow to the budget. It would in fact be a negative on GDP growth (increased cost of energy) and hence the budget and that's before another compensation package which will be politically necessary. No wonder Labor's gone very quiet on this.

While it hasn't been showing through to the surface in recent times, Labor remains divided on border protection and while there present driven to maintaining much of the government's policy platform by political necessity, they would slowly wind it back. First to go would be TPV's. Next would be the present offshore processing centres for some form of regional processing centre. I can see them going for an agreement with Indonesia in exchange to abandoning turn backs and $$$$ under pressure from the Labor left and the Greens.

Make no mistake. The people smugglers would be back in business and if the Greens get their way, we'll be flying them in in the 10's of thousands per year.


----------



## drsmith (19 April 2016)

On the policy front,



> Treasurer Scott Morrison will announce at least $120 million in additional funding for corporate regulator ASIC as part of a suite of measures to be unveiled on Wednesday, after he and Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull were challenged by the Coalition backbench on the need to crack down on bank behaviour.
> 
> The announcement will come a day after Mr Turnbull confirmed Australians will go to the polls in a double dissolution election to be held on July 2 and is designed to blunt the political impact of Labor's push for a banks royal commission.
> 
> ...




http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...confirms-july-2-election-20160419-go9ro8.html


----------



## luutzu (19 April 2016)

pixel said:


> The Pollied don't *ask* us. Voting is compulsory.
> They *order* us to the polls at the set date and accept no excuse.




True true.

Ah well, at least there's no knocks in the night.


----------



## Smurf1976 (19 April 2016)

Tisme said:


> Lobbyists who should be banned from doing so:
> 
> LGBT organisation
> Chartered institutions
> ...




I'd add the IPA to the list.


----------



## Smurf1976 (19 April 2016)

At the moment I'm undecided who I'll vote for as I'm not overly impressed with either of the majors.

Liberal - seem to be stuck in the past and hoping that what worked in the past will work in the future which is unlikely. Cutting the CSIRO whilst promoting the virtues of coal - sorry but it's 2016 not 1916.

Labor - seem a bit more progressive but I'm not convinced they're actually ready to govern, particularly with regard to matters of finance, and think they'd benefit from another term in opposition to get their act together.

So I'm undecided at this stage.

If either of the major parties were to propose genuine tax reform then that would likely sway my vote in the absence of any other major policy shift. Such reform necessarily includes cracking down hard on tax evasion and removing the loopholes but I doubt that either side of politics is up to the task.


----------



## sptrawler (19 April 2016)

Smurf1976 said:


> At the moment I'm undecided who I'll vote for as I'm not overly impressed with either of the majors.
> 
> Liberal - seem to be stuck in the past and hoping that what worked in the past will work in the future which is unlikely. Cutting the CSIRO whilst promoting the virtues of coal - sorry but it's 2016 not 1916.
> 
> ...




Well smurph, you just have to accept Australia is a beige Country, we like our lifestyle and whoever convinces the voters that they can maintain it, will win.

Even the bogans, who voted for the loonie senate, will be $hitting themselves now and will vote for a major party.


----------



## noco (19 April 2016)

Smurf1976 said:


> At the moment I'm undecided who I'll vote for as I'm not overly impressed with either of the majors.
> 
> Liberal - seem to be stuck in the past and hoping that what worked in the past will work in the future which is unlikely. Cutting the CSIRO whilst promoting the virtues of coal - sorry but it's 2016 not 1916.
> 
> ...




I think Turnbull is holding everything back until the budget,,,,I have a feeling he may have some sweeteners in it that will swing back the voters......I am not sure how the DD will go ....it could go anyway....I would not like to predict it.
He probably won back a few friends in Adelaide and Perth this week with his announcement on the ship building....Also GDP is up and unemployment is falling.
I fear to think what will happen if Labor gain power......open boarders again.....another carbon dioxide tax...another mining tax......Superannuation tax.....capital gains tax....no more negative gearing ....they will spend big and borrow more.
I think the Liberals might be the lessor of two evils.


----------



## sptrawler (20 April 2016)

noco said:


> I think Turnbull is holding everything back until the budget,,,,I have a feeling he may have some sweeteners in it that will swing back the voters......I am not sure how the DD will go ....it could go anyway....I would not like to predict it.
> He probably won back a few friends in Adelaide and Perth this week with his announcement on the ship building....Also GDP is up and unemployment is falling.
> I fear to think what will happen if Labor gain power......open boarders again.....another carbon dioxide tax...another mining tax......Superannuation tax.....capital gains tax....no more negative gearing ....they will spend big and borrow more.
> I think the Liberals might be the lessor of two evils.




I think this is probably the most important election in a generation, if whoever gets in spirals our debt out of control on unproductive spending, we are in more trouble than Ned Kelly.


----------



## CanOz (20 April 2016)

Smurf1976 said:


> At the moment I'm undecided who I'll vote for as I'm not overly impressed with either of the majors.
> 
> Liberal - seem to be stuck in the past and hoping that what worked in the past will work in the future which is unlikely. Cutting the CSIRO whilst promoting the virtues of coal - sorry but it's 2016 not 1916.
> 
> ...




Good points Smurf....but it comes down to the fact that what needs to be done is too big for the voters to swallow, tax reform with an end result of more revenue....cut cut cut spending, on everything. That's the only way to get out of debt quickly. No one has the stomach for it.


----------



## CanOz (20 April 2016)

sptrawler said:


> I think this is probably the most important election in a generation, if whoever gets in spirals our debt out of control on unproductive spending, we are in more trouble than Ned Kelly.




Exactly...

What Malcolm should do is whatever it takes to get elected with the most power possible and then get at it Straight away. The sad part is, he'd need a four year term, otherwise he'll get thrown out before any reform could take place.

I'm not even sure anyone is capable of convincing their members or constituents that reform is needed


----------



## SirRumpole (20 April 2016)

Both parties have to articulate a path back to recovery , not just wishy washy slogans or rhetoric.

No doubt this will be saved for the election campaign proper, but if people think that the election is a foregone conclusion, just remember Campbell Newman.


----------



## SirRumpole (20 April 2016)

CanOz said:


> Good points Smurf....but it comes down to the fact that what needs to be done is too big for the voters to swallow, tax reform with an end result of more revenue....cut cut cut spending, on everything. That's the only way to get out of debt quickly. No one has the stomach for it.




Neither party has the stomach for a proper Minerals Resource Rent Tax which should have been done decades ago.

Not getting the most that we can out of a non renewable resource is almost a criminal act in my opinion.


----------



## Tisme (20 April 2016)

Howard 2006:



> “I think it is important to keep the challenge of climate change in perspective,.…although I have been accused and continue to be accused of being somewhat of sceptic on the issue, the truth is I’m not that sceptical, I think the weight of scientific evidence suggests that there are significant and damaging growths in the levels of greenhouse gas emissions and that unless we lay the foundation over the years immediately ahead of us to deal with the problem, future generations will face significant penalties and will have cause to criticise our failure to do something substantial in response.”




Howard 2007


> "Being among the first movers on carbon trading in this region will present new opportunities for Australia. And we intend to grasp them."




LOL the Liberal/Labor Party does whatever it takes to get in the big kid's seat even it it means lying to the back of their teeth.


----------



## Tisme (20 April 2016)

This fella was voted in by ~34 ish% of the population at the last election. He was voted leader by the people still warming their bums on seats in Canberra:


----------



## noco (20 April 2016)

sptrawler said:


> I think this is probably the most important election in a generation, if whoever gets in spirals our debt out of control on unproductive spending, we are in more trouble than Ned Kelly.




SP, the best way to convert our country into socialism is to ruin our economy first......Control the media to be able to promote their lies and propaganda, as we have seen with the Labor controlled ABC, and then place the banks, manufacturing, mining and agriculture under central control....Run down our Australian Armed Forces as demonstrated by Rudd/Gillard/Rudd to a low of 1.8 % of GDP, the lowest since 1938 to make us defenseless against internal and external attacks.

*Capitalism and free enterprise is a dirty word under the Fabian (communist) ideology.
*
We have all noted how the CFMEU has tried to destroy the building industry as a result of the TURC.

If you are old enough you would have observed how the unions have destroyed our manufacturing industry over the past 60 years.

The Fabians are wolves in sheep's clothing (that is their motto) and the time it takes to archive their ambitions is not important....They are very subtle in their approach and will always attempt to make the naive believe their way is the best.

SP, I know I will be crucified for this post and will be character assassinated, intimidated and ridiculed in the usual Fabian manner but it does not worry me so long I can get some people to sit up and take notice of what can happen if Labor ever get back into power again...They will bankrupt our nation big time.

The Labor Party of today are not the true Labor Party of yesteryear.


----------



## Tisme (20 April 2016)

This bloke is more concerned with National Anthems, Gay people and republics:


----------



## Tisme (20 April 2016)

Then there's the Don Dunstan of the Liberal Party:


----------



## Logique (20 April 2016)

A video editor's nightmare, but very funny   , I'll be watching that again.


----------



## Tisme (20 April 2016)

I'm told that a previous Primed Minister is filling his gunny sack with some grenades readily for lobbing at the current boss as a thank you for loss of job and benefits.  No guesses when this might occur LOL


----------



## noco (20 April 2016)

Tisme said:


> Howard 2006:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Just be fair with Howard's statement on the carbon dioxide tax....he was prepared to do it if every other country did it...He was not intending to do it alone......You lefties always leave out a key point to look like  a "GOTCHA" and that tactic is wearing very thin.


----------



## SirRumpole (20 April 2016)

noco said:


> Just be fair with Howard's statement on the carbon dioxide tax....he was prepared to do it if every other country did it...He was not intending to do it alone......You lefties always leave out a key point to look like  a "GOTCHA" and that tactic is wearing very thin.




You apparently didn't read the second quote properly

""_Being among the *first movers *on carbon trading in this region will *present new opportunities* for Australia. *And we intend to grasp them.*"_ "

He left it pretty late to be the first.


----------



## noco (20 April 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> You apparently didn't read the second quote properly
> 
> ""_Being among the *first movers *on carbon trading in this region will *present new opportunities* for Australia. *And we intend to grasp them.*"_ "
> 
> He left it pretty late to be the first.




Hmmm..just more cheery picking.....Did Howard mention am absorbent cost of $25 per tonne like the Labor Party introduced and almost killed off every industry......or was it more like China's $1.50 per tonne?...You see there probably was a great difference to what your "GOTCHA" theme is all about.

And just look at what the affect of Labor's  stupid carbon tax did to our economy?...It almost sent Quantas out the back door for one.


----------



## Craton (20 April 2016)

CanOz said:


> The current government has no power....wasted votes mate.




Yeah, kudos to MT and co. for grabbing the bull by its horns via the DD.



Junior said:


> Complete this form and tick the first box:  http://www.aec.gov.au/Enrolling_to_vote/pdf/forms/overseas/er022nw-1115.pdf
> 
> Your name will be removed from the electoral roll, and it is your responsibility to add your name back onto the roll once you move back to Australia.  They don't need to any evidence or proof that you are overseas.




What an easy out. Unless one has a legit reason to use that form it'll be just wasted vote IMHO.



noco said:


> *I think Turnbull is holding everything back until the budget,,,,I have a feeling he may have some sweeteners* in it that will swing back the voters......I am not sure how the DD will go ....it could go anyway....I would not like to predict it.
> He probably won back a few friends in Adelaide and Perth this week with his announcement on the ship building....Also GDP is up and unemployment is falling.
> I fear to think what will happen if Labor gain power......open boarders again.....another carbon dioxide tax...another mining tax......Superannuation tax.....capital gains tax....no more negative gearing ....they will spend big and borrow more.
> I think the Liberals might be the lessor of two evils.




Yep. Talk about pre-election sweetners, what a great time to do it!
As a swinging voter I'm keeping my cards close to my chest (though I do that anyways), the budget will be crunch time for both parties and will certainly help to firm up one's mind either way.



sptrawler said:


> *I think this is probably the most important election in a generation*, if whoever gets in spirals our debt out of control on unproductive spending, we are in more trouble than Ned Kelly.




I tend to agree sp.

Since Kevin '07 Australia seems to have been marking time and not moving forward. The now opposition was hell bound on saving our ailing car manufacturing industry instead of realising that the industry had been defunct for a long time. What happened?

It took the current govt. to do the hard yards.

That stupid Carbon Tax that should have been an ETS from the get go. What a waste the boom times were, the list goes on and that all lead to what, a stymied govt that has kept us treading water.

Good on MT for wanting to challenge the status quo.



CanOz said:


> Exactly...
> 
> What Malcolm should do is whatever it takes to get elected with the most power possible and then get at it Straight away. The sad part is, he'd need a four year term, otherwise he'll get thrown out before any reform could take place.
> 
> I'm not even sure anyone is capable of convincing their members or constituents that reform is needed




I understand what you mean but I don't agree that MT should do whatever it takes to get elected, smacks too much of Gillard's "there will be no Carbon Tax under my govt." line.

Now, no doubt like many fellow Aussies, I've had it up to the back teeth with election promises aka lies. In this world of instant news and the instant public backlash that goes with it, I'd want to be up front as possible.

My reckoning is that we are mostly a conservative bunch that want to be progressive, working towards clear goals and maintaining/improving our standard of living. Back stabbing our 'captain' negates this in my view.

I sure wish that all Australians especially our elected ministers now realise that change for change sake is no change at all. Let the elected leader run his or her full term and let the people's choice have a fair crack at it.

Trouble is, and I think it's been said elsewhere, Australian politics is begging for a true visionary to emerge. We thought we had that with Kev '07, we thought we had that with PUP, boy-o-boy, were we ever wrong.

From my point of view, a 'banker' would run the country a lot better than a 'unionist'. Why?

A bank wants everyone to use their bank.

A union only looks after its members.

Can't wait to find out what the budget holds, see the post budget fall out and the electioning to start up proper.


----------



## SirRumpole (20 April 2016)

noco said:


> Hmmm..just more cheery picking.....Did Howard mention am absorbent cost of $25 per tonne like the Labor Party introduced and almost killed off every industry......or was it more like China's $1.50 per tonne?...You see there probably was a great difference to what your "GOTCHA" theme is all about.
> 
> And just look at what the affect of Labor's  stupid carbon tax did to our economy?...It almost sent Quantas out the back door for one.




Your assessment of the impact of the carbon tax on the economy is exaggerated.

In any case the taxpayer is still paying it via the stupid Direct Action Policy. If you think climate change is cr@p as you have often said here why are you not saying how stupid it is to waste taxpayers money for nothing ?


----------



## Tisme (20 April 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> You apparently didn't read the second quote properly
> 
> ""_Being among the *first movers *on carbon trading in this region will *present new opportunities* for Australia. *And we intend to grasp them.*"_ "
> 
> He left it pretty late to be the first.




It's been gnawing at me for some time ...that what is wrong with that picture feeling when it comes to our Townsville cobber ... he's a Labor Man in denial !!! Yep that's what drives the hysteria.


----------



## Tisme (20 April 2016)

noco said:


> Just be fair with Howard's statement on the carbon dioxide tax....he was prepared to do it if every other country did it...He was not intending to do it alone......You lefties always leave out a key point to look like  a "GOTCHA" and that tactic is wearing very thin.




Hey I'm just putting out there how the LNP is a moving feast which can't quite settle on a main course. I didn't have my hand up Howard's backside making his lips move.


----------



## noco (20 April 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Your assessment of the impact of the carbon tax on the economy is exaggerated.
> 
> In any case the taxpayer is still paying it via the stupid Direct Action Policy. If you think climate change is cr@p as you have often said here why are you not saying how stupid it is to waste taxpayers money for nothing ?




How so is it exaggerated?

That LUG Party carbon dioxide tax ( I mean price) was just another way to ruin our economy....Just compare that price to other countries...New Zealand $10 per tonne...China $1.50 per tonne...Australia $25 per tonne and increasing every year.....The Greens want $200 per tonne.....Which country would you say has the advantage over the other?

You just don't get it do you or perhaps you do and don't want to admit it.


----------



## sptrawler (20 April 2016)

Craton said:


> Can't wait to find out what the budget holds, see the post budget fall out and the electioning to start up proper.




I think you have nailed it, if the Turnbull and Morrison bring down a sensible budget with sensible savings and tax increases, they are just about home.
Labor are still wearing a lot of baggage, from their previous stint.IMO


----------



## noco (20 April 2016)

Tisme said:


> Hey I'm just putting out there how the LNP is a moving feast which can't quite settle on a main course. I didn't have my hand up Howard's backside making his lips move.




May I remind you and the rest of the LUG party under Julia Gillard

"THERE WILL BE NO CARBON TAX UNDER A GOVERNMENT I LEAD"

Enough said thank you.


----------



## SirRumpole (20 April 2016)

sptrawler said:


> I think you have nailed it, if the Turnbull and Morrison bring down a sensible budget with sensible savings and tax increases, they are just about home.
> Labor are still wearing a lot of baggage, from their previous stint.IMO




Baggage ! Sheesh.

After touting themselves as better economic managers the gross debt has increased from $257 billion in 2013 to $406 billion in 2016 and the deficit from $18 billion in 2013 to $38 billion in 2016.

That's a lot of baggage for the LNP to carry.


----------



## noco (20 April 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Baggage ! Sheesh.
> 
> After touting themselves as better economic managers the gross debt has increased from $257 billion in 2013 to $406 billion in 2016 and the deficit from $18 billion in 2013 to $38 billion in 2016.
> 
> That's a lot of baggage for the LNP to carry.




Don't forget the interest that has to paid on Labor's extravaganza...Don't forget some $6 billion the saving Labor announced was then rejected by Labor in the senate....Don't forget the Labor hare brain unfunded schemes like the NDIS and Gonski..A total of $80 billion.......Don't forget the NBN which Labor started and has to been continued and funded by the Liberal Government....The money has to come from some where....How would Labor have funded it?...Don't tell me...we all know that answer don't we Rumpy?

I think if you check your facts, Labor predicted a surplus in 2013, then a deficit of $1.5 Billion then $11 billion and then $18 billion all in a matter of one month  but in actual fact it was more like $40 billion in the red.


Some answers please and don't tell me the carbon dioxide tax that Gillard said we would never have and the mining tax the "GOOSE" introduced that cost more to administer than the revenue received.

My Oh My...you do have a short memory...It is so much easier to place the blame on the Liberals for the situation we find ourselves in......


----------



## SirRumpole (20 April 2016)

noco said:


> My Oh My...you do have a short memory...It is so much easier to place the blame on the Liberals for the situation we find ourselves in......




When you become the government you take the responsibility. The LNP won't do this, all they say is "Labor this, Labor that..." it's pathetic.


----------



## PZ99 (20 April 2016)

Don't forget the NBN isn't funded by the taxpayer. It's funded by investment like all infrastructure projects. It's not on the budget.

As for the Carbon Tax, it was bringing in around $8 billion a year. Now that revenue is gone which is why the Coalition are trying to replace it with numerous other taxes. 

The budget will never run a surplus unless something is done about all the handouts including super, neg gearing, paid maternal leave and stagnant wage growth.


----------



## Smurf1976 (20 April 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> After touting themselves as better economic managers the gross debt has increased from $257 billion in 2013 to $406 billion in 2016 and the deficit from $18 billion in 2013 to $38 billion in 2016.
> 
> That's a lot of baggage for the LNP to carry.




I've noted before in the context of state politics that we've seen different parties (Labor / Liberal) do essentially the same thing at the same time. Labor ran up huge debts in Victoria during the 1980's whilst Liberal did the same thing in Tasmania at the same time.

If someone had lived in Victoria during that time and their only interest in politics was at the state level, then they'd logically see Labor as poor performers when it comes to managing money and that Liberal was better at managing money.

If someone had lived in Tasmania during that time and their only interest in politics was at the state level, then they'd logically see Liberal as poor performers when it comes to managing money and that Labor was better at managing money.

After that period, Labor-Green raised taxes and implemented massive public sector job cuts in Tasmania. Then the Liberals were elected in Victoria and went about fixing that state's finances.

Back to federal politics, it's impossible to say exactly how a Liberal government would have reacted to the GFC since we had Labor in power at the time. I do think it's fair to say however that they wouldn't have carried on business as usual since that's not really an option when external circumstances change. They'd have done something differently but we'll never know exactly what. It's certainly possible however that we'd have ended up in debt as a result, I don't see anything which proves that such an outcome wouldn't have been the case.

Governments are always constrained by external factors. Regardless of which party wins the next election, they'll do things differently if the iron ore, coal and LNG price goes to the moon compared to what they'll do if commodity prices crash and the global economy falls in a heap big time.

To the extent that any political party promises certain things if elected, they're always basing that (assuming it's not an outright lie and that they do intend to actually implement the policy) on underlying assumptions about the economy. Promising $1 billion for whatever is all well and good, but it falls apart real quick if all of a sudden revenue drops. Who is in government might change how they react, but it doesn't change the underlying change of circumstances.

Personally I'd like to see both major parties outline how they'd actually respond to given circumstances. Obviously that would only ever be an indication, nobody can predict the future with precision, but I don't think it's unreasonable to outline what their response would be to, say, a global recession, major natural disaster, request to become involved in a foreign war or things like that. At least then we'd know what the underlying priorities and thought process is. Obviously the details can't be foreseen with accuracy, but I don't think it's unreasonable to say "we'll let the economy take its natural course and stick to our policies" or "we'll borrow if necessary to avoid a recession but won't go above $50 billion" or "we'll only participate in a war if there's broad international support" etc. It won't happen of course, politicians don't think like that, but I like the concept. 

To implement such a thing would simply require formal answers to standard scenarios such that all parties are outlining what they'd do in the event that the same circumstances occurred.

Instead of saying "we'll look at a high speed railway and see if it's viable" I'd rather they simply outlined exactly what would be required in order to make it viable and be committed to building it if those criteria are met. Tell us the underlying process and thoughts rather than assuming an outcome and making uncertain promises that may or may not be workable. Etc.


----------



## Macquack (20 April 2016)

noco said:


> May I remind you and the rest of the LUG party under Julia Gillard
> 
> "THERE WILL BE NO CARBON TAX UNDER A GOVERNMENT I LEAD"
> 
> Enough said thank you.




_May I remind you and the rest of the Noalition party under John Howard

"THERE WILL BE NO GOODS AND SERVICES TAX UNDER A GOVERNMENT I LEAD"_

Enough said thank you.


----------



## sptrawler (20 April 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Baggage ! Sheesh.
> 
> After touting themselves as better economic managers the gross debt has increased from $257 billion in 2013 to $406 billion in 2016 and the deficit from $18 billion in 2013 to $38 billion in 2016.
> 
> That's a lot of baggage for the LNP to carry.




When Labor entered Government, zero debt, when they exited $257 billion,at a time when the mining construction boom was in full swing.
LNP enter Government, $257 billion debt, plus 50,000 boat people sitting around on welfare, plus ridiculous spending programmes with no net worth to the budget bottom line.

It certainly was a lot of baggage, I don't see how normal people would have forgotten it, maybe I'm wrong but I doubt it.

Maybe people are more concerned about gay marriage and another flag, than their financial future, but I doubt it.

Time will tell.


----------



## sptrawler (20 April 2016)

Macquack said:


> _May I remind you and the rest of the Noalition party under John Howard
> 
> "THERE WILL BE NO GOODS AND SERVICES TAX UNDER A GOVERNMENT I LEAD"_
> 
> Enough said thank you.





He did take it to an election, but that obviously counts for nothing, to those who don't think.


----------



## moXJO (20 April 2016)

Liberals guided us through the Asian financial crisis, so they were already tested. Costello was already prepared for the gfc long before it happened  and when that idiot swan denied that such a thing would happen. Rudd grandstanded as the man that saved australia when all he really did was overshoot the mark when our economy was already strong.
Carbon tax was a waste of time shuffling money round in circles.


----------



## sptrawler (20 April 2016)

moXJO said:


> Liberals guided us through the Asian financial crisis, so they were already tested. Costello was already prepared for the gfc long before it happened  and when that idiot swan denied that such a thing would happen. Rudd grandstanded as the man that saved australia when all he really did was overshoot the mark when our economy was already strong.
> Carbon tax was a waste of time shuffling money round in circles.




Another one was the future fund, thank god Costello locked away that $80 billion, to help fund the unfunded Commonwealth sector pension fund. 
Now $118 billion as of 2015, that is saving the Australian taxpayer heaps, but lets just forget that.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_Government_Future_Fund

If Costello hadn't done that, the cost would be blowing out as well. 
When Labor were in they obtained a 40% pay rise remember, imagine the cost to the unfunded pension bottom line?

I didn't see Labor suggest, they should add to the future fund, for the massive increase in financial obligation. No same old, "let someone else look after it".

They really are the Don Quixote party, somewhat like Lancelot in Monty Pythons 'Holy Grail' wedding reception scene, meaning well but thrashing around nonsensically.


----------



## noco (20 April 2016)

Macquack said:


> _May I remind you and the rest of the Noalition party under John Howard
> 
> "THERE WILL BE NO GOODS AND SERVICES TAX UNDER A GOVERNMENT I LEAD"_
> 
> Enough said thank you.





Come on now be fair...You know damn well Howard was talking about the current term of government he was about to enter....Howard went to the next election seeking a mandate from the public and received it so what is your problem?...It is not as though he did behind behind voters back like Gillard did with the carbon tax and the mining tax 

Keating, as treasurer, wanted to introduce the GST and Hawke stopped him for fear a back lash from voters.

When the GST was introduced the hidden sales tax was removed and people then knew exactly what taxes they were paying......Before the GST, the hidden sales tax was increased from 20% to 25% on motor vehicles with the stoke of the pen by Keating....After the GST was introduced the S/T was removed and replaced with just 10% GST.
People did not realize they were paying 33.3 % S/T on stationery.....22% S/T on a can of soft drink...25% on white goods including TV sets.....they were deleted and replaced with a 10% GST.

So what is your problem with the GST?

Before Labor was re-elected to  office under Kim Beasley, they promised to repeal the GST...Why did they break that promise?

Wayne Swan had modelling done to increase the GST while he was treasurer but the Labor Party refused to release their modelling after they lost the election....No guts....no glory.


----------



## moXJO (20 April 2016)

sptrawler said:


> When Labor entered Government, zero debt, when they exited $257 billion,at a time when the mining construction boom was in full swing.
> LNP enter Government, $257 billion debt, plus 50,000 boat people sitting around on welfare, plus ridiculous spending programmes with no net worth to the budget bottom line.
> 
> It certainly was a lot of baggage, I don't see how normal people would have forgotten it, maybe I'm wrong but I doubt it.
> ...




According to rumpy that zero debt under labor was because labor won govt and instantly had zero debt. YAY for labor.

All labor has is gay marriage and more refugees. Their tax policies are going to fizzle and do nothing and they don't have the stones to do anything but populist crap.
Libs currently are showing to not be much better. 
If there was ever a time to pull your finger out and do right by your country,  now would be a good time. Not sure either party will step up.


----------



## sptrawler (20 April 2016)

noco said:


> Come on now be fair...You know damn well Howard was talking about the current term of government he was about to enter....Howard went to the next election seeking a mandate from the public and received it so what is your problem?...It is not as though he did behind behind voters back like Gillard did with the carbon tax and the mining tax
> 
> Keating, as treasurer, wanted to introduce the GST and Hawke stopped him for fear a back lash from voters.
> 
> ...




Noco, the problem is to be a Labor voter, it takes a degree of selective memory.

This is mainly due to the fact, that the last time they were in office, they did nothing worthy of remembering.

Actually most things they did required forgetting, therefore they try to rewrite pre 2007 history, in the hope everyone has forgotten. It really is a bit sad.IMO


----------



## Craton (21 April 2016)

Macquack said:


> _May I remind you and the rest of the Noalition party under John Howard
> 
> "THERE WILL BE NO GOODS AND SERVICES TAX UNDER A GOVERNMENT I LEAD"_
> 
> Enough said thank you.





Seriously?

I remember the night well as it t'was election night and we were playing a gig at the Demo Club. In between sets and having a quiet ale the results flashed across the TV screens. A single cheer went up amongst a group of young 'uns next to me, the lone voice was a female celebrating her 18th. 

Curious at to why she cheered I politely asked her why she was so happy that the Libs got in. She replied that it was her first vote and she voted for Johhny Howard's mob and he'd won, woohoo!

Thinking she might be politically savvy, I asked her if she understood the GST and the ramifications to which she replied, nope just voted for the change. I'm still scratching my head over that one.


----------



## SirRumpole (21 April 2016)

sptrawler said:


> When Labor entered Government, zero debt, when they exited $257 billion,at a time when the mining construction boom was in full swing.
> LNP enter Government, $257 billion debt, plus 50,000 boat people sitting around on welfare, plus ridiculous spending programmes with no net worth to the budget bottom line.
> 
> It certainly was a lot of baggage, I don't see how normal people would have forgotten it, maybe I'm wrong but I doubt it.
> ...




Ah yes, selective memory.

Do the words "Global Financial Crisis" mean anything to you ?

It didn't happen here because of stimulus spending of the Federal Government *as advised by the Treasury*.

If they hadn't done it you would now be blaming Labor for a high unemployment rate and sluggish economy.


----------



## Tisme (21 April 2016)

Just so we are arguing with cleans slates, can those who are pretending to be swinging voters just admit they are LNP tragics trying to distance themselves from the the last two years. There is no way your DNA will allow you to vote otherwise. 

Can we also accept that although the LNP have succeeded in fooling many of the population into thinking Labor is is still the govt, in fact it has been the LNP who have had the tin ear of the speaker of the house. Because of this it is the achievements of the LNP that are the legitimate target for a performance review.

The Labor Party and the Greens are not the board of directors, but still voted for by the shareholders to hold the board to account. Those shareholders have a pecuniary interest in the company's fortunes too, although the board would rather they proxied their voting rights to a friendlier representative.

So let's do some blood letting, but don't try to kid a kidder.


----------



## CanOz (21 April 2016)

Tisme said:


> Just so we are arguing with cleans slates, can those who are pretending to be swinging voters just admit they are LNP tragics trying to distance themselves from the the last two years. There is no way your DNA will allow you to vote otherwise.
> 
> Can we also accept that although the LNP have succeeded in fooling many of the population into thinking Labor is is still the govt, in fact it has been the LNP who have had the tin ear of the speaker of the house. Because of this it is the achievements of the LNP that are the legitimate target for a performance review.
> 
> ...




So let me ask you something Tisme, bit of a litmus test, where do you stand on Uber?


----------



## sptrawler (21 April 2016)

Tisme said:


> Just so we are arguing with cleans slates, can those who are pretending to be swinging voters just admit they are LNP tragics trying to distance themselves from the the last two years. There is no way your DNA will allow you to vote otherwise.
> 
> Can we also accept that although the LNP have succeeded in fooling many of the population into thinking Labor is is still the govt, in fact it has been the LNP who have had the tin ear of the speaker of the house. Because of this it is the achievements of the LNP that are the legitimate target for a performance review.
> 
> ...




There is no way I'm a swing voter at the moment.
Until Labor come up with a direction, they are unelectable. IMO
Their need for a Hawke or Keating has never been greater, than right now.


----------



## sptrawler (21 April 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Ah yes, selective memory.
> 
> Do the words "Global Financial Crisis" mean anything to you ?
> 
> ...




At a time when we were in a massive labour shortage. 
It was the biggest waste of money in our history, not only was it a waste, it was poorly directed and appallingly managed.


----------



## CanOz (21 April 2016)

sptrawler said:


> At a time when we were in a massive labour shortage.
> It was the biggest waste of money in our history, not only was it a waste, it was poorly directed and appallingly managed.




This wasn't stimulus, it was a concerted effort to put the country into debt and buy votes with populist policies. This had the effect of keeping the currency lower than if the stimulus had not been done, which is really why many governments went into debt. Otherwise their currencies would have been too attractive and they would have been priced out of global trade. 

Why the government of Australia would not apply a stimulus package to infrastructure is obvious, it doesn't attract voters.


----------



## noco (21 April 2016)

sptrawler said:


> At a time when we were in a massive labour shortage.
> It was the biggest waste of money in our history, not only was it a waste, it was poorly directed and appallingly managed.




I am absolutely sure, Costello would have done twice as much half the money Labor wasted pink bats, over priced school halls, $900 cheques to every man woman an child living and dead......Those cheques were only a Rudd loan and now we must pay it back somehow.

Yes the good old Labor days 2007/2013 which most Labor people want to sweep under the carpet.....Nothing to see here.


----------



## SirRumpole (21 April 2016)

CanOz said:


> This wasn't stimulus, it was a concerted effort to put the country into debt and buy votes with populist policies. This had the effect of keeping the currency lower than if the stimulus had not been done, which is really why many governments went into debt. Otherwise their currencies would have been too attractive and they would have been priced out of global trade.
> 
> Why the government of Australia would not apply a stimulus package to infrastructure is obvious, it doesn't attract voters.




You would have to be crazy to think that a government would blow a surplus and put us into debt for nothing.

Say whatever else you like about Rudd, but he's not that effing stupid. He was advised to do it by the Treasury and as a result we avoided the cr@p that went on in the US, Japan and Europe.

China certainly helped, but so did local spending and job creation.


----------



## sptrawler (21 April 2016)

CanOz said:


> This wasn't stimulus, it was a concerted effort to put the country into debt and buy votes with populist policies. This had the effect of keeping the currency lower than if the stimulus had not been done, which is really why many governments went into debt. Otherwise their currencies would have been too attractive and they would have been priced out of global trade.
> 
> Why the government of Australia would not apply a stimulus package to infrastructure is obvious, it doesn't attract voters.




IMO that is spot on, CanOz, the current Labor team is a short sight, talentless rabble, concerned more with social engineering than the fiscal health of the Country.


----------



## CanOz (21 April 2016)

sptrawler said:


> IMO that is spot on, CanOz, the current Labor team is a short sight, talentless rabble, concerned more with social engineering than the fiscal health of the Country.




Yup....thats it.


----------



## sptrawler (21 April 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> You would have to be crazy to think that a government would blow a surplus and put us into debt for nothing.
> 
> Say whatever else you like about Rudd, but he's not that effing stupid. He was advised to do it by the Treasury and as a result we avoided the cr@p that went on in the US, Japan and Europe.
> 
> China certainly helped, but so did local spending and job creation.




Don't talk nonsense, if the stimulus and not the mining boom solved all our problems, why don't they just send out cheques now.
It was a egotistical Rudd brain fart, that is now being blamed on treasury, Rudd look at me moment, absolute dick. IMO


----------



## CanOz (21 April 2016)

> Say whatever else you like about Rudd, but he's not that effing stupid. He was advised to do it by the Treasury and as a result we avoided the cr@p that went on in the US, Japan and Europe.




I don't think that the Labor governments 'stimulus' has been credited with saving Australia from the great recession. I think it was two fold effect of boat loads of exports to China, as well as the fact that Australia did not have complex mortgage based derivative exposure and a solid balance sheet. I'm sure McLovin or DS can confirm this, but I've not once heard that fiscal stimulus had much of a part in this. 

How Australia weathered the global financial crisis while Europe failed



> Australia hit the 2008 crisis in rude financial health: debt-free, growing strongly with significant assets and running surplus budgets. It is these robust foundations, along with very favourable terms of trade, which guaranteed that Australia would survive the crisis in very good shape.


----------



## SirRumpole (21 April 2016)

sptrawler said:


> Don't talk nonsense, if the stimulus and not the mining boom solved all our problems, why don't they just send out cheques now.




Because they haven't got the money and it's no longer necessary.



> It was a egotistical Rudd brain fart, that is now being blamed on treasury, Rudd look at me moment, absolute dick. IMO




The stimulus was praised as the correct action by leaders all around the world. The only reason other countries didn't do it was because they were already heavily in debt and didn't have the cash.

You view is probably the most one eyed I've seen on this site and really makes your opinion not worth the LCD's it's written on.


----------



## sptrawler (21 April 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Because they haven't got the money and it's no longer necessary.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




And your blind belief in what you're told, explains to me your stance on the Channel 9 kidnapping fiasco.

So best we avoid debating issues, our moral, fiscal and social beliefs are obviously poles apart.


----------



## SirRumpole (21 April 2016)

sptrawler said:


> And your blind belief in what you're told, explains to me your stance on the Channel 9 kidnapping fiasco.




I said it was a stunt, feel free to take the opposite view.


----------



## Ves (21 April 2016)

CanOz said:


> Why the government of Australia would not apply a stimulus package to infrastructure is obvious, it doesn't attract voters.



Are you arguing that the BER as part of the 2nd stimulus package wasn't infrastructure spending or are you unaware of it?

Whether it's a waste or not aside,  it was still infrastructure based.


----------



## Craton (21 April 2016)

Tisme said:


> *Just so we are arguing with cleans slates, can those who are pretending to be swinging voters just admit they are LNP tragics* trying to distance themselves from the the last two years. There is no way your DNA will allow you to vote otherwise.
> 
> Can we also accept that although the LNP have succeeded in fooling many of the population into thinking Labor is is still the govt, in fact it has been the LNP who have had the tin ear of the speaker of the house. Because of this it is the achievements of the LNP that are the legitimate target for a performance review.
> 
> ...




Tisme, I cast my vote to the party that, in my view, not only has my best interests in their policies but this great country's best interests.

I'm a swinging voter, always have been, always will be and for the record, am not a member of any party unless it's a dinner party.


----------



## CanOz (21 April 2016)

Ves said:


> Are you arguing that the BER as part of the 2nd stimulus package wasn't infrastructure spending or are you unaware of it?
> 
> Whether it's a waste or not aside,  it was still infrastructure based.




No Ves, actually i acknowledge that there was infrastructure spending, but what saved the economy, _at that time_ was actually the exports. 

Also, i was trying to make the point that their policies were populist, such as the Rudd Government giving 3.3% of GDP to households. 

Perhaps i should have re-worded that and said that if they had only spent it on infrastructure and not populist policies Australia would be in even better shape today.


----------



## SirRumpole (21 April 2016)

CanOz said:


> Also, i was trying to make the point that their policies were populist, such as the Rudd Government giving 3.3% of GDP to households.




How do you feel about family tax benefits and baby bonuses introduced by Howard ?

Were they populist ?

FTB's are the second biggest social welfare payment after the Old Age Pension. There is no need for them, if people want children they should be prepared to pay for them, but they are a continuing impost on government revenue.


----------



## Ves (21 April 2016)

CanOz,  for the record,   I think the Rudd stimulus package is more of a red herring in political debate than anything.

It's the kind of thing that ********s from both sides of politics trot out when convenient.

It was undeniably a populist policy because it had to be:   the government of the day,  whoever it was,  had to be seen to be doing something.  Because in crises,  the weakness of the masses perceive that doing nothing is infinitely worse than doing something.

There's no point in arguing about the economic benefit of it,  because it's not measurable.   The actual cost to the government, in the grand scheme of things was minimal.   It didn't ruin the finances.  And it didn't save the economy.  It's neither here nor there.

It's a testament to how bad political coverage is in this country that people still get fooled into thinking this debate is anything nearing important.

If anything it's little more than emotional symbolism.


----------



## CanOz (21 April 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> How do you feel about family tax benefits and baby bonuses introduced by Howard ?
> 
> Were they populist ?
> 
> FTB's are the second biggest social welfare payment after the Old Age Pension. There is no need for them, if people want children they should be prepared to pay for them, but they are a continuing impost on government revenue.




Totally agree, BUT i was here then and i recall that the howard government also wanted to encourage people to have children, thereby increasing the population. Obviously labor had other plans for increasing the population, as we found out.

But i do agree, its populist and would prefer the money spend on Education and Healthcare and encouraging SKILLED immigration.


----------



## CanOz (21 April 2016)

Ves said:


> CanOz,  for the record,   I think the Rudd stimulus package is more of a red herring in political debate than anything.
> 
> It's the kind of thing that ********s from both sides of politics trot out when convenient.
> 
> ...




Fair comment Ves.



> It didn't ruin the finances.




3.3% of GDP may have been more productive elsewhere though.


----------



## moXJO (21 April 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Because they haven't got the money and it's no longer necessary.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




NZ did more with less.
Rudd was an egomaniac. 
Mining boom and that we were already in a good financial position is what really saved us. Stimulus and government bank guarantee is what helped maintain confidence. He went overboard though.


----------



## noco (21 April 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Because they haven't got the money and it's no longer necessary.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




And the LUG party went into office with plenty of cash on hand thanks the good financial management of Howard and Costello...Labor had the cash and squandered it on hare brain schemes.

Perhaps you have a short memory.

Lets hope the majority of voters have a better memory of 2007/2013.


----------



## sptrawler (21 April 2016)

CanOz said:


> Fair comment Ves.
> 
> 
> 
> 3.3% of GDP may have been more productive elsewhere though.




Ves makes fair comment, but I as you, was most annoyed at the ill directed spending.
At the time I commented on the fact that the transcontinental line, could have been duplicated between Kalgoorlie and Perth, where there is a huge bottle neck.
I'm sure there are many glaring infrastucture bottle necks, that could have been addressed with the money, now we would be reaping the benefits in efficiency improvements.
As per usual, it was a poorly thought out, poorly executed, and managed in an incompetent manner.IMO

The pink batts fiasco, school buildings debacle and NBN roll out to business last, IMO were all examples of inept Government.


----------



## Tisme (21 April 2016)

CanOz said:


> So let me ask you something Tisme, bit of a litmus test, where do you stand on Uber?




Well I can't tell you I've used it Brisbane, because it's illegal here. But I can tell you I have never quite gotten over being threatened with harm and the aborted attempt of being turfed out of a taxi two years ago for not agreeing to pay a non metered ride.


I think if every aspect of my businesses have to be licenced, insured, et al then why should I suffer and not make sure others suffer too. Misery loves company and who am I to deny that opportunity for others....so if you are trying to segue into an owner driver argument then my stance is whatever you can't use to play wedge games.

If however you are angling at freedom of enterprise I'm all for it and oddly enough so is Trades Hall with all those money making Civil an Civic built office buildings they own in Canberra and other capital cities. I bet you didn't know Lend Lease (e.g. C&C) were hand in glove with the unions for decades.


----------



## basilio (21 April 2016)

sptrawler said:


> Ves makes fair comment, but I as you, was most annoyed at the ill directed spending.
> At the time I commented on the fact that the transcontinental line, could have been duplicated between Kalgoorlie and Perth, where there is a huge bottle neck.
> I'm sure there are many glaring infrastucture bottle necks, that could have been addressed with the money, now we would be reaping the benefits in efficiency improvements.
> As per usual, it was a poorly thought out, poorly executed, and managed in an incompetent manner.IMO
> ...




Bit of background SP.  Your right to say that one might have directed the infrastructure spending to things like the transcontinental railway. 

But in the circumstances it would have failed to meet the objectives of the  emergency capital spending program.

In the GFC crisis the economy was in freefall  and activity practically at a standstill. To keep the economy ticking over *and in particular the building industry* Treasury had already  planned a number of shovel ready widely distributed useful projects.  There were basically half a dozen designs for preplanned school assembly hall/sports centres.  The idea was that having hundreds of these buildings able to be begin in a short time around the country would provide immediate work for local contracters and workers. It was certainly not perfect and I'm sure there were some stupid glitches on the way. But it happened.

The big railway project could not have been implemented as quickly and would only have benefited one state. That's why it wasn't on the "Do it Now" list.

The insulation program was a good idea along similar lines.  It would provide immediate work and offer long term value to the community in terms of well insulated homes. The trouble was in effective supervision and keeping the cowboys from rorting the system. This also happened in the free Home Audit program which was supposed to help people get quality information to improve the efficiency of their home. A great idea but ruthlessly rorted by the get rich quick merchants.


----------



## Tisme (21 April 2016)

sptrawler said:


> There is no way I'm a swing voter at the moment.
> Until Labor come up with a direction, they are unelectable. IMO
> Their need for a Hawke or Keating has never been greater, than right now.




Yes as much as it grinds me, I think I would vote for a Keating, if only for the clarity of direction and purpose.

It's the new age (detached from core foundations) Laborite clingons like Wong and Plebersek and their preoccupation with gender related politics that worries me. Couldn't care less about unions fighting equally objectionable builders and developers, because you kill one group and another phoenixs in its place.


----------



## Tisme (21 April 2016)

moXJO said:


> NZ did more with less.




yeah they sent their own enmasse over here to live off our borrowings. instead of detention centres where they belonged


----------



## moXJO (21 April 2016)

Tisme said:


> yeah they sent their own enmasse over here to live off our borrowings. instead of detention centres where they belonged




Cuzzie bro mafia was strong across a few industries. They are all moving back now.


----------



## sptrawler (21 April 2016)

basilio said:


> Bit of background SP.  Your right to say that one might have directed the infrastructure spending to things like the transcontinental railway.
> 
> But in the circumstances it would have failed to meet the objectives of the  emergency capital spending program.
> 
> ...




I understand all that Basilio, but our economy wasn't in free fall, as can be seen from history it was climbing due to huge mining infrastructure requirements 2008- 2013.

We were screaming for workers and 457's were being thrown around like confetti, Labor saw the opportunity to throw money on their social agenda, which obviously worked as was shown by Rudd's resurrection, when Gillards fortunes were falling.


----------



## piggybank (21 April 2016)

Is history a good indicator of what will happen in the future. Do I care what happened last month let alone 10 years ago NO. 

Will I vote either the liberals, nationals, labor NO. Because if I did it would be a wasted. Politicians generally speaking these days are in it to get what they can get out of it for themselves, not for you or me in the electorate. How many of them have ever been on the dole, out of work for months or years? I bet 1 would be all but they claim they know what it feels like to be in your situation, bull**** do they. What about all the rorting going on especially in the private education field', how many of the criminals (who have scammed millions of $$$$$'s) are facing going to court, none. But those victims of these scams are the ones who are doing tough. WAKE UP AUSTRALIA before it is too late and give the minor parties a go - and I'm not talking about the likes of Palmer - this Country is going down the gurgler quickly and it will only get quicker if you vote in those mainstream idiots again.


----------



## sptrawler (21 April 2016)

sptrawler said:


> I understand all that Basilio, but our economy wasn't in free fall, as can be seen from history it was climbing due to huge mining infrastructure requirements 2008- 2013.
> 
> We were screaming for workers and 457's were being thrown around like confetti, Labor saw the opportunity to throw money on their social agenda, which obviously worked as was shown by Rudd's resurrection, when Gillards fortunes were falling.




Here is ABS historic link for private capital spending post gfc.

http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@...F27DAB3764F05BEDCA257BD50012B1B0?opendocument

That is pretty well labors term in office, what did we get to show for it?

I'm not without compassion for Labor, they gained power after a long time in opposition, then were hit with the GFC. 
It was a hard game for even a mature Government, but they didn't settle into the role even given a second term, that was highlighted by capitulation to minority parties.

IMO they haven't changed, they want to be re elected, with no obvious decisive platform, that differentiates them from the last sojourn.

Bob Brown achieved more than both Rudd and Gillard, whether it was right or wrong doesn't matter, he was a better politician.

It is just my opinion, but Turnbull may have the charisma but lacks the real world reality. Shorten, has none of anything. Abbott was a real world guy, with zero charisma.

I thought Chris Bowen may have had the credentials, but he has been lacking, as shadow treasurer. he doesn't present an alternative.

Scott Morrison, IMO, is the only one there that seems to have a grasp on reality and doesn't allow the media to bitch slap him. Whether that translates to a good Prime Minister, who knows?

But Australia needs a resolute leader who has a firm commitment and plan for Australia's future, because in a global economy, it won't look anything like our past.IMO

Third world economies will grow as they industrialise, this will be at the decline of our existing economies, unless we can come up with a way of using our unique abilities.

The problem we have at the moment, IMO, we are all sitting back on great living standards, without thinking what will sustain it.

A sign of the times in W.A Is 
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-04-21/drug-raids-carried-out-south-east-perth/7347026
That is just in the south east section of Perth, which is a small percentage of Perths population, most live North of the river.
We really have a problem when most people can afford drugs, unemployed included.

How the hell do we instil a hunger to achieve?


My rant for this week.lol


----------



## Logique (22 April 2016)

Parliament: from ineffectual to malfunctional, via the ballot box.  

It's only what so many have been saying. Oh well, it should ring fence Medicare, and stymie the worst excesses of regressive tax policy. Although superannuation won't necessarily be safe (other than pollies super of course). Assuming the Coalition actually gets over the line that is...



> http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...ll_handed_the_senate_to_labor_and_the_greens/
> *Has Turnbull handed the Senate to Labor and the Greens*? - 22 April 2016
> 
> This analysis suggests the Turnbull Government - by calling a double dissolution election - has thrown away a Senate if could work with to one where the Greens and Greens-leaning Nick Xenophon will call the shots:
> ...


----------



## Tisme (22 April 2016)

Logique said:


> Parliament: from ineffectual to malfunctional, via the ballot box.
> 
> It's only what so many have been saying. Oh well, it should ring fence Medicare, and stymie the worst excesses of regressive tax policy. Although superannuation won't necessarily be safe (other than pollies super of course). Assuming the Coalition actually gets over the line that is...




Noooo you are quoting Bolt, the champion of non thinking man!!


----------



## drsmith (22 April 2016)

Dopy teenage grade Sophie Mirabella strikes again.



> She told a live television audience last night the voters had cost themselves a multimillion upgrade to the Wangaratta Hospital.
> 
> "I had a commitment for a $10 million allocation to the Wangaratta hospital that if elected I was going to announce a week after the election," she said.
> 
> "That is $10m that Wangaratta hasn't had because Cathy got elected."




The government can forget about Indi.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-04-22/mcgowan-refuses-to-deny-being-pushed-by-mirabella/7348326


----------



## SirRumpole (22 April 2016)

drsmith said:


> Dopy teenage grade Sophie Mirabella strikes again.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Mirabella is a dill, which is why she lost last time and will lose again.


----------



## Tisme (22 April 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Mirabella is a dill, which is why she lost last time and will lose again.




Her smudged lipstick always reminded me of Clutch Cargo:


----------



## pixel (22 April 2016)

Tisme said:


> Noooo you are quoting Bolt, the champion of non thinking man!!


----------



## orr (22 April 2016)

Tisme said:


> Her smudged lipstick always reminded me of Clutch Cargo:





Snowshoe is a dead ringer from Mirrabella in a parker.'nuk nuk' 
Sophie has a good claim on a disability allowance, while some people suffer a loss of a sense, sight, hearing or a loss of use of physicality; Sophie is unable to recognise her own humilation. Sad and tradgic but fully deserved. Her campaign I hope to be an unfolding train wreck. 
Who's going to do the promotion of the bear knuckle cage fight rematch with Albrechtson, that'll do wonders for campaingn funding. Mind you... if it's a fight to death and Janet gets up, she'd more than decimate her readership.


----------



## explod (17 May 2016)

Yesterday the latest Morgan poll said,   Lib/nats 47.5 the Alp 52.5,  two party preferred. 

Little on the news media,  suppose everyone waiting for the Murdoch one.


----------



## Tisme (17 May 2016)

orr said:


> Snowshoe is a dead ringer from Mirrabella in a parker.'nuk nuk'
> Sophie has a good claim on a disability allowance, while some people suffer a loss of a sense, sight, hearing or a loss of use of physicality; Sophie is unable to recognise her own humilation. Sad and tradgic but fully deserved. Her campaign I hope to be an unfolding train wreck.
> Who's going to do the promotion of the bear knuckle cage fight rematch with Albrechtson, that'll do wonders for campaingn funding. Mind you... if it's a fight to death and Janet gets up, she'd more than decimate her readership.




See Sophie has the ABC almost onside using the female card.


----------



## Tisme (17 May 2016)

explod said:


> Yesterday the latest Morgan poll said,   Lib/nats 47.5 the Alp 52.5,  two party preferred.
> 
> Little on the news media,  suppose everyone waiting for the Murdoch one.




I think that's the picture back when Abbott got his DCM and the pollsters have been trying to weight the results to give Malcolm a honeymoon. Internal polling is what parties use and both parties know the score.


----------



## ggkfc (17 May 2016)

we all know which side the media are rooting for (given the biased articles you see on a daily basis)


----------



## Tisme (17 May 2016)

ggkfc said:


> we all know which side the media are rooting for (given the biased articles you see on a daily basis)




Malcolm is doing everything so right now, that he isn't making news.


----------



## explod (17 May 2016)

Tisme said:


> Malcolm is doing everything so right now, that he isn't making news.




Yeh,  heaps of smiling blah blah blah,  but no content.   Ok to say what your thrust is,   but how?  What?  When?   But Shorten not much better,  and the obvious bitterness is clear on his face,  not going to co-operate with anyone. 

People on the ground are hurting and certainly not stupid.   Early days but a very confused race.


----------



## noco (17 May 2016)

A letter from Bob Katter to all Australians...

Worth a read.


http://australianvoice.livejournal.com/15113.html
\
*Bob Katter's Second Letter: How Did Australia Get into this Mess? *


----------



## sptrawler (17 May 2016)

noco said:


> A letter from Bob Katter to all Australians...
> 
> Worth a read.
> 
> ...




Yes noco, it doesn't bode well for Australia.


----------



## sptrawler (17 May 2016)

What about Nick Xenophon, complaining about the back packer tax, is he worried about who will rent out his 20 properties?
Probably not, but who knows?
This has to be the weirdest election ever.IMO

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-05-17/xenophon-calls-on-government-to-scrap-backpacker-tax/7423408


----------



## qldfrog (18 May 2016)

noco said:


> A letter from Bob Katter to all Australians...
> 
> Worth a read.
> 
> ...



Hi Noco, we often are on opposing sides in discussion, global warming, etc but thanks a lot for that post, this should be mandatory reading for the electorate with responses if they want to by the clique of ALP/LNP MP before mandatory voting takes place.
Sad actually very sad.We need a Trump and/or a Bernie here too.


----------



## Tisme (18 May 2016)

qldfrog said:


> Hi Noco, we often are on opposing sides in discussion, global warming, etc but thanks a lot for that post, this should be mandatory reading for the electorate with responses if they want to by the clique of ALP/LNP MP before mandatory voting takes place.
> Sad actually very sad.We need a Trump and/or a Bernie here too.




While the article is very appealing, I would suspect there is majors flaws in the facts. Having spent many days of my youth in the shearing shed and knowing why wool sales contracted (causal being nothing to do with Paul Keating) I give you this by example (bear in mind there is a quota system in place):

from "Woolproducers Australia"



> Australia is the world’s number one producer of premium quality fine wool, and is the largest producer of all wools by value and volume. Wool was Australia’s second largest agricultural export in 2006-2007 behind beef, valued at $3.07 billion and making up approximately 11 per cent of total farm exports. Australia ships wool to 52 countries with the biggest being China, which takes around 65 per cent of the national clip.




Other than there being the chance of a lot of non factual rhetoric in the article, it does push a lot of charasmatic buttons.


----------



## SirRumpole (18 May 2016)

Tisme said:


> While the article is very appealing, I would suspect there is majors flaws in the facts. Having spent many days of my youth in the shearing shed and knowing why wool sales contracted (causal being nothing to do with Paul Keating) I give you this by example (bear in mind there is a quota system in place):
> 
> from "Woolproducers Australia"
> 
> ...




There is no doubt that Bob Katter is a patriot, he doesn't like sellouts to foreigners and will stand up for his electorate.

Whether that patriotism blinds him to reality I don't know, but I think we need people like him to keep the b@stards honest.


----------



## Tisme (18 May 2016)

This is doing well on social media...once again Bob Katter:

http://theaimn.com/bob-katter-nails-it-we-are-being-deceived-about-the-fta-with-china/





> Mr KATTER (Kennedy) (17:50): I feel sorry for the members of the government, I really do. They get a brief and they have got to get up and tell us how wonderful the free trade deal is and how it is going to save the world. I was in this place and saw the then Prime Minister stand up and lead the clapping for Andrew Robb on the free trade deal with China and I thought, ‘Maybe I know nothing about politics, but if this is getting you votes I am a Martian astronaut!’ Four weeks later he was thrown out a window.
> 
> You think you are deceiving the people of Australia. You are not. When they hear ‘free trade deal’, they hate you. Understand that, because I might not be an expert in a number of fields, but after 41 years of straight wins in pretty hostile territory, I can tell you that I know a little tiny bit about politics. I sat at the feet of the great master, Bjelke-Petersen. So if you are not interested in governing the country, if you are not interested in helping your country, maybe you might just think about your survival..........


----------



## qldfrog (18 May 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> 1
> Whether that patriotism blinds him to reality I don't know, but I think we need people like him to keep the b@stards honest.



Exactly! Not enough people with courage and convictions in politics;


----------



## drsmith (18 May 2016)

There's now intraday movement on the Sportsbet federal election outcome,

http://www.sportsbet.com.au/betting...deral-politics/outrights?ev_oc_grp_id=2104376

$1.30/$3.50 when I posted this.

Disclaimer: Gamble responsibly or better still, don't gamble at all.


----------



## luutzu (18 May 2016)

qldfrog said:


> Exactly! Not enough people with courage and convictions in politics;




Maybe they all have courage and convictions, just not the right ones, can't be the right one.


----------



## noco (18 May 2016)

drsmith said:


> There's now intraday movement on the Sportsbet federal election outcome,
> 
> http://www.sportsbet.com.au/betting...deral-politics/outrights?ev_oc_grp_id=2104376
> 
> ...




Doc, that betting seems to defy the polls.


----------



## ggkfc (19 May 2016)

Labour to remove freeze on Medicare rebates!


----------



## Tisme (19 May 2016)

ggkfc said:


> Labour to remove freeze on Medicare rebates!




Maybe a Royal Commission into the Aust Medical Association = Union ?


----------



## luutzu (19 May 2016)

Tisme said:


> Maybe a Royal Commission into the Aust Medical Association = Union ?




Speaking of which... aren't those Business Councils also unions? 

Guess not all unions are equal.


----------



## Bob (19 May 2016)

I wish I had wrote this......

All I hear about lately, is how the first home buyers in Australia cannot afford to buy their first home due to house prices being unaffordable.

I have to say, I am sick of all the whining. This sense of self-entitlement is simply sickening. Apparently, things are so much tougher than they were ten, twenty and thirty years ago.

But were they?

When I first purchased my home I was 19 – so that makes me a Gen X. Yes, I was 19 and yes, during high school I only earnt $25 per week in a part time job. When I left school, I was working 6 days a week, taking home $375 per week. That’s an income of $18,000 per annum.

But, I managed to save 20% of the purchase price of my home, plus stamp duty. I purchased it for $112,000, meaning I needed a $30k deposit. We didn’t have first home owners grants back then so we had to pay the full stamp duty. Earning $375 per week made this difficult, so to help myself get there, I bought and sold many second hand cars and made a few hundred dollars from each sale. It was essentially a second job.

There weren’t the loan products available like there are today, where you can have just a 5% deposit. Mum and Dad couldn’t borrow against the equity in their home to give me a deposit either. We had to save. Yes, it’s a nasty word.

Now when you look at the figures, $30k was what I needed. Today, a first home buyer who wants to buy a brand new, 2 bedroom unit now for $500k only needs a 5% deposit and no stamp duty, therefore only needs around $27k and I bet your income is at least three times what I was earning. But I feel your pain, it must be difficult.

I only lived in that first property for around 6 months then I rented it out. And I didn’t own another home again until I was 34. I chose to invest in property first to make money, so that I could afford to buy a home.

I drove a 1970 Toyota Corolla, which I bought for $900. You didn’t see me driving around in a fancy new car.

Now, when I purchased my first property, I bought what I could afford. I know that this will be hard for the Millennials to understand, but we all can’t always have what we want.

So, I purchased a tiny 1 bedroom unit with a car space. Sure I wanted a three bedroom house, but my budget couldn’t stretch that far. Now those same 1 bedroom units in Cronulla and Caringbah are still affordable at under $400k. But no, you couldn’t settle for that. What would our friends think about us if we lived “there”?

When I talk to my parents about their first home, they tell me how they used milk crates with a cushion as a lounge for 4 years before they could afford a proper lounge. And Dad worked two jobs to make that happen.

Yes, two jobs. On no, we can’t work two jobs, we would be tired.

We didn’t drink $4 coffees everyday, we didn’t have Foxtel, Netflix, Spotify. Our mobile phones lasted for many years. We had one TV in our house, not 4. We didn’t have lavish weddings for $60k, nor travel overseas for 12 months on a Gap Year, partying 24/7 whilst deciding what we wanted to do in life.

We didn’t get our cars washed for us nor get our shirts pressed. I didn’t have a credit card until I was 25 and even then the limit was $500.

Why do you need mobile phone plans with unlimited phone calls and massive data allowances, when you can log onto free Wifi almost everywhere? Like numerous other countries do?

And we certainly didn’t have children if we couldn’t afford to do so…

I hate to think what the next generation will be like if they are being brought up in this environment already.

So the latest political bashing has been on negative gearing. And how it only benefits the rich, and is the reason First home buyers have been priced out the market.. Well, it’s not benefiting the rich (or should I say the average income earner) very much. The latest ATO stats, that are two years old now, state that the negative gearing costs to the budget dropped by over 50% since the previous year. So what is all the fuss about?

That argument would have been relevant when interest rates were at 8%+. However, I see it as political grandstanding. I can tell you that if they drop negative gearing, then be prepared for rents to increase. Which is exactly what happened when they did this in the 90’s.

Now, I have barked enough, so what’s the solution?
◾Stay at home and don’t rent a place you cannot afford, save for a deposit until you are ready to really move out.
◾Spend a year or two saving, that means, cutting back on all the things that you don’t need. All of those subscriptions are eating away at the deposit you could be achieving.
◾Start having the conversation with Mum and Dad about how they can help… Even their equity can be a huge leg up.
◾Adjust your expectations, if you cant afford to live in the same suburb as your parents, look outside the box.. you will be okay if you’re not in the same suburb guys…
◾Don’t put a ring on it, unless you have a deposit for a home… and certainly don’t spend money on a wedding that you couldn’t afford to fund yourself. Imagine if you had a $30,000 or $60,000 gift from your parents instead of a Wedding? That’s a massive jump into the market..
◾Get your mates involved too, so you can still hang out and socialize, but perhaps not at the bar with the best view drinking $15 drinks, again that you cannot afford.

I honestly believe Millennials need to go without a few things. Get back to basics, learn to budget, learn to save and know that you can’t always have the property you want right now..

If you can’t afford it, then buy what and where you can afford. Even if that means you need to own an investment property or two first, then use that as a stepping stone into your first home.

Millennials, this is life – where you don’t get a participation trophy.


----------



## SirRumpole (19 May 2016)

Bob said:


> I wish I had wrote this......
> 
> All I hear about lately, is how the first home buyers in Australia cannot afford to buy their first home due to house prices being unaffordable.
> 
> ...




Bob, a simple reference to the price of housing compared to income indicates that as far as housing affordability is concerned, yes things are a lot tougher now.

Investors driving up prices is a big part of it, also developers building the biggest houses they can to maximise profits and a large increase in population .

Of course, various interests will say that it's one of those factors to the exclusion of all others, but they all play a part.



> In 1975, the median Sydney house price was $33,960, compared to the median household Income of $8273 – a multiple of 4.1, according to the LF Economics report. Prices remained fairly constant as a multiple of incomes until 1996 when lower interest rates sparked a phenomenal rise in home prices.
> 
> Economist Saul Eslake warns of growing social harm being caused by rising property prices.
> 
> ...


----------



## Bob (19 May 2016)

Investors driving up prices is a big part of it, also developers building the biggest houses they can to maximise profits and a large increase in population .



Investors creating jobs, paying Capital Gains Tax, Stamp duty and income tax on the rental returns must be a big concern to the government.  The same investors that delay gratification and not rely on a pension provided by the government must also get up the Government's nose. 

Bob


----------



## drsmith (19 May 2016)

noco said:


> Doc, that betting seems to defy the polls.



The Sportsbet odds seem to correspond more closely to the following which still has the Coalition in front on a seat basis,

http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/2016/05/19/bludgertrack-50-1-49-9-labor-2/

A big issue for the federal coalition there is WA where the political situation for the state Liberal government has gone from bad to worse.


----------



## SirRumpole (19 May 2016)

Bob said:


> Investors driving up prices is a big part of it, also developers building the biggest houses they can to maximise profits and a large increase in population .
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Well Bob I'd suggest that a lot of those investors probably claim a pension as well after they haven't paid full CGT thanks to Howard.


And the fact is that they are making a LOSS on their investment and the taxpayer is subsidising it. Give owner occupiers a break, NG is a rort as the majority of economists agree.


----------



## Bob (19 May 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Well Bob I'd suggest that a lot of those investors probably claim a pension as well after they haven't paid full CGT thanks to Howard.
> 
> 
> And the fact is that they are making a LOSS on their investment and the taxpayer is subsidising it. Give owner occupiers a break, NG is a rort as the majority of economists agree.




Yes, probably some investors would be claiming a part pension depending on the number of properties they own.  I think we all know that it is in favour of the government otherwise they wouldn't do it.  
Politicians take the road of least resistance and the CGT was halved to benefit the economy.

This is all a mute point as negative gearing is here to stay, and with interest rates so low (and possibly going down again) there is not really a great advantage to an investor to utilise it.  No sophisticated investor would invest for the tax benefits but would only consider the (taxable) capital tax.  I am 65 years of age and have seen the damage done here in Sydney when it was taken out in the 80s and reinstated later.  

No one has mentioned the gearing on shares...they must be OK ???  What jobs do they create? 

Bob


----------



## noco (19 May 2016)

Bob said:


> I wish I had wrote this......
> 
> All I hear about lately, is how the first home buyers in Australia cannot afford to buy their first home due to house prices being unaffordable.
> 
> ...




A great piece of history of years gone by.

I can relate to your experience but I will go back further.

I bought  a block of land in Brisbane in 1951 for 300 pounds ($600)

I had a 3 bedroom house built on it for 2,240 pounds ($4,480) in 1953 when I became married....My wife and I had to raise 750 pounds ($1500) deposit with the Commonwealth bank... At the time I was a plumbing supervisor on $46 per week and drove a 1935 Chev coupe...My wife and I sold lots of personal effects  from a 303 rifle and push bike  and other stuff to gain the deposit...Out repayments were 9 pounds per month over 25 years.

The cost of the house was drastically reduced to suit out pocket.....We illuminated the tiled roof for a corrugated iron roof of which I did my self......We could not afford a hot water system so we boiled up the gas copper each night and carted it up to the bathroom with buckets for 9 months......We moved into the house with no kitchen ...it consisted of a sink propped up with two pieces of 2" x 1 " pine timber.....The gas stove sat on a wooden box......We had to borrow an old cane table from my mother but we only had one chair...I sat on a homemade saw stool.....My dining room and lounge was my temporary work shop with a circular saw for building the kitchen cupboards .

The inside of the house was unpainted and the floor was just bare timber......We sleep on the floor for 6 months until I made the bed ends to take the mattress.....Things were so tight I could not afford a push mower for 3 pounds so I bought a scythe for 17 shillings and 6 pence.

I wonder if today young people would be prepared to go through the same sacrifice?

But further down the track in 1970 I had a 12 months stint in real estate of which the life style I enjoyed immensely....It was a hard task as the banks had no money to lend for housing and all loans went through a building society......We sales people had to qualify a buyer before before we left the office.....A buyer would enquirer about a 3 bedroom brick veneer home with a market price of $ 15,000...To qualify, the buyer would need a 25% deposit, $400 for legal fees and stamp duty and repayments of nor more than 25% of a man's gross salary.....the wife's wage was never taken into consideration....In many cases, due to lack of deposit and ability to pay back,  we would have to restrict their viewing of houses in the $8,000 range.

So yes, things are a lot different today.


----------



## drsmith (19 May 2016)

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-05-19/afp-raids-labor-party-offices-in-melbourne/7430346

The linked video is what's of interest in the above.  I'd suggest Mathias Cormann got precisely the reaction from Tony Burke he was baiting for.


----------



## noco (19 May 2016)

drsmith said:


> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-05-19/afp-raids-labor-party-offices-in-melbourne/7430346
> 
> The linked video is what's of interest in the above.  I'd suggest Mathias Cormann got precisely the reaction from Tony Burke he was baiting for.




.Tony Burke sure got a bit agro.


----------



## drsmith (19 May 2016)

noco said:


> .Tony Burke sure got a bit agro.



His comment about how Labor would treat people in detention centres very differently is what was interesting and will be another headache for Bill Shorten in this policy area.


----------



## SirRumpole (20 May 2016)

drsmith said:


> His comment about how Labor would treat people in detention centres very differently is what was interesting and will be another headache for Bill Shorten in this policy area.




It's a headache to treat people in a civilised manner rather than having them set themselves on fire ?

A lot of people are coming to the opinion that there needs to be more humanity in the way Nauru and Mannus are run while maintaining the offshore processing and third country settlement principles.

Time will tell how the refugee problem will play out in the election, but imho sympathies are swinging somewhat to a more humane approach.

Either way I suspect that both parties will want to stay quiet. Labor over fear of a scare campaign and the LNP over allegations of barbarity in the camps.

We will see.


----------



## Bob (20 May 2016)

noco said:


> A great piece of history of years gone by.
> 
> I can relate to your experience but I will go back further.
> 
> ...




Well done Noco,

This generation of entitlement wouldn't go without a cafÃ© Latte let alone be inconvenienced.  They are creating the society they deserve.  I served 40 years in the Navy, my wife was serving in the Army at that time and had to discharge due to "being married".  We still managed to scrap by on one wage, put children through Catholic schools and put some aside for investment so that I don't have to go on the government boob in retirement.  
It is hard to like this younger generation, in fact, I don't think they like each other

Bob


----------



## Tisme (20 May 2016)

The AFP raid on Conroy is rather interesting. 

Given the AFP must seek permission from the Speaker or President of the respective houses to enter the premises, it would be logical that Conroy would keep his powder dry onsite, rather than in an electoral office. I recall the AFP had to seek permission to look into Mal Brough's computer in regard to Peter Slipper's diary ....... I don't know if they got it.

Doesn't Conroy get to see everything as part of his committee seat?


----------



## explod (20 May 2016)

Tisme said:


> The AFP raid on Conroy is rather interesting.
> 
> Given the AFP must seek permission from the Speaker or President of the respective houses to enter the premises, it would be logical that Conroy would keep his powder dry onsite, rather than in an electoral office. I recall the AFP had to seek permission to look into Mal Brough's computer in regard to Peter Slipper's diary ....... I don't know if they got it.
> 
> Doesn't Conroy get to see everything as part of his committee seat?




Regardless of what comes out,  the news items up front today really smell and Christopher Pynes vehemence convinces me the Libs are up to thier necks in this. 

Looks like next morgan poll will be 45 lib 55 alp,  two party preferred.


----------



## noco (20 May 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> It's a headache to treat people in a civilised manner rather than having them set themselves on fire ?
> 
> A lot of people are coming to the opinion that *there needs to be more humanity* in the way Nauru and Mannus are run while maintaining the offshore processing and third country settlement principles.
> 
> ...




To the best of my knowledge they are treated well with humanity and the allegations of barbarity is no less coming from SHY.

They have been told they will not be settled in Australia....They have been offered citizenship in PNG or  the old Burma or the alternative of returning to their homeland...Their fate is really in their own hands......

Where are the ones on Manus Island originally from......Does anyone know?......If you don't know where they are from, how do you know they are genuine refugees fleeing persecution.


----------



## Tisme (20 May 2016)

explod said:


> Regardless of what comes out,  the news items up front today really smell and Christopher Pynes vehemence convinces me the Libs are up to thier necks in this.
> 
> Looks like next morgan poll will be 45 lib 55 alp,  two party preferred.




I would have thought the govt would know that it would put a stink around them. Perhaps it's a sting from a third party or ALP themselves?


----------



## SirRumpole (20 May 2016)

noco said:


> To the best of my knowledge they are treated well with humanity and the allegations of barbarity is no less coming from SHY.
> 
> They have been told they will not be settled in Australia....They have been offered citizenship in PNG or  the old Burma or the alternative of returning to their homeland...Their fate is really in their own hands......
> 
> Where are the ones on Manus Island originally from......Does anyone know?......If you don't know where they are from, how do you know they are genuine refugees fleeing persecution.




A lot of them might be economic migrants for all I know, but quite a few have been investigated and classified as genuine refugees.

What should happen to them if no other country will take them ?


----------



## Tisme (20 May 2016)

Tisme said:


> The AFP raid on Conroy is rather interesting.
> 
> Given the AFP must seek permission from the Speaker or President of the respective houses to enter the premises, it would be logical that Conroy would keep his powder dry onsite, rather than in an electoral office. I recall the AFP had to seek permission to look into Mal Brough's computer in regard to Peter Slipper's diary ....... I don't know if they got it.
> 
> Doesn't Conroy get to see everything as part of his committee seat?




It seems my crystal ball is working and parliamentary privilege is in play ...


Abbott must be loving this


----------



## noco (20 May 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> A lot of them might be economic migrants for all I know, but quite a few have been investigated and classified as genuine refugees.
> 
> What should happen to them if no other country will take them ?




Do you know the what would be the percentage of "GENUINE REFUGEES"?

But their are countries who will take them.

As I said before they all have a choice...their future lies in their own hands....If they don't want to settle in PNG or Burma, then they should go back to where they come from and apply for immigration in the correct way.


----------



## noco (20 May 2016)

The hypocrisy of some of our politicians is unbelievable. 

I admit I have a very strong political POV and it worries me no end how Australia and the rest of world has changed over the years and it is not a pretty site in my eyes....We have on one hand, Islam intent on dominating the world, Communism is still very much alive with the same intentions and the Green movement headed by the UN intent on World government......All are out to destroy capitalism and the free world....We have so many politicians who are living the life of a capitalist but who want to live in a  socialist world.....David Feeny and his wife Liberty Sanger and Richard Di Natalie are typical examples.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/fed...r/news-story/8db8e034b37da64d31bd27a43e508f78

*Greens leader Richard Di Natale was last night embroiled in a spat over property interests and payment of a live-in nanny, after it emerged he failed to properly *declare a farm and paid an au pair as little as $6 an hour.

As Labor frontbencher David Feeney fends off attacks about his real estate and other holdings, Senator Di Natale last night *defended wrongly declaring his *interest in the Twin Gums farm he owns with his wife in the Otway Ranges for 15 months when he was first elected to parliament.

Senator Di Natale’s Greens *colleague Adam Bandt suggested Mr Feeney should resign.

“A NSW premier had to resign after forgetting about a bottle of wine. What happens to someone who forgets to declare a $2.3 million house?” Mr Bandt said.

With the Greens promising to legislate to entrench weekend penalty rates, Senator Di Natale was forced to explain why he paid several au pairs as little as $150 a week plus board and food.

Mr Feeney, the opposition assistant defence spokesman, faced new questions as corporate documents show several shareholdings held by his lawyer wife Liberty Sanger that are not declared on his entry in the register of members’ interests. He has begun taking fire from within his own ranks with former Labor Queensland premier Peter Beattie declaring he should “hang his head in shame”.

The controversy over the “forgotten” negatively geared $2.3m house in Melbourne’s Northcote and an undeclared unit in Canberra bought by his wife, has now spread to the couple’s use of a family trust and declarations of her shareholdings and property assets.

Documents suggest the Maurice Blackburn shares the couple has declared, and the Canberra unit that they did not declare, are held in a trust, raising fresh queries over why he may have treated disclosure differently in each case.

Bill Shorten said Mr Feeney’s nondisclosure of the unit was within the rules. It was not mentioned in his disclosure of interests but it was held through a family trust which was declared. As Mr Feeney ignored questions over his property holdings, the Coalition accused him of hypocrisy for railing against negative gearing.

While Senator Di Natale *declared the farm as a business and source of income in his first declaration of interests in 2011, he failed to declare the property as a real *estate interest as required under Senate rules. A spokesman for Senator Di Natale said that the property was declared as owned by his wife, Lucy Quarterman, but she did not take full ownership of the farm until October 2012.

“Richard declared the farm in two different ways from the *moment he was elected,” he said.

An advertisement posted by Ms Quarterman offered an au pair a $150-a-week wage, with board and food included. “We live a sustainable lifestyle with water tanks and solar power. Dad works away a lot during the week so I am looking for an extra pair of hands around the place to entertain the lads and help with cooking and general domestic *duties,” it said. “We have self-contained accommodation with own bathroom, kitchen, TV & stereo. A car is also available. Will take *couples but weekly wage remains the same.”

His spokesman said “au pairs were all paid above minimum wage and in accordance with the law.”

Mr Feeney is also under fire over the revelations of the Canberra unit, the fourth property in his portfolio, and his practice of staying there and claiming the $270-a-night travel allowance during parliamentary sitting weeks.

The jewel in the couple’s *property crown is their opulent East Melbourne apartment overlooking Fitzroy Gardens, which was bought for $2.85m in 2010. The block is one of the most *valuable apartment complexes in Melbourne, with the penthouse, which has views of the CBD, *selling for $18m in 2008.

The Opposition Leader, who at various time has been personally close to Mr Feeney, backed the frontbencher over his lack of *disclosure of the Canberra unit, which was bought by Ms Sanger in 2008 and is owned by the Liberty Sanger Family Trust.

“I understand, according to his wife’s declarations, today that has all been done according to the rules and has been adhered to the rules,’’ Mr Shorten said.

He said claiming travel allowance for staying at a family member’s property was “not a practice that I do myself” but he understood it was “a practice amongst members of parliament”.

“I think (the Prime Minister) Mr Turnbull has been in very similar circumstances in the past too,” Mr Shorten said.

Mr Feeney, Ms Sanger and the ALP declined to answer questions yesterday, but corporate documents show that Ms Sanger, a leading lawyer and principal with Maurice Blackburn, is not a direct beneficiary of her Maurice Blackburn shares, suggesting they are held in a trust. Her shareholding in the big plaintiff law firm was *declared by Mr Feeney.

The Canberra property, which the MP has confirmed is owned by the trust, was not declared, raising the prospect he has applied a different standard to the two assets.

Documents also show that Ms Sanger is a shareholder and director of two undeclared companies, Zabulon Disbursements and *Zabulon Pty Ltd, although these are entities associated with Maurice Blackburn. None of these shareholdings was declared on Mr Feeney’s entry on the register of interests despite guidelines urging MPs to disclose shareholdings of their spouses.

Ms Sanger is also listed as a *director of another company, MBC Insurance, which is not listed on the register but is wholly owned by Maurice Blackburn.

The 42-year-old lawyer is scheduled to make a regular *appearance as a public affairs commentator on ABC radio’s Jon Faine program this morning in a segment dissecting the political news of the week. As of last night, it was understood she intended *appearing on the show as planned, although she declined to clarify that.

Along with the Maurice Blackburn shares, and the trust, Mr Feeney’s entry also lists the investment property in the western Melbourne suburb of Seddon that he and Ms Sanger brought from now disgraced Health Services Union figures Jeff and Kathy Jackson.

He blames a “maelstrom of events” for failing to declare the negatively geared home in Northcote and pledged to update the register after the election.

He insists his lack of disclosure of the Canberra unit is within the guidelines telling The Australian on Wednesday night: “This property has been appropriately *recorded on the register of member’s interests and all travel *entitlements have been claimed in accordance with the rules and *regulations that govern the *system.”

The negative publicity around Mr Feeney’s treatment of disclosure of his and his wife’s property portfolio comes just as he is in the midst of a desperate fight to save his inner Melbourne seat from an onslaught from the Greens.*

And yes I will also admit there are very few "DARLINGS" in the conservative side of politics...

But we do have a choice of the lesser of two evils or is it now 3?
.


----------



## SirRumpole (20 May 2016)

When it comes to personal vs public interests all politicians are the same unfortunately.

You show me one Labor hypocrite and I'll show you a LNP hypocrite.

But, the fact that Labor have some negative gearers in their ranks and still want to reform the system is a tick in their favour imo.


----------



## noco (20 May 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> When it comes to personal vs public interests all politicians are the same unfortunately.
> 
> You show me one Labor hypocrite and I'll show you a LNP hypocrite.
> 
> But, the fact that Labor have some negative gearers in their ranks and still want to reform the system is a tick in their favour imo.




The point being made is that Feeny and Di Natalie are the hypocrites on the socialist side of politics.

Feeny was siding with Labor policy on negative gearing when he was happy to negative gear a $2.3 million property and neglected to declare it...

On the other hand we have Di Natalie spruking a fair deal for workers and yet  he was quiet happy to under pay a nanny couple on his farm....It is similar to Shorten saying he looks after workers and then short changes them in Chiquita and Clean Event.


----------



## SirRumpole (20 May 2016)

noco said:


> The point being made is that Feeny and Di Natalie are the hypocrites on the socialist side of politics.
> 
> Feeny was siding with Labor policy on negative gearing when he was happy to negative gear a $2.3 million property and neglected to declare it...
> 
> On the other hand we have Di Natalie spruking a fair deal for workers and yet  he was quiet happy to under pay a nanny couple on his farm....It is similar to Shorten saying he looks after workers and then short changes them in Chiquita and Clean Event.




Feeney certainly made a blunder. Hypocritical ? Possibly, but the fact is Labor still wants to change the system (while leaving current arrangements in place).

De Natalie denies he underpaid anyone, so it's a case of believe who you want.


----------



## noco (20 May 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Feeney certainly made a blunder. Hypocritical ? Possibly, but the fact is Labor still wants to change the system (while leaving current arrangements in place).
> 
> De Natalie denies he underpaid anyone, so it's a case of believe who you want.




Of course he would deny it...What else did you expect.....Someone has spilled the beans on him and it was most likely the recipients.

So what is your take on Billy boy, Chiquita and Clean Event?


----------



## SirRumpole (20 May 2016)

noco said:


> So what is your take on Billy boy, Chiquita and Clean Event?




Ancient history, don't care really.


----------



## noco (20 May 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Ancient history, don't care really.




*GOTCHA*


----------



## SirRumpole (20 May 2016)

noco said:


> *GOTCHA*




Really ? Why pray tell ?

Billy boy has had more scrutiny in your biased RC than Arfur (Daly) Sinodinos has had about his shady dealings and the RC didn't lay a glove on Shorten.

So all this guff about his union days is blowing in the wind, it's out there, people know all about it and they don't particularly care.

Turnbull and the Panama Papers, Sinodinos and possibly corrupt donations are sitting in a corner starting to smell and there is no RC to clear their names before the election. Tough luck for them.


----------



## overhang (20 May 2016)

noco said:


> The point being made is that Feeny and Di Natalie are the hypocrites on the socialist side of politics.
> 
> Feeny was siding with Labor policy on negative gearing when he was happy to negative gear a $2.3 million property and neglected to declare it...
> 
> On the other hand we have Di Natalie spruking a fair deal for workers and yet  he was quiet happy to under pay a nanny couple on his farm....It is similar to Shorten saying he looks after workers and then short changes them in Chiquita and Clean Event.




No excuse for Feeny, he should resign as even if he did somehow forget then that is the sort of incompetence that shouldn't be representing constituents.  

Di Natalie seems to be a media beat up.  I do actually trust him more than the media and he alleges that he paid them $500 for 25 hours work which also included rent, meals and sundries, the media left out this.


----------



## noco (20 May 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Really ? Why pray tell ?
> 
> Billy boy has had more scrutiny in your biased RC than Arfur (Daly) Sinodinos has had about his shady dealings and the RC didn't lay a glove on Shorten.
> 
> ...




Firstly, we know about Bill Shorten and how he diddled  workers at Chiquita and Clean Event but you seem to have trouble in acknowledging  it.

To the best of my knowledge Sinodinos was cleared of any wrong doing unless you know something I don't.

What do you have on Turnbull and the Panama papers or is that just wishful thinking in your part...HOPING....It seems to have died of natural death....If there was something on Turnbull, don't you think the left wing controlled ABC media would have been all over it?


----------



## SirRumpole (20 May 2016)

noco said:


> Firstly, we know about Bill Shorten and how he diddled  workers at Chiquita and Clean Event but you seem to have trouble in acknowledging  it.
> 
> To the best of my knowledge Sinodinos was cleared of any wrong doing unless you know something I don't.




Cleared by who ?

He refused to show up at a Senate committee to answer questions. I don't consider that means he's "cleared" of anything.


----------



## noco (20 May 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Cleared by who ?
> 
> He refused to show up at a Senate committee to answer questions. I don't consider that means he's "cleared" of anything.




So what have you got on him and why didn't he show up at the Senate committee......If he was under investigation as you say, there would be no point in being question by a senate committee.

I think you clasping at straws ATM.


----------



## Tisme (21 May 2016)

noco said:


> So what have you got on him and why didn't he show up at the Senate committee......If he was under investigation as you say, there would be no point in being question by a senate committee.
> 
> I think you clasping at straws ATM.




http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary...islative_provisions/Interim_Report/report.pdf


----------



## Tisme (21 May 2016)

I'm guessing we all prefer our comfort blankets over statistics. The odd thing is when it comes to investing money we tend to be more objective with our decisions.


http://www.crikey.com.au/2016/05/16/are-conservatives-better-economic-managers/


----------



## noco (21 May 2016)

Tisme said:


> http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary...islative_provisions/Interim_Report/report.pdf




Thanks Tisme...I read that article from start to finish and found one section very interesting.

*Coalition Senators’ Dissenting Interim Report
1.1 This inquiry is unworthy of the Senate.
1.2 Never before has the Senate directed any of its Ministers to appear before one
of its Committees. Ministers are accountable through questions with and without
notice, and through the Estimates process. The motion establishing this inquiry stands
without precedent and violates well-established Senate practice.
1.3 The usual process is for a Committee to invite a Minister to attend. Senator
Arthur Sinodinos invoked the words of former Senator Mark Arbib, then a Minister in
the Rudd Labor Government, in his declining a request to appear before a Senate
Committee. The Committee refused to recognise the principle invoked by a Labor
Senator when applied to a Liberal Senator.
1.4 The Electoral Commissioner, Mr Tom Rogers - the sole witness at the less
than two-hour Committee hearing - noted in his submission that this space of public
policy has already been the subject of 'significant scrutiny' and the Committee has a
short reporting period. Mr Rogers also highlighted that the Australian Electoral
Commission has already made numerous submissions to parliamentary inquiries,
including to the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters - the proper
Committee to inquire into political donations.
1.5 We note that the majority of associated entities are affiliated with the
Australian Labor Party and that these entities declared in total more than $800 million
of income to the AEC for financial year 2014-15, representing more than 90 per cent
of all associated entities declared income. We also note that unions alone gave the
ALP direct donations worth more than $5.3 million in financial year 2014-15.
1.6 We asked for a number of witnesses to be invited to give evidence at this
inquiry's hearings, including the Hon Bill Shorten MP, Mr Cesar Melham MLC, Mr
Noah Carroll, Mr Lance Wilson, Ms Fiona Ward, and Mr Ted Lockyer. Labor and
Greens Senators on the Committee did not entertain inviting these witnesses to appear.
1.7 These witnesses could have testified about the washing of a $40,000 in kind
donation from Unibuilt Pty Ltd to Bill Shorten’s 2007 Maribyrnong election campaign
via the Australian Workers Union – an associated entity.
1.8 The Chair’s attempt to justify the exclusion on these witnesses on grounds of
their being “not relevant to the terms of reference” further demonstrates the partisan
nature of this exercise.
1.9 Asked why these witnesses were not relevant to the terms of reference, the
Chair posited that “it was not possible for the Committee to discuss that because…”
before receiving riding instructions from Senator Wong to proceed regardless. The
Chair then proffered that she was unable to disclose private Committee deliberations
and that such questions were out of order.
1.10 Clearly questions about the activities of the Victorian AWU – an ALP
associated entity - are relevant to the inquiry’s terms of reference.
6
1.11 This was underlined by the fact that the Electoral Commissioner answered a
series of questions about this donation, which went undisclosed for eight years until
Mr Shorten fronted the Royal Commission into Trade Union Governance and
Corruption.
1.12 For the record it should be noted that the Royal Commission made no finding
in relation to whether this donation breached the Electoral Act. A number of issues
about it remain unresolved.
1.13 Senator Wong’s intemperate criticism of Mr Rogers during the Committee’s
hearing on 28 April, also deserves comment.
1.14 Consistent with his past practice, the Electoral Commissioner rightly refused
to be drawn on questions about evidence to a NSW ICAC inquiry, much of it
contested, put to him by Senator Wong, preferring to wait until ICAC reports its
findings.
1.15 That Senator Wong should twice accuse him of “turning a blind eye” and
ignoring evidence, thus impugning his integrity and independence, simply because he
wouldn’t fall into line with her partisan line of questioning, further illustrates the
purely political nature of this exercise, notwithstanding Senator Wong’s unsuccessful
attempts at parsing.
1.16 In conclusion, the establishment of this inquiry, the conduct of the Chair and
Senator Wong at its one hearing and the content of the majority report, has been a
partisan political exercise, unworthy of a Senate Committee and unworthy of further
consideration by the Senate.
Senator Cory Bernardi
Deputy Chair
Senator for South Australia
Senator Joanna

*


----------



## SirRumpole (21 May 2016)

Senate Committees divided along Party lines ?

Whatever will happen next ?


----------



## noco (21 May 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Senate Committees divided along Party lines ?
> 
> Whatever will happen next ?




Dunno...What do you think?


----------



## trainspotter (21 May 2016)

Politics in Australia - Star Wars style:-


----------



## noco (21 May 2016)

trainspotter said:


> Politics in Australia - Star Wars style:-
> 
> View attachment 66774




You should have included the Greens whose motto is "WOLVES IN SHEEP'S CLOTHING".


----------



## drsmith (21 May 2016)

noco said:


> You should have included the Greens whose motto is "WOLVES IN SHEEP'S CLOTHING".



The Greens in that analogy would see themselves as Yoda. Matching skin colour but the question as always with the Greens is the colour of the blood that flows within.


----------



## noco (21 May 2016)

drsmith said:


> The Greens in that analogy would see themselves as Yoda. Matching skin colour but the question as always with the Greens is the colour of the blood that flows within.




*Yes, a nasty RED....It is called COMMUNISM..*


----------



## SirRumpole (21 May 2016)

drsmith said:


> The Greens in that analogy would see themselves as Yoda. Matching skin colour but the question as always with the Greens is the colour of the blood that flows within.




Yours is true blue I'm sure.


----------



## drsmith (21 May 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Yours is true blue I'm sure.



That is the colour of the saber in the image above.


----------



## trainspotter (21 May 2016)

drsmith said:


> The Greens in that analogy would see themselves as Yoda. Matching skin colour but the question as always with the Greens is the colour of the blood that flows within.




You are onto something Doc ...


----------



## trainspotter (21 May 2016)

noco said:


> *Yes, a nasty RED....It is called COMMUNISM..*




Bill Shorten before make up ...


----------



## noco (21 May 2016)

Barnacle Bill wants to increase foreign aid to appease the Socialist UN.

I say to Bill, how about looking after the homeless and the poor in our country first. 


https://au.news.yahoo.com/a/31665500/labor-promises-to-stop-aid-cuts/

*Labor has pledged to reverse $224 million in cuts to the foreign aid budget if elected.

This year's federal budget gutted Australia's foreign aid budget to an all-time low of 22 cents for every $100 of national income in the 2016-17 financial year, bringing official aid to $3.8 billion.

It came after $1 billion was stripped away in the 2014 budget.

"We will stop the clock on aid cuts. We will ensure there are no cuts next financial year to the aid budget," Labor's foreign affairs spokesperson Tanya Plibersek told reporters in Sydney on Saturday.

Labor will also commit $450 million over three years to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees.

Ms Plibersek said it is in Australia's interest to be a "good global citizen", with Malaysia and Thailand, which are now major trading partners, examples of countries that were significant recipients of Australian aid.*


----------



## luutzu (21 May 2016)

noco said:


> Barnacle Bill wants to increase foreign aid to appease the Socialist UN.
> 
> I say to Bill, how about looking after the homeless and the poor in our country first.
> 
> ...




Don't know how politics and foreign policy is with Aussie politicians, but have watch some research on how other, mainly Western, nation handles their "foreign aid" and....

and it's not all what it appears. 

Some of the cash might go towards legitimate charities doing actual charities... but most are to buy and grease certain favoured politicians; most of the cash are to nudge foreign gov't towards certain aims and towards repaying debts to they-know-who debtors.

The stats are something like for every one dollar given out in foreign aid, some 100 or 1000s bucks swing back out - back out in terms of debt/interest payment to Western bankers and hedge funds; back out in terms of "free trade" deals.

So why aren't our homeless being help much but all that foreign aid cash goes towards helping foreign poors? Our banks don't lend to our homeless and our corporations can't sell to our homeless either.

Real politiks, no?


----------



## explod (21 May 2016)

luutzu said:


> Don't know how politics and foreign policy is with Aussie politicians, but have watch some research on how other, mainly Western, nation handles their "foreign aid" and....
> 
> and it's not all what it appears.
> 
> ...




Good post. 

Charity does begin at home.  

And "communism" is a word derived from "the COMMON man(woman)"  and the red is an invitation to us to reinstate the ideals of good blood between us all and to share the bounty of this earth together equally.


----------



## noco (22 May 2016)

Judith Sloan sums up the long hard ride which Labor started in 2008 and will continue for at least another 10 years.

She compares both the Liberal Party and Labor as what that situation could be under both parties and while she has not given any bouquets to either party, she nevertheless has pointed to the worse scenario under the two evils.



http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...s/news-story/e455ae51d498a85d81ff4fe2e93e1eb4

*Indeed, the amazing thing is why we have not already lost our rating; the rate of increase in our debt is well above every other country with a current AAA credit rating. And there is no reason to assume that our fiscal outlook will improve in the next several years notwithstanding the continuing fiscal fantasies presented in every budget since 2010.

You see — this is not really a political party thing. The Coalition has proved to be as fiscally hopeless as Labor. If anything, opposition Treasury spokesman Chris Bowen is slightly more realistic in his assessment that a ratings downgrade will occur; he has *already begun to rehearse his lines.

The obvious question we should contemplate is: will Labor be even more fiscally irresponsible than the Coalition if Labor wins the election?

The clear answer is that Labor’s rash spending plans as outlined in the election campaign and before will mean the budgetary position will be worse than were the Coalition to retain power. Mind you, this is like saying the team in second last position on the ladder is slightly better than the last placed team. We already know Labor is planning to spend an additional $17.8bn between 2016-17 and 2019-20, though it laughably expects to raise $17bn more by increasing taxes and by making other “savings”.

We also know Labor wants to inject immediately an *addi*tional $3bn into childcare and an additional $4.5bn on schools. It also will maintain higher education tuition subsidies, adding *another $2bn, and lift the freeze on the Medicare Benefit Schedule — another $900 million. Bowen has announced that Labor quickly will increase the superannuation guarantee charge, the cost of which is unknown at this stage. We haven’t heard about the party’s plans for the foreign aid *budget.

While we can bank on the extra spending, a considerable portion of the additional revenue Labor is assuming is simply make-believe, with numbers essentially pulled out of thin air — think, in particular, additional tax revenue on multinational companies.

We also need to add back in the zombie savings stuck in the Senate because Labor has opposed them. That’s another $20bn added on to the cumulative deficits.

So in the four years starting next financial year, Labor would add at least another $30bn to the expected cumulative deficits we have been softened up to *expect from this year’s budget. That’s assuming the additional revenue and savings Labor has *listed actually come to pass. Also bear in mind Labor assumes away any drag on GDP that the higher tax burden inevitably *would impose (and that would lower all revenues). Across the longer term, the spending ambitions of Labor are even more vaulting.

Just consider Labor’s reckless spending ambitions, particularly on schools and health. What Bill Shorten and his comrades don’t seem to understand is that Julia Gillard’s *unfunded, over-the-*horizon spending plans, particularly as *articulated in the last Council of Australian Governments meetings over which she presided, were just a sham *designed to bamboozle the public and wedge an incoming *Coalition government. There was no sense in which an extra $80bn for health and schools was ever affordable.

Take a look at the figures. Labor plans to spend an additional $40bn on schools to implement the full Gonski across the next *decade, even though there are *separate and distinct agreements with the states. It’s not quite the *national school funding system Gonski envisaged, but what the heck. Is anyone checking?

We can only assume a similar or larger sum will be made available to fund the reckless health and hospitals package that Gillard put forward in the dying days of her government. So add another $40bn to $50bn.

Then there is Labor’s commitment to additional infrastructure spending — light rail on every corner — and the bipartisan commitment to the enormous defence boondoggle spending that the *Coalition has put forward, You begin to realise the fiscal *catastrophe we have experienced since 2008 is just the entree.

Now, your head may be spinning with numbers — I know mine is — but the bottom line is this: Labor is completely out of control fiscally; the Coalition is slightly better but no cigar. (I haven’t *bothered to mention the Greens *because that would be fiscal *Armageddon.)

There are some very important lessons that our politicians have failed to heed in the past 10 years or so:

• Never introduce any new welfare entitlement on the basis it can be withdrawn in the future.

• Projecting expenditure is much more certain than projecting revenue — spend only money that is secure, not assumed.

• Do not embark on large-scale spending commitments such as Gonski; we cannot afford it and there is no hard evidence the extra spending will improve student performance.

But, most important, both sides of politics should understand the basic point: if you are in a (fiscal) hole, stop digging. We need to start paying back the debt, not increasing it.

Suggesting that Australia could become like Greece is a bit hyperbolic; France is closer to the mark. The French government has not run a budget surplus since 1974; government net debt is *approaching 100 per of GDP; the AAA *credit rating was lost a long time ago; and France’s rate of unemployment is 10 per cent and 25 per cent among young people. Vive l’Australie.*


----------



## explod (22 May 2016)

The cost of Gonski is but a fraction of the submarines.


----------



## Smurf1976 (22 May 2016)

Labor, Liberal, Greens, whoever.

The one thing they all have in common is that they'll be running up debt.

Sad but that's the situation we seem to be in. Max out 10 credit cards or hand one back and just max out the other 9. Not good either way.


----------



## noco (22 May 2016)

explod said:


> The cost of Gonski is but a fraction of the submarines.




How well could Gonski defend the Australian shore line and how many jobs will Gonski provide in South Australia?

Gonski was never funded by the Labor party....Labor was going to fund it with the proceeds from Swan's mining tax which cost more to administer than it raked in.

REAL GOOD ECONOMICS from the "World's Greatest Treasure".


----------



## qldfrog (23 May 2016)

explod said:


> The cost of Gonski is but a fraction of the submarines.



with arguments like that, we sure head to the wall:
we can afford neither!


----------



## qldfrog (23 May 2016)

noco said:


> J
> Suggesting that Australia could become like Greece is a bit hyperbolic; France is closer to the mark. The French government has not run a budget surplus since 1974; government net debt is *approaching 100 per of GDP; the AAA *credit rating was lost a long time ago; and France’s rate of unemployment is 10 per cent and 25 per cent among young people. Vive l’Australie.



As someone very well aware of France's situation, it has always been my worry and I can not agree more.
ut for migration which has been a bit more controlled here so far, we are scaringly following my native country path with a 20y delay and a no surprise negative outcome.But ehh i am a pessimistic guy;
But another definition of pessimism could be knowledge (knowing from previous experiences the outcomes of given actions)


----------



## ggkfc (23 May 2016)

Seeing how the lack of interest rates reductions have had on stimulating the economy, Labor's outlandish spending might prove to be a silver bullet


----------



## trainspotter (23 May 2016)

ggkfc said:


> Seeing how the lack of interest rates reductions have had on stimulating the economy, Labor's outlandish spending might prove to be a silver bullet




Fine ... except when the economy is a werewolf.


----------



## Tisme (23 May 2016)

noco said:


> Judith Sloan sums up the long hard ride which Labor started in 2008 and will continue for at least another 10 years.
> 
> She compares both the Liberal Party and Labor as what that situation could be under both parties and while she has not given any bouquets to either party, she nevertheless has pointed to the worse scenario under the two evils.
> 
> ...




No reflection on you Noco, but:

That's rather an immature piece of work, especially from an extreme right winger who haunts the halls of the IPA, HR Nichols and Centre of I.S. A juvenile attempt to lower the public expectation bar of the LNP then put everything/one else under it.


----------



## moXJO (23 May 2016)

ggkfc said:


> Seeing how the lack of interest rates reductions have had on stimulating the economy, Labor's outlandish spending might prove to be a silver bullet



If we failed after having an almighty mining boom then I'm not sure I trust kicking the can down the road by either side.
That's what got us here in the first place.


----------



## noco (23 May 2016)

Tisme said:


> No reflection on you Noco, but:
> 
> That's rather an immature piece of work, especially from an extreme right winger who haunts the halls of the IPA, HR Nichols and Centre of I.S. A juvenile attempt to lower the public expectation bar of the LNP then put everything/one else under it.




There is little doubt in my mind that whist the fiscal situation is still grim from the Rudd/Gaillard/Rudd era, I do believe our economy would have been a lot worse had the Liberal Government not won office in 2013....The history of the Labor Party is a proven factor when it comes bad economic management....Labor would have continued to add to the "SPENDO METER" just like Billy boy has been with his promises in the last 2 weeks....More spending and higher taxes.

There are many factors as to the reason we are still not in good shape.....One being the carry over of underfunded projects by the Labor Party......the massive interest bill we are still paying.....$billions of cuts to spending which the Labor Party, cuts they proposed themselves, would not pass through the senate with bloody mindedness.......We have an ever increasing demand on social security with people living longer with modern medicines.....There has been a massive down turn in export commodity prices....And lastly, what would have happened had the Liberal Party suddenly stopped spending?......Yes, you got it, the economy would have come to a stand still....There would have massive unemployment.

IMHO I don't think Turnbull is doing enough to explain the benefits of lower tax rates for small business which comes into effect 2 or 3 years before the larger business will benefit...The benefits being increased job opportunity....On the other hand Shorten wants to increase taxes resulting in less incentive for investment.

Penalty rates on weekends is another deterrent for business to employ more people....Although I see on a news item over the weekend where the unions have done a dirty deal with McDonald's restaurants to gain more union members, they have made an agreement with McDonald's to pay 16 year old workers $8 per hour plus 25% extra for Saturday and 50% extra for Sunday...So i ask the question why can't Shorten and his union buddies do the same for all restaurants?....A bit of hypocrisy here I would I would say......Looks like another Chiquita/Clean Events saga.......

Good onya Bill for standing up for the workers.....BS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## SirRumpole (23 May 2016)

Judith Sloan is a well known Right Wing commentator so we can hardly expect her to favour Labor.

There is a wealth of opinion around that Labor are the better financial managers than the Libs, and after Howard's squandering of the mining boom on family tax benefits, baby bonuses and middle class welfare like tax free superannuation and capital gains discounts I 'm ready to believe that opinion.

Once ore prices declined there was very little holding up the economy. They will obviously go up again, lets hope that whoever is in government at the time doesn't blow the proceeds again.


----------



## moXJO (23 May 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Judith Sloan is a well known Right Wing commentator so we can hardly expect her to favour Labor.
> 
> There is a wealth of opinion around that Labor are the better financial managers than the Libs, and after Howard's squandering of the mining boom on family tax benefits, baby bonuses and middle class welfare like tax free superannuation and capital gains discounts I 'm ready to believe that opinion.




That's no surprise. How did Rudd and Gillard blow us up into debt during the greatest mining boom ever. Instead of pulling back all these things, they spent more. When libs tried to cut back, labor then blocked.
Gfc seems to be the convenient excuse.  It was just stupid policy after stupid policy.
Howard went through the Asian financial crisis when there was no boom. Nothing but a blip
Rudd and Swan milked the gfc for all it was worth.


----------



## trainspotter (23 May 2016)

moXJO said:


> If we failed after having an almighty mining boom then I'm not sure I trust kicking the can down the road by either side.
> That's what got us here in the first place.




:iagree: with this statement.





Not forgetting we were debt free before the Rudd/Gillard/Rudd era.


----------



## noco (23 May 2016)

moXJO said:


> That's no surprise. How did Rudd and Gillard blow us up into debt during the greatest mining boom ever. Instead of pulling back all these things, they spent more. When libs tried to cut back, labor then blocked.
> Gfc seems to be the convenient excuse.  It was just stupid policy after stupid policy.
> Howard went through the Asian financial crisis when there was no boom. Nothing but a blip
> Rudd and Swan milked the gfc for all it was worth.




It is the Fabian (communist) ideology .......Firstly control the media for their propaganda.....ruin the our economy by massive spending with borrowed money .....break down the morals of young people as they are trying to do in Victoria......control the banking system and it all makes for an easier conversion to Socialism (communism) and the LUG party are up to their eyeballs in it.

The current Labor Party is NOT the Labor Party of yesteryear. 

Communism is not dead and buried.


----------



## noco (23 May 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Judith Sloan is a well known Right Wing commentator so we can hardly expect her to favour Labor.
> 
> There is a wealth of opinion around that Labor are the better financial managers than the Libs, and after Howard's squandering of the mining boom on family tax benefits, baby bonuses and middle class welfare like tax free superannuation and capital gains discounts I 'm ready to believe that opinion.
> 
> Once ore prices declined there was very little holding up the economy. They will obviously go up again, lets hope that whoever is in government at the time doesn't blow the proceeds again.




So what do you think of Shorten's union buddy's dirty deal with McDonalds restaurants?


----------



## SirRumpole (23 May 2016)

noco said:


> So what do you think of Shorten's union buddy's dirty deal with McDonalds restaurants?




Still trying the character assassination and guilt by association ploy ?

Hasn't hurt Shorten's ratings, he's up 3 points as preferred PM.


----------



## noco (23 May 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Still trying the character assassination and guilt by association ploy ?
> 
> Hasn't hurt Shorten's ratings, he's up 3 points as preferred PM.




Well, what do you think of the McDonald deal by the unions?

I am seeking YOUR  opinion.


----------



## Tisme (23 May 2016)

noco said:


> There is little doubt in my mind that whist the fiscal situation is still grim from the Rudd/Gaillard/Rudd era, I do believe our economy would have been a lot worse had the Liberal Government not won office in 2013....The history of the Labor Party is a proven factor when it comes bad economic management....Labor would have continued to add to the "SPENDO METER" just like Billy boy has been with his promises in the last 2 weeks....More spending and higher taxes.
> 
> There are many factors as to the reason we are still not in good shape.....One being the carry over of underfunded projects by the Labor Party......the massive interest bill we are still paying.....$billions of cuts to spending which the Labor Party, cuts they proposed themselves, would not pass through the senate with bloody mindedness.......We have an ever increasing demand on social security with people living longer with modern medicines.....There has been a massive down turn in export commodity prices....And lastly, what would have happened had the Liberal Party suddenly stopped spending?......Yes, you got it, the economy would have come to a stand still....There would have massive unemployment.
> 
> ...




I certainly think the people wanted a pause from the frenetic decisions of the RGR era. 

I would like to see how much impetus is still in play as the spend washes through the economy and whether that is the reason we haven't seen a sharp decline in GDP growth?


----------



## SirRumpole (23 May 2016)

noco said:


> I am seeking YOUR  opinion.




You never have before.


----------



## Tisme (23 May 2016)

noco said:


> It is the Fabian (communist) ideology .......Firstly control the media for their propaganda.....ruin the our economy by massive spending with borrowed money .....break down the morals of young people as they are trying to do in Victoria......control the banking system and it all makes for an easier conversion to Socialism (communism) and the LUG party are up to their eyeballs in it.
> 
> The current Labor Party is NOT the Labor Party of yesteryear.
> 
> Communism is not dead and buried.




Isn't democracy defined by the idea of the social construct of governance for the people and by the people?


----------



## Tisme (23 May 2016)

Paul Keating tweet 16 May 2016:



> If Property magnates and home loan charlatans are railing against Negative Gearing changes, you know you are doing the right thing


----------



## SirRumpole (23 May 2016)

Tisme said:


> Paul Keating tweet 16 May 2016:




What does PK have to say about why he re-introduced it in 1987 ?


----------



## noco (23 May 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> You never have before.




But I am now and you obviously don't have the answer..... 

Well, I guess you do have the answer but you won't admit the LUG Party is full of hypocrisy.

I just want you to tell me who came on top of the McDonald's dirty union deal?

Was it the Labor Party....the unions or the poor workers who were dudded again by the LUG Party?


----------



## moXJO (23 May 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> What does PK have to say about why he re-introduced it in 1987 ?



Tried to save his bacon after the backlash.


----------



## SirRumpole (23 May 2016)

noco said:


> But I am now and you obviously don't have the answer.....
> 
> Well, I guess you do have the answer but you won't admit the LUG Party is full of hypocrisy.
> 
> ...




Good of you to have concern for the workers, you usually don't.

As I understand it, the union members have to vote to accept the agreement. If they are not happy with the way it was explained to them then they should turf out the union delegates and elect someone else.


----------



## luutzu (23 May 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> What does PK have to say about why he re-introduced it in 1987 ?




Good point.

But PK got a good point too... Have never seen so many property developer, lenders and landlords care so much about poor Aussies renting or not able to buy their own home.

NG is bad for renters! It will drive up the rent (and we all hate that!)


----------



## noco (24 May 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Good of you to have concern for the workers, you usually don't.
> 
> As I understand it, the union members have to vote to accept the agreement. If they are not happy with the way it was explained to them then they should turf out the union delegates and elect someone else.




At 16 years of age, those kids did not know they were even in a union so how could they vote?...McDonald's paid their union fees.....Typical dirty deal by your LUG party mates.


----------



## SirRumpole (24 May 2016)

noco said:


> At 16 years of age, those kids did not know they were even in a union so how could they vote?...McDonald's paid their union fees.....Typical dirty deal by your LUG party mates.




What are you suggesting ?

Who got what out of the agreement ?


----------



## moXJO (24 May 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> What are you suggesting ?
> 
> Who got what out of the agreement ?




Here's how it "allegedly" works:
Company pays union fees and pays for union training courses to keep union onside.

Union readily accepts deals pushed across the table.

Business and union are as bad as each other screwing the workers. I'd rather less red tape then lower wages.


----------



## SirRumpole (24 May 2016)

moXJO said:


> Here's how it "allegedly" works:
> Company pays union fees and pays for union training courses to keep union onside.
> 
> Union readily accepts deals pushed across the table.
> ...




If that's the way it works then it's obviously a bad system for the workers.

Sounds like they need to elect some new union reps.


----------



## moXJO (24 May 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> If that's the way it works then it's obviously a bad system for the workers.
> 
> Sounds like they need to elect some new union reps.




The Australian system needs a lot of tweaks. So do workers attitudes.
A heap of laws but no protection for the guys that can't afford it.
I'm hoping that Xenophon's party picks up speed.


----------



## SirRumpole (24 May 2016)

moXJO said:


> I'm hoping that Xenophon's party picks up speed.




Me too.


----------



## Tisme (24 May 2016)

moXJO said:


> Here's how it "allegedly" works:
> Company pays union fees and pays for union training courses to keep union onside.
> 
> Union readily accepts deals pushed across the table.
> ...




I am not really up to speed on this, but surely it's hypocrtical of liberal party hacks to be upset at any whiff of labour servitude and poverty wages? 

2013 EBA :

In summary, the NES currently provides the following:
• An average of 38 ordinary hours of work per week for full time employees;
• An employee with 12 months' service has a right to up to 12 months unpaid
parental leave and the right to request an additional period of up to 12
months parental leave. The Employer can refuse the request for additional
parental leave on reasonable business grounds;
• Four weeks' annual leave per annum for weekly employees with an additional
week for certain continuous shift workers;
• Ten days' per annum paid personal/carer's leave for full time employees, and
pro-rata for part-time employees;
• Two days' unpaid carer's leave per occasion for casuals and employees who
have exhausted their paid carer's leave entitlements;
• Up to two days' paid compassionate leave per occasion;
• Paid jury service leave and unpaid leave for eligible community service
activities;
• Long service leave;
• Public holidays;
• Notice of termination and redundancy pay, subject to certain exclusions; and
• The provision of a Fair Work Information Statement to new employees.


----------



## noco (24 May 2016)

Tisme said:


> I am not really up to speed on this, but surely it's hypocrtical of liberal party hacks to be upset at any whiff of labour servitude and poverty wages?
> 
> 2013 EBA :
> 
> ...




My oh my.....Wouldn't the workers in India, Bangladesh, Ghana and lots of other African and Asian countries love to have those conditions.......In Ghana, they work 11 hour days, get paid once per month at an average wage of 400 Cedis (approx AU$120) and have no workers compensation or sick leave....It is stiff "bickies"if you get sick.

No wonder our manufacturing industries have been lost to overseas.


----------



## noco (24 May 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> What are you suggesting ?
> 
> Who got what out of the agreement ?




The unions and McDonald's came out on top and the kids got dudded just like the workers at Chiquita and Clean Event....That is the unions looking after the workers interests.

I have a niece who worked for McDonald's and they turfed her out when she turned 21.....She was told she was a union member.....She said how come?.....I did not sign up to a union and she was told McDonald's had paid her union fees......She never went to a union meeting and she had no say whether she agreed to the conditions of employment...It was a matter of take it or leave it.

If it is good enough for the unions and McDonald's to pay juniors 25 % extra for Saturday and 50% extra on Sunday, why can't they apply the same conditions for workers at all other restaurants on Weekends?

Talk about hypocrisy by the LUG Party....I thought workers in one particular industry were all paid on equal terms.


----------



## craft (24 May 2016)

trainspotter said:


> :iagree: with this statement.
> 
> View attachment 66793
> 
> ...




Wow, there is no fear of letting facts get in the road of opinions here.

Most of Australia’s debt is private and most of it was run up in the Howard/Costello era. 

Yes there was transfer from the Private to Public balance sheet  since the GFC. But there is a defensible argument that this was necessary to soften the economic impact of private debt accumulation hitting the wall.

If Australia has a debt problem – It’s a private debt problem.  The public balance sheet being used in moderation as a shock absorber is the least of our worries.

The political point scoring that happens in the absence of the economic discussion that should really occur is heartbreaking.  I thought Malcolm as PM would have changed this - but if I hear the dumbed down slogan of "Jobs and Growth" or "Labor Deficit Disaster" come out of his mouth one more time, the TV had better run and hide.


----------



## Tisme (24 May 2016)

noco said:


> My oh my.....Wouldn't the workers in India, Bangladesh, Ghana and lots of other African and Asian countries love to have those conditions.......In Ghana, they work 11 hour days, get paid once per month at an average wage of 400 Cedis (approx AU$120) and have no workers compensation or sick leave....It is stiff "bickies"if you get sick.
> 
> No wonder our manufacturing industries have been lost to overseas.




That was the Maccas award I posted


----------



## Tisme (24 May 2016)

craft said:


> The political point scoring that happens in the absence of the economic discussion that should really occur is heartbreaking.  I thought Malcolm as PM would have changed this - but if I hear the dumbed down slogan of "Jobs and Growth" or "Labor Deficit Disaster" come out of his mouth one more time, the TV had better run and hide.




I'd suggest eve his biggest fans (eg Rumpole) would agree with that, in moderation of course.

They're even sloganeering with the "big black hole" and no doubt "stop the boats" will become more pronounced.

Juveniles in crusty bodies.


----------



## luutzu (24 May 2016)

noco said:


> The unions and McDonald's came out on top and the kids got dudded just like the workers at Chiquita and Clean Event....That is the unions looking after the workers interests.
> 
> I have a niece who worked for McDonald's and they turfed her out when she turned 21.....She was told she was a union member.....She said how come?.....I did not sign up to a union and she was told McDonald's had paid her union fees......She never went to a union meeting and she had no say whether she agreed to the conditions of employment...It was a matter of take it or leave it.
> 
> ...




Maybe your niece should contact the unions and get her member's due, due. 

It'd be nice if there's no need for unions or other regulations safeguarding workers' rights, but you know... leaving it to the business owners' kindness kind of not work out so well.

A recent expose' in the US showed how all their big chicken manufacturers (yes, manufacturer) have adapted Henry Ford's production line so well now that workers either have to wear diaper or go to the toilet in their own pants - what with only a 10 minute break, long lines at the toilet.

Good thing the unions aren't there to ruin things and run up costs to consumers ey? Good thing too for the chemicals that'll kill all the shiet too. Not so good for the salads when similar conditions were imposed and when nature calls, the bushy cabbage patch comes in real handy.

But yea, if we have all these rights and safety, how can we compete with slave labour in the third world. 

Maybe question ought to be, why the heck must anyone have to choose from these two options? Oh right, "free trade" - good for you, good for me, just not good for the workers, or the environment... and since we're mostly all workers...


----------



## luutzu (24 May 2016)

craft said:


> Wow, there is no fear of letting facts get in the road of opinions here.
> 
> Most of Australia’s debt is private and most of it was run up in the Howard/Costello era.
> 
> ...




But your TV didn't do anything craft.

I caught a bit of our innovative PM this morning... wow. And I thought he was a more intelligent one.

He does make running for office look easy though. Just repeat: Labor is bad; Labor hasn't a clue, we do; Labor's policy will destroy jobs, rack up debt, enrich people smugglers - the gov't I lead won't do that. 

How? Details?

Isn't it obvious?


----------



## SirRumpole (24 May 2016)

Tisme said:


> I'd suggest eve his [Turnbull] biggest fans (eg Rumpole) ...




Not any more, he had his chance with me and he's blown it.

Trickle down economics bs, Abbott policies on universities, Medicare and education in general, sacking scientists in the CSIRO, elitism gone mad in relation to negative gearing, he's all bluff and bluster and I have to turn off his pompous windbaggery whenever he appears on my tv screen.

I recant, and admit you were right all along.


----------



## trainspotter (24 May 2016)

craft said:


> Wow, there is no fear of letting facts get in the road of opinions here.
> 
> Most of Australia’s debt is private and most of it was run up in the Howard/Costello era.
> 
> ...




Opinionated away ... Australia’s net Government debt was $96 billion in June 1996.  By June 2007, Australia had net financial assets (negative debt) of $29 billion. Thanks John Howard and the Liberal Party.



> Most of Australia’s debt is private and most of it was run up in the Howard/Costello era.



 Agreed ... The GOVERNMENT does not have to pay this back by taxing us now does it? Unlike the debt it has hanging around it's neck now - who pays for that? WE DO !!


----------



## explod (24 May 2016)

luutzu said:


> But your TV didn't do anything craft.
> 
> I caught a bit of our innovative PM this morning... wow. And I thought he was a more intelligent one.
> 
> ...




Agreed,  as I have been saying for sometime,  no substance or content and people are uneasily starting to see through this wire netting canoe.


----------



## craft (24 May 2016)

trainspotter said:


> Opinionated away ... Australia’s net Government debt was $96 billion in June 1996.  By June 2007, Australia had net financial assets (negative debt) of $29 billion. Thanks John Howard and the Liberal Party.
> 
> Agreed ... The GOVERNMENT does not have to pay this back by taxing us now does it? Unlike the debt it has hanging around it's neck now - who pays for that? WE DO !!
> 
> View attachment 66799




If the public balance sheet wasn’t used to cushion private deleveraging the physical economy would have been hit much harder. Tax as a % of National Income would have had to go much higher especially as the transfer system costs would have started exploding as unemployment ballooned. 

It’s so simple to cry government debt – who has to pay for that? And it’s a simple message that obviously resonates – but using the public balance sheet as a shock absorber can and should lower the % of tax to income that people have to pay in the long run. I guess that's to hard a concept for the politicians to prosecute (or the electorate to comprehend), so we get simplistic debt scare campaigns instead, whilst both sides actually use the shock absorber and rack up the debt since the GFC, which makes Liberal debt spin and reality all the harder to reconcile - god help us if they actually implemented their own spin.


----------



## trainspotter (24 May 2016)

craft said:


> If the public balance sheet wasn’t used to cushion private deleveraging the physical economy would have been hit much harder. Tax as a % of National Income would have had to go much higher especially as the transfer system costs would have started exploding as unemployment ballooned.
> 
> It’s so simple to cry government debt – who has to pay for that? And it’s a simple message that obviously resonates – but using the public balance sheet as a shock absorber can and should lower the % of tax to income that people have to pay in the long run. I guess that's to hard a concept for the politicians to prosecute (or the electorate to comprehend), so we get simplistic debt scare campaigns instead, whilst both sides actually use the shock absorber and rack up the debt since the GFC, which makes Liberal debt spin and reality all the harder to reconcile - god help us if they actually implemented their own spin.




The RBA plunged the cash rate from 7.25 in August 2008 to 3 per cent in April 2009. When a country has a central bank targeting inflation and growth, fiscal stimulus is redundant. It's both costly and unnecessary. Hence why we have the debt that neither Libs or Labs have a clue to dumb down. 

Hockey giving the RBA 8.8 billion as a one-off grant to help it manage future economic crises did not help either. But then again spending 95 billion on "stimulus packages" did not help our balance sheet one bit.

Also the Aussie peso plunged making us more competitive, China spent 596 billion in trade over 2 years (7% of GDP) and we had no bank failures. MEH !

We are talking about the PAST ... Pauline Hanson is back on the agenda.



> Labor and LNP strategists both concede Ms Hanson is likely to pick up the last Senate seat in Queensland, where she could share the balance of power after the election.




http://www.news.com.au/national/fed...r/news-story/169fbf6340ec0d8e433fc3c95d7af294


----------



## Ves (24 May 2016)

trainspotter said:


> The RBA plunged the cash rate from 7.25 in August 2008 to 3 per cent in April 2009. When a country has a central bank targeting inflation and growth, fiscal stimulus is redundant. It's both costly and unnecessary. Hence why we have the debt that neither Libs or Labs have a clue to dumb down.



I don't follow this logic.

Private debt was about 120% of GDP at this time (2008) and hint:  that's much closer to high than low.  Comparatively net public debt is about 11%.

As a central bank by lowering interest rates you're trying to lower the cost of funds  (ie. borrowings) and encourage more spending and hence more growth. Agree?

However I thought that in order for growth to happen people either have to spend money they've previously saved (with private debt so high I doubt they've saved much) or borrow more money.  Either this or the government borrows.

But if private borrowings are already super high people aren't going to borrow more (the stats in the few years after 2008 tell this story).

So what would simply lowering interest rates achieve if private borrowings are already sky high?


----------



## moXJO (24 May 2016)

How much of that public debt is for investment?


----------



## Ves (24 May 2016)

moXJO said:


> How much of that public debt is for investment?



Off the top of my head about 35% is business related.

65% is private households (about 90% of this was housing related).


----------



## moXJO (24 May 2016)

Ves said:


> Off the top of my head about 35% is business related.
> 
> 65% is private households (about 90% of this was housing related).




Probably one of my larger concerns is housing prices and the threat of deflation.  One shock and things can turn nasty quickly.


----------



## trainspotter (24 May 2016)

Ves said:


> I don't follow this logic.
> 
> Private debt was about 120% of GDP at this time (2008) and hint:  that's much closer to high than low.  Comparatively net public debt is about 11%.
> 
> ...




_"The Reserve Bank through its control over interest rates, determines the overall level of aggregate demand in the economy, and the Bank would likely take account of any fiscal stimulus in its monetary decisions – that is, more spending would keep interest rates higher than otherwise…

The bottom line is that in the event of a shallow downturn, discretionary [fiscal] action may not achieve any noticeable outcomes in terms of growth and unemployment, but would leave rates higher, erode the [budget] surplus and put at risk the Government’s fiscal credibility.

*These costs of course need to be weighed against the potential political costs of being seen to do nothing…*"_

Wayne Swan wrote this in his book "The Good Fight".

P.S. Prior to the GFC the RBA were LIFTING rates to fight inflation. GFC hit and WHAMMO the rates came tumbling down. Rudd claimed it was because of his "stimulus packages" that save Australia from recession. Nope ... the RBA lowering rates, China spending 568 billion or 7% of GDP with us blah blah blah .. GEDDIT NOW ???


----------



## Ves (24 May 2016)

trainspotter said:


> _"The Reserve Bank through its control over interest rates, determines the overall level of aggregate demand in the economy, and the Bank would likely take account of any fiscal stimulus in its monetary decisions – that is, more spending would keep interest rates higher than otherwise…
> 
> The bottom line is that in the event of a shallow downturn, discretionary [fiscal] action may not achieve any noticeable outcomes in terms of growth and unemployment, but would leave rates higher, erode the [budget] surplus and put at risk the Government’s fiscal credibility.
> 
> ...



All that is great, it really is.  But it doesn't actually answer my question.

If the private sector stops borrowing,  and the government also decides to stop borrowing more (ie. running a surplus budget), both of these in an economy that historically (and at the time) runs a trade deficit,  then how the bloody hell does GDP grow?

You can't rely on low interest rates to carry an economy if people aren't borrowing any way!!


----------



## SirRumpole (24 May 2016)

trainspotter said:


> . Rudd claimed it was because of his "stimulus packages" that save Australia from recession. Nope ... the RBA lowering rates, China spending 568 billion or 7% of GDP with us blah blah blah .. GEDDIT NOW ???




You don't think that a combination of measures helped avoid the GFC ?

No-one would claim that stimulus spending alone achieved the result, but if they didn't happen then we would have been worse off than we were.

China only spends within a limited range of our economy, they couldn't possibly have saved the whole lot. As for interest rates, people don't usually spend if they see a recession coming, low interest rates or not. The handouts gave consumers the cash necessary to spend.


----------



## trainspotter (24 May 2016)

Ves said:


> All that is great, it really is.  But it doesn't actually answer my question.
> 
> If the private sector stops borrowing,  and the government also decides to stop borrowing more (ie. running a surplus budget), both of these in an economy that historically (and at the time) runs a trade deficit,  then how the bloody hell does GDP grow?
> 
> You can't rely on low interest rates to carry an economy if people aren't borrowing any way!!




So no one borrowed any money to fuel the housing boom then? 

No one borrowed money to buy a new car now did they?



> *It’s official: 2015 was the biggest year for the Australian new vehicle market on record.*
> 
> Australians took delivery of 1,155,408 million new cars, SUVs and commercials last year, eclipsing the previous watermark of 1,136,227 set in 2013. This figure represents a climb of 3.8 per cent over the 2014 result, and is the fourth consecutive 1.1 million-plus year.




http://www.caradvice.com.au/406917/...time-australian-new-vehicle-sales-record-set/


----------



## trainspotter (24 May 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> You don't think that a combination of measures helped avoid the GFC ?
> 
> No-one would claim that stimulus spending alone achieved the result, but if they didn't happen then we would have been worse off than we were.
> 
> China only spends within a limited range of our economy, they couldn't possibly have saved the whole lot. As for interest rates, people don't usually spend if they see a recession coming, low interest rates or not. The handouts gave consumers the cash necessary to spend.




Ermmm Rudd claimed he did save Australia from the GFC. Wayne Swan was named "World's best Treasurer" .. anybody ... anybody?

Of course it was a combination of things 

Interest rates for ONE !!



> Consider interest rates first. The Reserve Bank reduced official interest rates by 4.25 per cent, from 7.25 in early September to the present 3 per cent, the lowest official rate for decades. Of course, not all of the interest rate cuts translated fully to home loan rates, but even if we compare, for example, a 3 per cent cut on a housing loan of $200,000, this implies extra household income of $6000 on an annual basis, a large multiple of the $990 cash handouts from the federal budget.




Handouts and Stimulus right?



> 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




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/thanks-due-to-monetary-policy/story-e6frg6n6-1225749411215



> The paper's main finding is that household consumption expenditures on non-durables did
> 
> not react significantly during or after the one-time, pre-announced transfer. The estimated effects
> 
> ...




https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B5Krgb1oYMxTUmk3cDE3QzcyUzA/edit?pli=1

A mind is like a parachute. It only works when it is open.


----------



## craft (24 May 2016)

trainspotter said:


> _"The Reserve Bank through its control over interest rates, determines the overall level of aggregate demand in the economy, and the Bank would likely take account of any fiscal stimulus in its monetary decisions – that is, more spending would keep interest rates higher than otherwise…
> 
> The bottom line is that *in the event of a shallow downturn*, discretionary [fiscal] action may not achieve any noticeable outcomes in terms of growth and unemployment, but would leave rates higher, erode the [budget] surplus and put at risk the Government’s fiscal credibility.
> 
> ...




Nicely Cherry Picked.

The key is "in the event of a shallow downturn"

If you go to the full briefing paper (attached) you will see that they were trying to decide whether they were facing just a shallow downturn where demand management through monetary policy is still effective and your cherry picked statement is correct or they were facing a major downturn where private consumption evaporates and the government needs to step in to provide demand.

History seems to suggest they guessed right. 

http://www.thegoodfightonline.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/1.-Note-from-meeting-at-the-lodge-%E2%80%93-August-2008.pdf


----------



## trainspotter (24 May 2016)

July 2nd is the date - Pauline Hanson to hold the balance of power is my tip


----------



## trainspotter (24 May 2016)

craft said:


> Nicely Cherry Picked.
> 
> The key is "in the event of a shallow downturn"
> 
> ...




Ermm nope 







> *that is, more spending would keep interest rates higher than otherwise…*



 is the key. So they spent and what happened to rates? They went to record lows


----------



## moXJO (24 May 2016)

craft said:


> History seems to suggest they guessed right.




Not to compare but NZ did fine without much stimulus.
Our markets just needed confidence. But not the level of splashfest that happened.
Rudd iust wanted his grand delusion of "saving Australia" written in stone.


----------



## craft (24 May 2016)

trainspotter said:


> Ermm nope  is the key. So they spent and what happened to rates? They went to record lows




As far as I can see you have just contradicted your own cherry picking. The spending did not stop interest rates from going to (modern) record lows.  Monetary policy is not the solution for a lack of consumption, it gets to the stage where they are pushing on the strings that they used to be able to pull to control demand. Fiscal policy on the other hand can make a difference.

Any rate reached my quota. Back to normal programming.


----------



## SirRumpole (24 May 2016)

> Interest rates for ONE !!




So how many interest rates cuts have we had in the last three years ?

How is the economy going now ?

It looks like interest rates may get close to zero and these rate cuts have not produced a measurable improvement in the economy, so I doubt whether interest rates are the magic wand you seem to think they are.


----------



## Ves (24 May 2016)

trainspotter said:


> So no one borrowed any money to fuel the housing boom then?
> 
> No one borrowed money to buy a new car now did they?
> 
> ...



I'm still confused.  You were talking about the 2008 / GFC before and now you're talking about 2015.

Private debt to GDP actually decreased and then flat-lined during the GFC and year or two after,  which tells me that the private sector certainly wasn't increasing their debt levels.

It did however start increasing again from about 2013 onwards.  Which is the period I assume you are highlighting with those links??


----------



## trainspotter (24 May 2016)

craft said:


> As far as I can see you have just contradicted your own cherry picking. The spending did not stop interest rates from going to (modern) record lows.  Monetary policy is not the solution for a lack of consumption, it gets to the stage where they are pushing on the strings that they used to be able to pull to control demand. Fiscal policy on the other hand can make a difference.
> 
> Any rate reached my quota. Back to normal programming.




Ermmm nope again ... This is the World's Greatest Treasurer predicting that interest rates would rise under stimulus / fiscal massaging and the exact opposite has occurred. It was an extract from his book.

Over and out.


----------



## craft (24 May 2016)

moXJO said:


> Not to compare but NZ did fine without much stimulus.
> Our markets just needed confidence. But not the level of splashfest that happened.
> Rudd iust wanted his grand delusion of "saving Australia" written in stone.




NZ have done well. I'm not sure how hot their run-up was, I suspect their exposure to mining is not the same as ours and I don't know how much private debt they had to manage. The bigger the run up the harder to manage the outfall.

As to the level of stimulus - I suspect there is lots of defensible arguments around bigger or smaller, its just that we never seem to get the discussion from our politicians - just slogans "deficit disaster" "saved Australia" whatever line they think will get them re-elected and unfortunately Mr "Jobs and Growth" has turned out no different.

Politicians always want the glory. I suspect Australia's fortunes have probably got more to do with the calibre, education and culture of the non elected professionals in our bureaucracies and institutions that advise our politicians then the politicians themselves.


----------



## craft (24 May 2016)

trainspotter said:


> Ermmm nope again ... This is the World's Greatest Treasurer predicting that interest rates would rise under stimulus / fiscal massaging and the exact opposite has occurred. It was an extract from his book.
> 
> Over and out.




Go read your extract in context:  Your making no sense - well not to me anyway, but I'm a bit thick.


Here's the context again in case you forgot to read it last time.
http://www.thegoodfightonline.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/1.-Note-from-meeting-at-the-lodge-%E2%80%93-August-2008.pdf


----------



## trainspotter (24 May 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> So how many interest rates cuts have we had in the last three years ?
> 
> How is the economy going now ?
> 
> It looks like interest rates may get close to zero and these rate cuts have not produced a measurable improvement in the economy, so I doubt whether interest rates are the magic wand you seem to think they are.




Magic wand interest rates are a thing of the past. So when I wrote this you ignored it?



> Of course it was a combination of things


----------



## SirRumpole (24 May 2016)

trainspotter said:


> Magic wand interest rates are a thing of the past. So when I wrote this you ignored it?




So what else is this government doing to stimulate the economy ?


----------



## trainspotter (24 May 2016)

Ves said:


> I'm still confused.  You were talking about the 2008 / GFC before and now you're talking about 2015.
> 
> Private debt to GDP actually decreased and then flat-lined during the GFC and year or two after,  which tells me that the private sector certainly wasn't increasing their debt levels.
> 
> It did however start increasing again from about 2013 onwards.  Which is the period I assume you are highlighting with those links??




You wrote this ...



> All that is great, it really is. But it doesn't actually answer my question.
> 
> If the private sector stops borrowing, and the government also decides to stop borrowing more (ie. running a surplus budget), both of these in an economy that historically (and at the time) runs a trade deficit, then how the bloody hell does GDP grow?
> 
> *You can't rely on low interest rates to carry an economy if people aren't borrowing any way!*!




People are borrowing and are continuing to borrow. 

The private sector in 2009/10 used the "stimulus" package (read $900 cheques) to pay down debt. Yep to GDP it decreased and flatlined. But then the low interest rates started a housing boom and a car frenzy. Banks are making record profits. 

My point was it was not necessary to spend 95 billion on debt to "stimulate" the economy when the Chinese were buying our ore and coal and the RBA was dropping rates.


----------



## trainspotter (24 May 2016)

craft said:


> Go read your extract in context:  Your making no sense - well not to me anyway, but I'm a bit thick.
> 
> Here's the context again in case you forgot to read it last time.
> http://www.thegoodfightonline.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/1.-Note-from-meeting-at-the-lodge-%E2%80%93-August-2008.pdf




Wayne Swan wrote this _"that is, *more spending* would keep *interest rates higher* than otherwise…"_

So they spent 95 billion dollars and what happened to interest rates anyway?


----------



## trainspotter (24 May 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> So what else is this government doing to stimulate the economy ?




Borrowing more money


----------



## craft (24 May 2016)

trainspotter said:


> Wayne Swan wrote this _"that is, *more spending* would keep *interest rates higher* than otherwise…"_
> 
> So they spent 95 billion dollars and what happened to interest rates anyway?




Crickeys, talk about being able to see black as white. The risk was that if it was only a shallow downturn and they used fiscal stimulation THEN the RBA would fight them and raise interest rates, making them look dopey.

However the RBA has supported the fiscal stimulus with even more monetary stimulus which you acknowledge but somehow you can turn it all on its head to suit your political opinion - quite incredible.


----------



## noco (24 May 2016)

craft said:


> NZ have done well. I'm not sure how hot their run-up was, I suspect their exposure to mining is not the same as ours and I don't know how much private debt they had to manage. The bigger the run up the harder to manage the outfall.
> 
> As to the level of stimulus - I suspect there is lots of defensible arguments around bigger or smaller, its just that we never seem to get the discussion from our politicians - just slogans "deficit disaster" "saved Australia" whatever line they think will get them re-elected and unfortunately Mr "Jobs and Growth" has turned out no different.
> 
> Politicians always want the glory. I suspect Australia's fortunes have probably got more to do with the calibre, education and culture of the non elected professionals in our bureaucracies and institutions that advise our politicians then the politicians themselves.




New Zealand has a Liberal Government who know how to handle their finances better than Labor....If Labor had been in power during the GFC, New Zealand would most likely be in the same situation as Australia.


----------



## trainspotter (24 May 2016)

craft said:


> Crickeys, talk about being able to see black as white. The risk was that if it was only a shallow downturn and they used fiscal stimulation THEN the RBA would fight them and raise interest rates, making them look dopey.
> 
> However the RBA has supported the fiscal stimulus with even more monetary stimulus which you acknowledge but somehow you can turn it all on its head to suit your political opinion - quite incredible.




Ermmmm nope again ....



> "The Reserve Bank through its control over interest rates, determines the overall level of aggregate demand in the economy, and the Bank would likely take account of* ANY *fiscal stimulus in its monetary decisions - that is, *more spending* would keep *interest rates higher* than otherwise."




From the link you supplied.

My opinion is that Swan had no idea what he was doing as he predicted ANY fiscal stimulus would cause the RBA to increase interest rates. Political or otherwise.

RBA was raising rates trying to slow the economy pre GFC remember ??





Roll out the stimulus packages .. 2.4 billion for Pink Batts ... anyone ... anyone?



> Most energy efficiency studies focus solely on the operational aspect of buildings, such as the energy it takes to heat and cool them. However, various studies have proven that the energy and emissions required to manufacture building products, such as insulation, can be just as significant. When they’re calculated using a comprehensive assessment technique, which includes all of the energy expended across the entire supply chain, the so-called “embodied” energy and emissions of a building can be equivalent to 50 years worth of a building’s operational energy requirement.




Just the facts as my political view is this ...


----------



## Ves (24 May 2016)

trainspotter said:


> The private sector in 2009/10 used the "stimulus" package (read $900 cheques) to pay down debt. Yep to GDP it decreased and flatlined. But then the low interest rates started a housing boom and a car frenzy. Banks are making record profits.



The stimulus package was like 12 billion to households.

Household debt is like $1.5 trillion.

That's basically the equivalent of saying you can pay an entire mortgage off with a 100 dollar bill.

Thanks,  it has been entertaining.

edit:  In other words it had barely any effect on Private Debt/GDP.


----------



## Tisme (24 May 2016)

Leigh on 7:30 Report  currently stitching up our Treasurer for lying


----------



## trainspotter (24 May 2016)

Ves said:


> The stimulus package was like 12 billion to households.
> 
> Household debt is like $1.5 trillion.
> 
> ...




You wrote this *"You can't rely on low interest rates to carry an economy if people aren't borrowing any way!!"*

I asked if anyone was NOT borrowing money to buy houses and cars. DERP !!

Thanks it evidences to me that you have no clue as to how fiscal policy works. I even gave you the debt clock to reference.


----------



## drsmith (24 May 2016)

Tisme said:


> Leigh on 7:30 Report  currently stitching up our Treasurer for lying



Not judging by the friendly nature upon which it ended.

Scott Morrison's tactic is to get Labor to say it's walking away from previous criticisms of the current government's budget measures. He doesn't want to let them crab walk in silence.

Whether the 4-year hole is $32bn or $67bn, it's still a big hole and Spend-O-Meter Bill and Labor are going to have to walk away from a lot more of their Coalition budget criticisms to get anywhere near eliminating it. 

I don't know if it was by design or luck but I now wonder if the 10yr company tax cut plan was in part at least a political ploy to encourage Bill Shorten to spend. If it was, it's worked a treat and to make matters worse for Labor, every new spend now will be seen through the prism of Bill's Spend-O-Meter.

On another policy front, commentary about an upcoming apartment oversupply are now becoming prevalent in mainstream media. I know in Perth, there's an awful lot presently being built.


----------



## luutzu (25 May 2016)

drsmith said:


> Not judging by the friendly nature upon which it ended.
> 
> Scott Morrison's tactic is to get Labor to say it's walking away from previous criticisms of the current government's budget measures. He doesn't want to let them crab walk in silence.
> 
> ...




Is a $48B over ten year corporate tax cut a spending or an investment?

I guess it can't be a spending because for it to be a loss in revenue would mean you'd have to first been able to collect the tax if the cuts weren't dreamt up.

$50B on submarines... that cash could have kick start more than a handful of Australian maritime engineers and other related industry if it weren't offshored ey.

Love how the innovation boom is given a few bucks but the real deal go to those who've done it already.


----------



## Ves (25 May 2016)

trainspotter said:


> You wrote this *"You can't rely on low interest rates to carry an economy if people aren't borrowing any way!!"*
> 
> I asked if anyone was NOT borrowing money to buy houses and cars. DERP !!
> 
> Thanks it evidences to me that you have no clue as to how fiscal policy works. I even gave you the debt clock to reference.



With all due respect,  people borrowing money to buy houses and cars is only one aspect of monetary supply created by the private sector.

There's also corporate borrowing for capex spending / investment,  infrastructure etc.  It's pretty obvious that both government and RBA policy has been trying to stimulate this for years.

I stand by my comments that monetary supply in Australia was very flat for those few years from about 2008-2012 (especially outside of the mining sector). There's heaps of commentary by this in the RBA minutes, press releases and also more by treasury.  

This was the discussion that we were initially having,  until you, aside from the witty insults and hilarious use of memes,  moved the goal posts and started talking about record car sales in 2015 and the "housing boom", and the took my quote out of context.

The whole irony is that in previous conversations,  yourself and various others,  put your hands up in the air and protested that the $900 cheques were taken to JB Hifi and used to buy plasma TVs.  Now that it suits your argument they were used to repay debt. Can't have it both ways.


----------



## SirRumpole (25 May 2016)

The Greens have a new model for business.


Ethics.


Good luck with that, but it sounds like a good idea to me.


http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-05-24/berg-greens-innovation-plan/7439642


----------



## trainspotter (25 May 2016)

Ves said:


> With all due respect,  people borrowing money to buy houses and cars is only one aspect of monetary supply created by the private sector.
> 
> There's also corporate borrowing for capex spending / investment,  infrastructure etc.  It's pretty obvious that both government and RBA policy has been trying to stimulate this for years.
> 
> ...




Ermmm nope you were having a conversation with yourself about GDP to household debt blah blah blah and questioned my rationale on this statement ...



> The RBA plunged the cash rate from 7.25 in August 2008 to 3 per cent in April 2009. When a country has a central bank targeting inflation and growth, fiscal stimulus is redundant. It's both costly and unnecessary. Hence why we have the debt that neither Libs or Labs have a clue to dumb down.




and you replied thusly ...



> I don't follow this logic.
> 
> Private debt was about 120% of GDP at this time (2008) and hint: that's much closer to high than low. Comparatively net public debt is about 11%.
> 
> ...




So I went on to explain that lowering interest rates would encourage people to borrow money as in RECORD car sales and a housing boom etc.



> P.S. Prior to the GFC the RBA were LIFTING rates to fight inflation. GFC hit and WHAMMO the rates came tumbling down. Rudd claimed it was because of his "stimulus packages" that save Australia from recession. Nope ... the RBA lowering rates, China spending 568 billion or 7% of GDP with us blah blah blah .. GEDDIT NOW ???




You then came out with this gem ...



> You can't rely on low interest rates to carry an economy if people aren't borrowing any way!!




So no one borrowed any money then ? The lowering of interest rates as well as China spending 568 billion or 7% of GDP got us through the GFC and not RUDD as he claimed with his "stimulus packages". Plus a few more things helped like the fact we had 26 billion dollars in the piggy bank and the government was debt free to name a few.

Keeping up yet? 

So then you got all specific about 2008 net debt to GDP ratio's blah blah blah which is not what I was discussing at all.

Yes the $900 went to Harvey Norman and flat screen TV's which amounted to $1 of household consumption expenditures - in other words IT WAS A WASTE ...



> The paper's main finding is that household consumption expenditures on non-durables did
> 
> not react significantly during or after the one-time, pre-announced transfer. The estimated effects
> 
> ...




https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B5Kr...UzA/edit?pli=1

Thanks .. it has been quaint.


----------



## Ves (25 May 2016)

trainspotter said:


> So no one borrowed any money then ?




Already explained in my last post.   Housing / cars / blah blah,  yep borrowing is occurring,  anything else pretty much **** all borrowing is occurring. The total aggregate growth is pretty low and has been since about 2008.

Isn't it obvious that is why rates are still at record lows?

Hence not much inflation and not much growth and exactly why the Libs aren't taking an axe at the deficit (like they have been telling the media they will for the last, I dunno,  7 years).

You can't just look at one part of the economy and ignore the rest like you are.


----------



## trainspotter (25 May 2016)

Ves said:


> Already explained in my last post.   Housing / cars / blah blah,  yep borrowing is occurring,  anything else pretty much **** all borrowing is occurring. The total aggregate growth is pretty low and has been since about 2008.
> 
> Isn't it obvious that is why rates are still at record lows?
> 
> ...




And rates are going to go lower as the RBA tries to keep the inflation in target range and the Aussie peso will be around 65 cents.



> The Governor and the Treasurer have agreed that the appropriate target for monetary policy in Australia is to achieve an inflation rate of 2–3 per cent, on average, over the cycle. This is a rate of inflation sufficiently low that it does not materially distort economic decisions in the community. Seeking to achieve this rate, on average, provides discipline for monetary policy decision-making, and serves as an anchor for private-sector inflation expectations.




http://www.rba.gov.au/inflation/

My point was Libs left 26 billion in the bank, GFC hit, rates dropped, China represents 7% GDP, no bank foreclosures, no property price crash = NO NEED FOR STIMULUS PACKAGES (well maybe a little but not the amount that was spent) 

Neither the Libs or the Labs have a clue as to how to pay off the deficit. 10 year modelling on company tax rates indeed !!


----------



## Tisme (25 May 2016)

Reclaim Australia are doing there best on facebook/twitter to make sure no one votes Labor nor Greens to stop the influx of Muslims et al

I'm wondering if our Townsville correspondent will attend the 02 July "Respect Australia Rally - National"


----------



## trainspotter (25 May 2016)

Tisme said:


> Reclaim Australia are doing there best on facebook/twitter to make sure no one votes Labor nor Greens to stop the influx of Muslims et al
> 
> I'm wondering if our Townsville correspondent will attend the 02 July "Respect Australia Rally - National"




Pauline has hit the Facebook hustings hard to try and look middle of the road ...


----------



## noco (25 May 2016)

drsmith said:


> There's now intraday movement on the Sportsbet federal election outcome,
> 
> http://www.sportsbet.com.au/betting...deral-politics/outrights?ev_oc_grp_id=2104376
> 
> ...




According to the bookies, Shorten does not have a chance...What will happen to him if he loses the election on July2 ?

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...o/news-story/83d33304ce4c04cd8f3ca05d1d46bbbb

*When the election campaign first kicked off, I suggested Labor’s task to win the election was Himalayan. Labor needs a net gain of 19 seats with a uniform swing of four per cent to form government in its own right.

Now some two and a half weeks into the eight week campaign, individual seat betting markets are showing Labor may only clamber up as far as base camp with a six seat gain – two in Queensland (Petrie and Capricornia), two in NSW (Eden-Monaro and Banks), and one a piece in the NT (Solomon), WA (Hasluck) and SA (Hindmarsh).*


----------



## banco (25 May 2016)

Why are we giving welfare to the dairy farmers?


----------



## luutzu (25 May 2016)

banco said:


> Why are we giving welfare to the dairy farmers?




Because it's election year, farmers are struggling and our competition watchdog and government can't seem to know what else to do when the two major buyers thought they'd used their too-big-to-play-hero-with position, make their projected profit, and our representative won't do anything but reach into each of our pocket and give it to them - masking it as helping the Aussie battler, of course.

It's Market forces and economy of scale where if they make big profits they keep but if not enough we cough up, pay the abused farmers, and indirectly reward them for... for something.


----------



## drsmith (25 May 2016)

noco said:


> According to the bookies, Shorten does not have a chance...What will happen to him if he loses the election on July2 ?
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...o/news-story/83d33304ce4c04cd8f3ca05d1d46bbbb
> 
> ...



Poll Bludger in a piece today had a graphic of the betting odds more broadly,




http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/2016/05/25/bludgertrack-50-50/


----------



## Tisme (25 May 2016)

banco said:


> Why are we giving welfare to the dairy farmers?




Because they have growth and jobs Barnaby Tomato on their side 24/7. Didn't you know that?! 

Farmers can't just turn off the milk, it would result in people out of work. Unlike GMH and Ford where evil anti Australian trade unionists were raised and nurtured like a manmade pestilance in our land of golden soil for toil.


----------



## moXJO (26 May 2016)

banco said:


> Why are we giving welfare to the dairy farmers?




Because food production.


----------



## moXJO (26 May 2016)

Tisme said:


> Because they have growth and jobs Barnaby Tomato on their side 24/7. Didn't you know that?!
> 
> Farmers can't just turn off the milk, it would result in people out of work. Unlike GMH and Ford where evil anti Australian trade unionists were raised and nurtured like a manmade pestilance in our land of golden soil for toil.




Pretty sure keeping national food security is more important then crappy cars no one is buying.
If our dollar drops to US .50 then manufacturing will flood back. If we lose a generation of aussie farmers and farms to foreign interests,  then it's lost.


----------



## Tisme (26 May 2016)

Recap last few days:


Our treasurer is still telling lies to weasel out of the lies he told Leigh the other day. Plus apparently it's Labor's fault his govt and two more LNP govts are in the top four biggest spend per GDP regimes.

The Finanace Minister gave Billy Shorten a wrap at a door stop interview ... good on him for showing bi partisan support for Labor's policies.

Then there's the not so savvy Labor dick that got blindsided twice by Fox News and forgot to take his notes with him as he "run Rabbit runned". 

And never one to let us down Barnaby Tomato blamed Labor stopping the live beef exports as reason why (apparently) Indonesia retaliated by sending us their live people exports. AND THen he gets on telly this morning to mimic the treasurer's method of factualisation by lying to the back of his red faced teeth.

Things are starting to get amusing, thank goodness


----------



## SirRumpole (26 May 2016)

banco said:


> Why are we giving welfare to the dairy farmers?




Because of Free Trade Agreements.


----------



## SirRumpole (26 May 2016)

This is a comment from a dairy as to the cause of the milk problem

"The reason for the sharp drop in price paid to farmers for milk solids is because of a global oversupply. This is because of an unexpected drop in demand from China, and Russia banning import of dairy from EU countries (for no other reason than that Russia likes to flex it's muscle) leading to a glut of milk in Europe. As farmers are highly subsidised in Europe this means they continue to produce despite the lack of demand- leading to a drop in world price. 

In New Zealand they are heading into the third season of below cost of production prices- with many farmers there living on overdraft. Australai has been better off up until this season because the Victorian co-operative Murray Goulburn has held it's price up- forcing the other foreign owned companies in Vic, Tas and SA to hold their prices in order to secure supply. When MG dropped it's price, they were quickly followed by the other main exporters in the Southern states.

The situation has NOTHING to do with the supermarkets, (as awful as they are) and the reaction of boycotting supermarket brand milk, while done with the best of intentions will do nothing to help the farmers whose milk mainly gets sold into the export market."


----------



## moXJO (26 May 2016)

Tisme said:


> Things are starting to get amusing, thank goodness




Watching Billy and Malcom slug it out so far was like watching two marshmallows getting it on.
Maybe they are saving the meaty attacks for next month?
Been a fizzer so far.


----------



## Tisme (26 May 2016)

I think the party that comes out and states it will rejig the current spends and constrain new spending will get a sympathetic ear for the voters. IT was what many wanted last election, but instead the bleed got worse.

IMO Billy shot himself in the foot when he started rolling out increases in expenditures for some sectors without clearly explaining how that was offset against savings in others...if that is the case. The public want surety that Labor  has learned how to be prudent and at least get the message out there to the entire population by means other than through a Liberal Party dominated media....the ABC will only ever reach those already informed people who have fixed focus.


----------



## SirRumpole (26 May 2016)

Tisme said:


> I think the party that comes out and states it will rejig the current spends and constrain new spending will get a sympathetic ear for the voters. IT was what many wanted last election, but instead the bleed got worse.
> 
> IMO Billy shot himself in the foot when he started rolling out increases in expenditures for some sectors without clearly explaining how that was offset against savings in others...if that is the case. The public want surety that Labor  has learned how to be prudent and at least get the message out there to the entire population by means other than through a Liberal Party dominated media....the ABC will only ever reach those already informed people who have fixed focus.




The length of the campaign means it's only a phony war so far. I expect things to hot up once the official campaigns begin.

If the government sticks to previous strategies they will release their costings on the Thursday before the election. 

They have already showed they are willing to make wild assumptions about Labor's so called "black hole", just as they were willing to make wild assumptions about the cost of the NBN before the last election.

How far we can trust Labor on their costings is another matter. I suspect that they are keeping revenue measures closely guarded to avoid a potential backlash from rich and powerful people.


----------



## Tisme (26 May 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> The length of the campaign means it's only a phony war so far. I expect things to hot up once the official campaigns begin.
> 
> If the government sticks to previous strategies they will release their costings on the Thursday before the election.
> 
> ...




Hoping for a baby overboard to seal the deal?


I'm really disappointed to find out it wasn't Tony Abbott who propounded the "Ditch the Witch", "Barnacle Bill" name calling and sloganeering for stupids, now we have to witness Malcolm Turnbull schoolyard labelling Shorten as "Billionaire Bill".....WTF is wrong with the LNP that they have to resort to childish behaviour (I think it's Morrison at its core), does Barnaby Tomato name call and I wonder if he applauds Johnny Depp for his clever lip?


----------



## SirRumpole (26 May 2016)

Tisme said:


> Hoping for a baby overboard to seal the deal?
> 
> 
> I'm really disappointed to find out it wasn't Tony Abbott who propounded the "Ditch the Witch", "Barnacle Bill" name calling and sloganeering for stupids, now we have to witness Malcolm Turnbull schoolyard labelling Shorten as "Billionaire Bill".....WTF is wrong with the LNP that they have to resort to childish behaviour (I think it's Morrison at its core), does Barnaby Tomato name call and I wonder if he applauds Johnny Depp for his clever lip?




Electricity Bill ? That was one of Abbott's I think.

Trouble is stupid voters remember that sort of cr@p, it's a lot easier than thinking about policy.


----------



## Tisme (26 May 2016)

Barnaby is currently getting a bucket tipped over him by Tony Windsor over Barnaby's statements about boat people and Labors fault. He's pointing out the suspension of exports was supported by bipartisan agreement between the govt and the National Party.

Of course Tony is also of the opinion that Barnaby has probably insulted the Indonesians .... I doubt that could happen given our neighbours aren't fools.


----------



## Tisme (26 May 2016)

I should point out that Johnny Depp is probably forgiven for his rants against Barnaby given his wife Amber Heard left him May 22 after the apology and  after John's mum's death May 20.


----------



## SirRumpole (26 May 2016)

Tisme said:


> I should point out that Johnny Depp is probably forgiven for his rants against Barnaby given his wife Amber Heard left him May 22 after the apology and  after John's mum's death May 20.




Having seen his recent TV interviews I don't blame her. Creepy is the word that comes to mind.


----------



## Tisme (26 May 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Having seen his recent TV interviews I don't blame her. Creepy is the word that comes to mind.




I was looking at my tweets a moment ago and one of my posts has surfaced from way back when I gave Tony Abbott a rap for standing up for us males LOL. 

Currently appreciating Barnaby's swipes at Tanya....apparently he is off to the local markets to find Plibersek's policy on nautical asylum seekers.


----------



## SirRumpole (26 May 2016)

Tisme said:


> I was looking at my tweets a moment ago and one of my posts has surfaced from way back when I gave Tony Abbott a rap for standing up for us males LOL.
> 
> Currently appreciating Barnaby's swipes at Tanya....apparently he is off to the local markets to find Plibersek's policy on nautical asylum seekers.




Fortunately we haven't seen a lot of Tanya so far this campaign. Blonde jokes always come to mind when she appears.


----------



## luutzu (26 May 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Fortunately we haven't seen a lot of Tanya so far this campaign. Blonde jokes always come to mind when she appears.




You two got the TisPole or PoleTis batten down yet?


----------



## SirRumpole (26 May 2016)

luutzu said:


> You two got the TisPole or PoleTis batten down yet?




Membership fee $500. You in ?


----------



## wayneL (26 May 2016)

With the possibility of a Short'un win, I have started shifting my millions to safer jurisdictions, North Korea, Nigeria and Venezuela.


----------



## luutzu (26 May 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Membership fee $500. You in ?




Wow. That much for baby oil and a mat? 

too far?


----------



## drsmith (26 May 2016)

drsmith said:


> Not judging by the friendly nature upon which it ended.
> 
> Scott Morrison's tactic is to get Labor to say it's walking away from previous criticisms of the current government's budget measures. He doesn't want to let them crab walk in silence.
> 
> Whether the 4-year hole is $32bn or $67bn, it's still a big hole and Spend-O-Meter Bill and Labor are going to have to walk away from a lot more of their Coalition budget criticisms to get anywhere near eliminating it.



Overboard from the Labor ship as a result of Scott Morrison's Labor black hole broadside,



> The Federal Opposition has confirmed it will not roll back the Coalition's changes to the pension or restore the Schoolkids Bonus if it wins power.
> 
> Labor has criticised the Coalition for scrapping the bonus and has railed against the pension changes, which reduce payments to pensioners with substantial assets.
> 
> ...




http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-05-26/labor-backtracks-on-schoolkids-bonus/7447760

They'll be more.


----------



## SirRumpole (26 May 2016)

luutzu said:


> Wow. That much for baby oil and a mat?
> 
> too far?




You get the companionship of like minds, or we throw you out.


----------



## trainspotter (27 May 2016)

Sums it up pretty nicely I thought ...


----------



## drsmith (27 May 2016)

drsmith said:


> They'll be more.



Overboard today,



> The Federal Opposition has confirmed it's supporting a $1 billion cut to the Australian Renewable Energy Agency
> 
> As my colleague Dan Conifer writes, the Government has proposed a $1.3 billion reduction in ARENA funding.
> 
> ...




http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-05-27/election-2016-live-blog-may-27/7449652


----------



## overhang (27 May 2016)

noco said:


> According to the bookies, Shorten does not have a chance...What will happen to him if he loses the election on July2 ?




I think the bookies odds have a lot to do with the fact we've only had a one term government once as the polls seem to indicate it will be a lot closer than the odds suggest.  
Interestingly a couple of weeks before the 2010 election had Labor at $1.45 and the coalition at $2.65 and we know how close Labor came to losing that election.  Going by those odds the bookies don't believe the coalition are in as much trouble as Labor were in 2010 but I wouldn't be confident either.


----------



## Ves (27 May 2016)

Betting odds don't represent a view on the probability of something happening,  so there's really no point in using them as a gauge.


----------



## bellenuit (27 May 2016)

Ves said:


> Betting odds don't represent a view on the probability of something happening,  so there's really no point in using them as a gauge.




I would have thought it would be very much in the interest of those setting the odds to make sure that the odds reflect accurately the probability of sides winning. However that assumes those who take the bets also do so on the basis of an objective assessment of who will win, rather than just betting for their favourite party irrespective. 

Not so much disputing what you are saying, but surely if the odds offered are not reflective of reality, astute punters should be able to make a killing.


----------



## Ves (27 May 2016)

bellenuit said:


> I would have thought it would be very much in the interest of those setting the odds to make sure that the odds reflect accurately the probability of sides winning. However that assumes those who take the bets also do so on the basis of an objective assessment of who will win, rather than just betting for their favourite party irrespective.
> 
> Not so much disputing what you are saying, but surely if the odds offered are not reflective of reality, astute punters should be able to make a killing.



Well,  for a gambling company to make a profit,  the probabilities of all events have to add up to more than 100% for a start.

There's also supply / demand factors... for instance,  if too many people are betting LNP then their odds will have to come down to balance the outcomes.   Labor's odds also might widen.

Gambling companies also adjust their algorithms based on past experience (ie. if people were more likely to bet on an outcome when it looked like a "surer bet" than "too close to call" they may also adapt the odds to reflect this or any other type of behaviour you can imagine).

I'm certainly no expert, but some people certainly do make money on political odds,  although,  it's obviously built into the odds already and generally enough people lose to make up for it.

I don't think political betting markets are that saturated either.  Which doesn't help much when setting probabilities.


----------



## SirRumpole (27 May 2016)

Ves said:


> Well,  for a gambling company to make a profit,  the probabilities of all events have to add up to more than 100% for a start.
> 
> There's also supply / demand factors... for instance,  if too many people are betting LNP then their odds will have to come down to balance the outcomes.   Labor's odds also might widen.
> 
> ...




Must be a big risk in the swinging voters though. A lot don't make up their minds untill they get into the booths.


----------



## Tisme (28 May 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Must be a big risk in the swinging voters though. A lot don't make up their minds untill they get into the booths.




True and the Labor Party probably wonder why having a burka wearing woman handing out how to vote cards is problematic. Of course if I was the Lib candidate I'd probably hire a burka wearing woman to parade a "Vote Labor" placard around Noco's area.


----------



## Logique (28 May 2016)

Not looking too good for the Coalition



> Election 2016:* Labor surges in the polls* as campaign focus turns to economic credentials - May 27, 2016
> smh: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...redentials-20160527-gp5bc5.html#ixzz49ttY7yCW
> 
> At the end of the third week of the 2016 campaign, Labor surged to its largest lead of the contest to date in a Seven News/Reachtel poll published Friday night, taking a *52-48 lead* in the two-party preferred vote....


----------



## explod (28 May 2016)

Morgan poll had them 52.5 to 47.5 on the 15th.


----------



## SirRumpole (28 May 2016)

Tisme said:


> True and the Labor Party probably wonder why having a burka wearing woman handing out how to vote cards is problematic. Of course if I was the Lib candidate I'd probably hire a burka wearing woman to parade a "Vote Labor" placard around Noco's area.




Only problematic in some areas as you suggested. It would go down well in Ed Husic's seat or Tony Burkes, or Chris Bowen's.

A burka clad woman with a placard Vote Liberal would be a good idea for Labor on Sydney's Northern beaches.


----------



## drsmith (28 May 2016)

William Bowe (Editor of Poll Bludger has offered some preliminary commentary on the latest ReachTEL polls,



> Good news and bad news for both sides this evening courtesy of the latest ReachTEL polls for the Seven Network, which have Labor opening up a 52-48 lead on two-party preferred nationally, but trailing 54-46 in the fairly crucial Liberal-held Victorian marginal of Corangamite.




http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/2016/05/27/reachtel-52-48-labor-3/

Sportsbet odds I note are yet to change from $1.30/$3.50 in favour of the Coalition in response to the above so I can only assume the betting money still has Labor struggling in the marginal seats it needs to win.


----------



## moXJO (28 May 2016)

It's still a bit far out to rely on the polls,last few weeks will be the tell. It's going to be close. IMO it's a hung parliament or labor edging in at this point in time.

Tbull is just not an effective, or interesting enough campaigner at this point. But perhaps they are keeping their powder dry. Still a good distance to run yet.


----------



## drsmith (28 May 2016)

moXJO said:


> Tbull is just not an effective, or interesting enough campaigner at this point. But perhaps they are keeping their powder dry. Still a good distance to run yet.



Interesting piece in the AFR today,

http://www.afr.com/news/politics/el...ull-the-winner-to-cut-through-20160526-gp4sqk


----------



## noco (28 May 2016)

drsmith said:


> Interesting piece in the AFR today,
> 
> http://www.afr.com/news/politics/el...ull-the-winner-to-cut-through-20160526-gp4sqk




Doc, that link is only for subscribers...You may have to bring some of that out.


----------



## explod (28 May 2016)

noco said:


> Doc, that link is only for subscribers...You may have to bring some of that out.




Came up fine and in full on my android. 

The basic tenet: Turnbull as an honest person is finding it difficult to impart bull... t


----------



## moXJO (28 May 2016)

explod said:


> Came up fine and in full on my android.
> 
> The basic tenet: Turnbull as an honest person is finding it difficult to impart bull... t




That's the problem after the last three elections. Messages have to be dumbed down so much for the public to swallow. Rudd was a master at captivating the general public. Tony had three word slogans. They both got a message across, or an emotion whipped up.

I still don't know what either party wants to get across. If the message is "trust us to run the finances" - man.... good luck with that. At least attempt to make the message palatable. Voters are dumb but they need a forward thinking vision from either side. Not just "Hey, at least we are better then them".

 I'm fine with bland politics rather than a circus. But that's not what wins elections.


----------



## dutchie (29 May 2016)

moXJO said:


> That's the problem after the last three elections. Messages have to be dumbed down so much for the public to swallow. Rudd was a master at captivating the general public. Tony had three word slogans. They both got a message across, or an emotion whipped up.
> 
> I still don't know what either party wants to get across. If the message is "trust us to run the finances" - man.... good luck with that. At least attempt to make the message palatable. Voters are dumb but they need a forward thinking vision from either side. Not just "Hey, at least we are better then them".
> 
> I'm fine with bland politics rather than a circus. But that's not what wins elections.




Real (normal 5 week) election campaign starts tomorrow.


----------



## noco (29 May 2016)

moXJO said:


> That's the problem after the last three elections. Messages have to be dumbed down so much for the public to swallow. Rudd was a master at captivating the general public. Tony had three word slogans. They both got a message across, or an emotion whipped up.
> 
> I still don't know what either party wants to get across. If the message is "trust us to run the finances" - man.... good luck with that. At least attempt to make the message palatable. Voters are dumb but they need a forward thinking vision from either side. Not just "Hey, at least we are better then them".
> 
> I'm fine with bland politics rather than a circus. But that's not what wins elections.




I will be voting for the lesser of two evils.


----------



## SirRumpole (29 May 2016)

noco said:


> I will be voting for the lesser of two evils.




So will I .

At least we agree on something.


----------



## noco (29 May 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> So will I .
> 
> At least we agree on something.




Geez Rumpy, when did you convert?..The is the greatest news break of the day.....Good on you...I am so proud of you....!!!!!!


----------



## Tisme (29 May 2016)

Just a reminder not to put your money on bookies when it comes to elections. As recently as a year and half ago, this was the state of play for the upcoming QLD State election and the "on the nose " Labor Party.



> THE bookies says the Queensland election on January 31 looks like being a bitter sweet one for Premier Campbell Newman.
> 
> Online bookmaker sportsbet.com.au is predicting a victory for the LNP, but Newman finds himself a $2.45 outsider to retain his seat of Ashgrove in what would be the ultimate celebration dampener.
> 
> ...





Wrong on every scenario, bar one


----------



## orr (29 May 2016)

Tisme said:


> Wrong on every scenario,




Don't cruel it for TISM'e the last time I looked Mirrabella was 11-1 against; a bloke needs something to hang-on to.

 Of note as well; Back when the Victorian's gave Kennett the 'big heave-ho' the 'bookies' had him as a shoe in...


----------



## drsmith (29 May 2016)

Betting odds don't say who will win. They are a market representation on the probability of specific outcomes. $1.30/$3.50 for represents an 80% implied probability of a Coalition win, according to Poll Bludger. 

Individuals can of course form their own views and where that differs from the above can add to the market. Gamble responsibly.

On another topic, what's wrong with John Hewson ?

He looked terrible when on the ABC's post debate discussion.


----------



## drsmith (29 May 2016)

If Labor get elected it will be 100 days before they make further changes to super.


----------



## Tisme (29 May 2016)

drsmith said:


> If Labor get elected it will be 100 days before they make further changes to super.





If labor win it will change the way you are allowed to talk and think so that it doesn't offend some fringe dweller.. Penny and Tanya will see to that.


----------



## Tisme (29 May 2016)

http://www.essentialvision.com.au/category/essentialreport


depends on the boundaries and the captives in it.


----------



## Tisme (30 May 2016)

drsmith said:


> Betting odds don't say who will win. They are a market representation on the probability of specific outcomes. $1.30/$3.50 for represents an 80% implied probability of a Coalition win, according to Poll Bludger.
> 
> Individuals can of course form their own views and where that differs from the above can add to the market. Gamble responsibly.
> 
> ...




I actually wanted to know how bookies set their odds when I had stars in my eyes back in mist of youth. One thing that was apparent is that the odds are not exclusively prob&stats; actually probability was relegated in favour profit and profit won't flow if their isn't an anomolly to the expected outcome ....... anyone can work the probability and expected distribution and thus no need for bookies if that was the only criteria.

Bookies actually play on public opinion and receive an median overround  of about 6% for their effort. The odds are based on a mixture of probabilities and public opinion.

The stock exchange works pretty much the same way. You have clever people on one side who possess the wisdom of the ages and another set of people on the other who possess the ages of wisdom and a bloke sitting in the middle hoping neither side, too often,  twigs they are subjectively choosing objectivity.


----------



## noco (30 May 2016)

Who would you sooner have take care of our finances?????

A self made business man who understands the essentials in economics or an ex union hack with a kindergarten knowledge of handling your money with no business experience.

Keith De Lacey, an ex Queensland Labor MP from the old Labor school is one who does not hold Bill Shorten in high regard  when it comes to understanding  the importance of a strong business with continued growth, employing more people and investing more into our economy........De Lacey maintains Shorten is anti business and anti investment and will eventually lead Australia into an even bigger disaster than Rudd/Gillard/Rudd. 

Shorten was like a cracked record in last nights debate and repeated himself over and over again about the tax incentive Turnbull was offering business......He raved on about the big banks and large corporations getting tax cuts of which would not come to effect until 2019....  

Shorten and his team are hell bent on central control......profits are a dirty word and are anti capitalists.....Most of the LUG party are capitalist wanting to live in a socialist world......David Feeney is a typical example.



http://www.theaustralian.com.au/fed...s/news-story/f29196ab1c05c244a0896059e1b9f633

*Bill Shorten’s claim that the opposition has “excellent relations” with corporate Australia has been dealt a sharp blow, with former Queensland Labor treasurer Keith DeLacy decrying the party’s stance on tax cuts as “the most anti-business policy I’ve ever seen federal Labor put to an election”.

As Labor continues its attack on the Coalition’s plans for $48.2 billion in business tax cuts, Mr DeLacy, an experienced director who has chaired companies such as Macarthur Coal and Cubbie Station, took aim at Labor’s rhetoric.

“This is the most anti-business policy I’ve ever seen federal Labor put to an election,” the Goss government treasurer from 1989 to 1996 told The Australian.

“And it’s not just the policy. It’s the language. The way it splits out the top end of town leaves business in no doubt that they are the enemy.”

    More: Shorten mum on bonus backflip
    More: Xenophon surge threatens majors

Mr DeLacy’s comments came as NSW Business Chamber chief executive Stephen Cartwright declared he did not think “the ALP have a clue about what small businesses really need from their pol*itical leaders”.

Former ANZ Bank chairman John Morschel joined the fray, warning that Labor’s approach could “take the country down a very dangerous path, which is big-spending”.

Peak business groups have backed key planks of Malcolm Turnbull’s economic agenda, prompting the Opposition Leader to insist last week that “Labor has excellent relations with business”.

Minerals Council of Australia chief executive Brendan Pearson said Labor’s handling of the debate on company tax cuts was a “clear departure” from the approach of the Hawke and Keating governments that took the company tax rate from 49 to 36 per cent.

“To be frank, Labor’s approach to the company tax debate has been very disappointing,” Mr Pearson said. “The strident anti-business tone of some of the opposition’s rhetoric over recent months has also been surprising, given the consultative approach that has characterised most of the last three years.”

Under the Coalition’s plan, the tax rate for small and medium businesses will be cut to 27.5 per cent from July 1 and extended to companies turning over less than $10 million, up from $2m. From 2023-24, all companies would be on 27.5 per cent, which would be lowered to 25 per cent in 2026-27.*


----------



## SirRumpole (30 May 2016)

noco said:


> Who would you sooner have take care of our finances?????




Not someone who is going to give a ten year $50 billion tax cut to his mates, when his government has doubled the deficit (at least) and doubled government debt.

We just can't afford this extravagant and wasteful spending in a time of financial stringency.


----------



## Logique (30 May 2016)

I thought Shorten was the clear winner last night in the televised debate. Well prepared, and pretty much nailed Turnbull.

I don't know why he let Turnbull pretend the company tax cut was about protecting young people. Unlike Labor's negative gearing/CGT wind backs I suppose?

Interesting to see Richard Branson on morning TV today. Branson says we're lucky to Malcolm Turnbull as our PM.

Of course nothing to do with Malcolm's promised company tax cut, which would net Virgin Australia...how many $Mills?


----------



## Tisme (30 May 2016)

noco said:


> Who would you sooner have take care of our finances?????
> 
> A self made business man who understands the essentials in economics or an ex union hack with a kindergarten knowledge of handling your money with no business experience.




That would suggest you proscribe anyone who isn't wealthy? Maybe Clive would be better seeing as he has vastly more wealth than our PM?

Not taking anything away from his early achievements Mal was in a position to profit from his time with Packer and Neville Wran/Nicholas Whitlam (you know the previous LABOR premier and son of a previous LABOR PM. ). He also went to a largely Jewish populated school named Sydney Grammar which would be great exposure to how to make money out of an empty pot.


----------



## noco (30 May 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Not someone who is going to give a ten year $50 billion tax cut to his mates, when his government has doubled the deficit (at least) and doubled government debt.
> 
> We just can't afford this extravagant and wasteful spending in a time of financial stringency.




We could not afford the extravagant waste in 2007/2013 either and we are still suffering today.....Labor said NO to $18 billion spending cuts which the Liberals wanted to introduce.......Gonski and the NIDIS was never funded by Labor which has become another legacy inherited by the Liberals.....$6billion of that $18 billion was even a part of Labor's own cuts......What a grubby lot they are to have the audacity to say the Liberals have doubled the debt and deficit.......If Labor had been still in power it would have doubled again to that of the Liberals.

Labor are economic vandals with one thing in mind..."RUIN OUR ECONOMY TO ADVANCE INTO SOCIALIST CENTRAL CONTROL". 

'TAX CUTS TO HIS MATES"???????????????...Typical Fabian rhetoric.....You just do not understand the reasoning behind it do you?

Your Labor mate Keith De Lacey understands the benefits......Paul Keating understood the benefits when he reduced the business tax rate .....Chris Bowen wanted cut the business tax rate to 28%...Andrew Leigh once wrote, "LOWER BUSINESS TAX WILL CREATE JOBS"...Many economists understand the benefits as per the link.

So who do you suggest is out of step?


----------



## SirRumpole (30 May 2016)

noco said:


> Your Labor mate Keith De Lacey understands the benefits......Paul Keating understood the benefits when he reduced the business tax rate .....Chris Bowen wanted cut the business tax rate to 28%...Andrew Leigh once wrote, "LOWER BUSINESS TAX WILL CREATE JOBS"...Many economists understand the benefits as per the link.
> 
> So who do you suggest is out of step?




Bowen may well have written his opinion when business tax cuts were affordable.


They aren't now.


----------



## noco (30 May 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Bowen may well have written his opinion when business tax cuts were affordable.
> 
> 
> They aren't now.




Not so according to leading economists.....Paul Keating did it when he said we were headed into becoming a 'BANANA REPUBLIC"...At that stage we were headed for a recession...Smart thinking on Keating's part.....Dull thinking on Labor 2016....It is a case of Labor opposing for the sake of opposing without any National interest of the outcome.

So what is your opinion of Keating?


----------



## SirRumpole (30 May 2016)

noco said:


> Not so according to leading economists.....Paul Keating did it when he said we were headed into becoming a 'BANANA REPUBLIC"...At that stage we were headed for a recession...Smart thinking on Keating's part.....Dull thinking on Labor 2016....It is a case of Labor opposing for the sake of opposing without any National interest of the outcome.
> 
> So what is your opinion of Keating?




Keating was one of our best PMs, but conditions are different now.

It's well known that most of the benefits of a business tax cut now will go to overseas shareholders or the US government.

If everyone has to tighten their belts then so should companies. A tax cut to business is useless unless consumers are spending. If there are to be tax cuts they should go to people more likely to put the money back into the economy; ie low and middle income consumers.


----------



## luutzu (30 May 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Bowen may well have written his opinion when business tax cuts were affordable.
> 
> 
> They aren't now.




A business tax cut is not affordable now, that's why they're only given a 1.5% cut. In coming years, when it's more affordable, they'll get a bigger cut.

I'm pretty sure I heard that right when the Budget was release by our wise Treasurer Morrison. 

Listen up poor, sick people... we can't afford too much so you'll have to do your part and cough up more cash when you cough up your lung; Look business, we can't afford much so there's $50Billion - there'll be more where that comes from!


----------



## Logique (30 May 2016)

Australian Liberty Alliance: tell me again why I should vote ALA in the Senate?

My bolds below, from the ALA website. As I read it, the prospective ALA Senators would wave through a GST increase. And make me pay more for online purchases from Amazon.

No thanks.



> http://www.australianlibertyalliance.org.au/values-and-policies/values-and-core-policies
> 
> i. The tax base must be as broad as possible while tax rates should be kept as low as possible. We prefer lower tax rates on income and profit in return for *an increased tax rate on all goods and services*.
> 
> ...


----------



## noco (30 May 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Keating was one of our best PMs, but conditions are different now.
> 
> It's well known that most of the benefits of a business tax cut now will go to overseas shareholders or the US government.
> 
> If everyone has to tighten their belts then so should companies. A tax cut to business is useless unless consumers are spending. If there are to be tax cuts they should go to people more likely to put the money back into the economy; ie low and middle income consumers.




Can you blokes get it into your thick heads those tax cuts for big business does not take place for another 4 years...What are you raving on about.....It is the typical LUG party ploy to parrot Bill Shorten that overseas share holders will benefit.......Are you still behind the times that  tax loop holes are being closed with an international understanding to prevent such happenings where by large corporations will be pulled into line to pay their fair share of tax...Shorten was like a cracked record about it on the debate last night......The old Fabian tactic......if you say something often enough the naive will believe it.

The problem is in this great country of ours nobody wants to tighten their belts when things get tough ......Bugger you mate, I am alright.....So long as my pocket is full I don't care about yours and that is the attitude of the majority.

Asked them to pay a little extra to go to the doctor and there is a hugh and cry......Ask them to pay a little more for prescriptions at the Chemist and Labor jump up and down ....Look!!!!!!!! the Liberals are hitting the poor old pensioners  most of whom go to the public hospital anyway.

If workers in this country of ours accept better wages and conditions when things are good, why isn't fair for workers to accept lower conditions when things get tough......Is that too much to ask?...Labor states they will increase local manufacturing if they get into power but they don't say how they will do it....How will they compete overseas with such high wages and conditions which all add to the cost?

Bill Shorten always talks a lot about fairness...Bill Shorten states he always has the workers interest at heart until it come to dirty deals with Chiquita, Clean Event and McDonals's restaurants purely to suit him personally and the AWU which he represents.....'FAIRNESS", Shorten does not know the meaning of the word.....Shorten is an absolute hypocrite.


----------



## SirRumpole (30 May 2016)

noco said:


> Can you blokes get it into your thick heads ...




You were going ok for a while and then the rant subroutine cut in.


----------



## noco (30 May 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> You were going ok for a while and then the rant subroutine cut in.




With that typical Rumpy remark, it just goes to prove you just do not understand the simple basics of economics....

The majority in this country are so damn  greedy that they  do not want give an inch.


----------



## SirRumpole (30 May 2016)

Nick Xenophon Team to attract 22pc of votes, opinion poll finds


http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-05-...australian-to-vote-nick-xenophon-team/7458606


----------



## SirRumpole (30 May 2016)

noco said:


> The majority in this country are so damn  greedy that they  do not want give an inch.




Sure and most of them are on higher incomes.

Don't take away my negative gearing on my 10 houses, don't take away my tax free super, don't take away my capital gains tax discount, don't hit me with a deficit levy I'm only on $200 grand a year.


----------



## noco (30 May 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Sure and most of them are on higher incomes.
> 
> Don't take away my negative gearing on my 10 houses, don't take away my tax free super, don't take away my capital gains tax discount, don't hit me with a deficit levy I'm only on $200 grand a year.




Talk to David Feeny and a quite a few other Labor people, they would not like it either......I repeat..they are wannabe capitalists wanting to live in a socialist world.

They are absolute hypocrites.


----------



## SirRumpole (30 May 2016)

noco said:


> Talk to David Feeny and a quite a few other Labor people, they would not like it either......I repeat..they are wannabe capitalists wanting to live in a socialist world.
> 
> They are absolute hypocrites.




Not really, they are in a party that supports the changes. Maybe Feeny votes against the NG changes, who knows but the Labor Party supports them, that's what matters.


----------



## overhang (30 May 2016)

The company tax cuts are just another thought bubble by this coalition government.  The largest beneficiary of our tax cuts is the US treasury as we have a tax treaty with the US that means that US companies must pay the difference in tax back home, the US company tax rate is 35% and this will cost our coffers $11 billion. Will the US throw in a few free F35s for that $11 billion gift?

Given 43% of shares are foreign owned and many companies will pass the tax cuts onto investors means that all those franked dividends will result in more money moving offshore.



> Reserve Bank research shows companies are paying out more than 80 per cent of their underlying earnings.




And the biggest rubbish of all that these tax cuts will create jobs and growth.



> Treasury modelling finds that the level of employment in 20 or 30 years' time will be just 0.1 per cent higher than otherwise.






> After 20 or 25 or 30 years, the level of real after-tax wages will be 0.4 per cent higher than otherwise.




Demand creates jobs, tax cuts creates larger profits and these tax cuts do bugger all for workers.  Miners will still invest here because we have the resources, political stability, infrastructure and heavy tax subsidies.  It will do bugger all to revive manufacturing in this country and the service industry benefits more from wage growth than company tax cuts.
http://www.smh.com.au/business/the-...debunk-a-company-tax-cut-20160527-gp572e.html


----------



## explod (30 May 2016)

Very good post overhang.


----------



## drsmith (30 May 2016)

It wasn't too long ago that Labor was criticising the government for not cutting the corporate tax rate enough,



> "Another day, another bit of talk, but as we've seen to date on tax, the Liberal Party is all talk and no action," shadow treasurer Chris Bowen said.
> 
> "The Liberal Party has voted against company tax cuts previously and criticised Labor when talking about aspiring to bring down company tax further."




http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-...benefit-workers-arthur-sinodinos-says/7261308


----------



## bellenuit (30 May 2016)

overhang said:


> The company tax cuts are just another thought bubble by this coalition government.  The largest beneficiary of our tax cuts is the US treasury as we have a tax treaty with the US that means that US companies must pay the difference in tax back home, the US company tax rate is 35% and this will cost our coffers $11 billion. Will the US throw in a few free F35s for that $11 billion gift?
> 
> Given 43% of shares are foreign owned and many companies will pass the tax cuts onto investors means that all those franked dividends will result in more money moving offshore.




I have doubts about much of what you are saying. 

Firstly, AFAIK, the difference in tax is only applicable to profits repatriated to the US and many US companies keep their excess cash invested abroad (Apple, Microsoft etched.)

For investors, overseas investors do not get any benefit from franking credits.  That is purely Australian (perhaps it may include NZ). So overseas investors will still pay tax at their marginal rates. Australian investors do not benefit from the lesser tax at least in relation to franked dividends. Because the company pays less corporate tax, for every dollar of fully franked dividend received, the Australian investor will have a smaller franked amount than previously, so will end up paying more to the ATO than before on dollar of dividend received. 

You cannot just say a reduction in corporate tax is bad. If it were the case then we should increase company tax. Whether the current or proposed levels are optimal or not is hard to say, but in general reduced company taxes have usually led to increased investment in the country (e.g. Ireland)


----------



## Tisme (30 May 2016)

noco said:


> If workers in this country of ours accept better wages and conditions when things are good, why isn't fair for workers to accept lower conditions when things get tough......Is that too much to ask?...




The aim of the Reserve Bank is to maintain an inflation rate of ~3%/annum. 

Last year we experienced the lowest rise in wages on record at around 2 and a poofteenth % over the 12 months to end of calendar year. That's your crowd at the helm steering the ship of the lucky country. Although in fairness the previous lot (read as Noco's Fabian Commo buddies) saw wages climb to 41/4% with the public service finally being damped from its atrocious reward of 4.75% by Mr Howard (while the rest of the market had to put up with 3.5%).

The dead cat bounce in 2009 to 2011 has been trajectorying down since Sept 2012 and disinflation has gone with it and consequently so has profit, interest rates, productivity, tax receipts, etc which risks us going into a downward wages/prices spiral, that will meet its hiatus when mortgage stress exceeds the ability of people to render due payments.

Remember the recession we had to have?


----------



## SirRumpole (30 May 2016)

bellenuit said:


> You cannot just say a reduction in corporate tax is bad. If it were the case then we should increase company tax. Whether the current or proposed levels are optimal or not is hard to say, but in general reduced company taxes have usually led to increased investment in the country (e.g. Ireland)




Reduction of all taxes is good and that should be the aspiration of governments over a period of time.

However it's a matter of fiscal circumstances and the efficiency of tax cuts in various sectors. 

The Australia Institute thinks that company tax cuts do not produce optimal results.



> Changes to macroeconomic indicators are driven by many factors, not just corporate
> tax rates. Across many indicators, however, there is no support for the idea that
> cutting the company tax rate will lead to tangible benefits in the wider economy.
> 
> http://www.tai.org.au/sites/defualt/files/P245 Company tax - what the evidence shows.pdf




Of course that's just one opinion, but it seems to me that the people shouting most loudly for company tax cuts are those who will benefit most.


----------



## Tisme (30 May 2016)

With the ABS' "Measures of Australia's Progress" dashboard laying fallow during this govt's reign, I wonder how we have really performed since 2012 in the key indicators of  Society, Economy, Governance and Environment ?


----------



## overhang (30 May 2016)

drsmith said:


> It wasn't too long ago that Labor was criticising the government for not cutting the corporate tax rate enough,



Labor supports the small business tax cuts but not extending that to the corporate tax rate. 


bellenuit said:


> I have doubts about much of what you are saying.
> 
> Firstly, AFAIK, the difference in tax is only applicable to profits repatriated to the US and many US companies keep their excess cash invested abroad (Apple, Microsoft etched.)
> 
> ...




Non-residents are exempt from receiving the franked proportion of the dividend, they benefit greatly from lower company tax rates.  And yes you hit the nail on the head, it makes no difference to Australian residence but is a windfall for foreign investors who pay no income taxes in Australia. 

The US figure is the forecasted figure from research, I have no idea about the validity of that data. 
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-05-16/tax-treaty-to-deliver-billions-to-us-treasury/7416534

I'm saying it's bad as I don't think we can afford it and I also don't believe it returns the largest gain to the economy.  If you lower income tax rates it benefits the whole economy, people spend and invest.  Nothing will ever change, companies don't employ more staff because of lower costs, they require demand which is something corporate tax cuts don't deliver.


----------



## explod (30 May 2016)

overhang said:


> Nothing will ever change, companies don't employ more staff because of lower costs, they require demand which is something corporate tax cuts don't deliver.






Yes,  real tangible productivity within.


----------



## noco (30 May 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Not someone who is going to give a ten year $50 billion tax cut to his mates, when his government has doubled the deficit (at least) and doubled government debt.
> 
> We just can't afford this extravagant and wasteful spending in a time of financial stringency.




Here is a link which may put some of the socialist on this forum flat on their backs after criticizing the Liberal government's plan to reduce small business tax to 27.5%. Bill Shorten proposed at 5% cut to 25% in his budget reply speech 2015......What a difference a year makes...So that would have been a $100 billion give away.


http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...y/news-story/af02aeec824442ae44a34d10ffb95e27

*Bill Shorten wants to give small business a 5 per cent tax cut and has pledged free university degrees for 100,000 maths, science, engineering and technology students.

Handing down his official budget reply speech tonight, the opposition leader also said primary and secondary school children would learn computer coding as part of his vision for the future and a Labor government would boost innovation by providing loan guarantees for start-up companies and help to commercialise inventions.

He also promised an overhaul of infrastructure policy, pledging to give Reserve Bank-style independence to Infrastructure Australia to decide where to build roads, rail, ports, bridges, social housing, smart energy grids, efficient irrigation and digital infrastructure.

But there was no detailed plan last night on how Labor would pay for expensive promises such as the small business tax cut and free university degrees, which the government last night called magic pudding economics.

Mr Shorten said the tax cut for small business announced by the government on Tuesday night from 30 to 28.5 per cent was “not enough to generate the confidence and long-term growth our economy needs for jobs”.

Did Shorten meet a softer Sales?

He told Parliament the nation should go further and called for a bipartisan plan to triple the cut to slash the company tax rate for small firms to 25 per cent.

“Not a 1.5 per cent tax cut, a 5 per cent tax cut. That’s the future. That’s real confidence,” he said.

“I understand this will not be easy and may take longer than the life of one Parliament. That’s

why it must be bipartisan.”

Mr Shorten said to create jobs of the future, new skills were required such as computer coding*.


----------



## overhang (30 May 2016)

noco said:


> Here is a link which may put some of the socialist on this forum flat on their backs after criticizing the Liberal government's plan to reduce small business tax to 27.5%. Bill Shorten proposed at 5% cut to 25% in his budget reply speech 2015......What a difference a year makes...So that would have been a $100 billion give away.




You are aware the Labor party still supports small business tax cuts?  The problem is the Turnbull government wants to change the way we define small business five fold from $2 million to $10 million initially and then up to $1 billion in 8 years.  It's quite clear by the change in definition that the coalition are trying to look after their corporate mates by disguising big business tax cuts as a small business tax cut.


----------



## Smurf1976 (30 May 2016)

overhang said:


> The problem is the Turnbull government wants to change the way we define small business five fold from $2 million to $10 million initially and then up to $1 billion in 8 years.




$10 million I can accept is a reasonably small business. Obviously it's bigger than $2 million but it's still not large as such. But $1 billion? No way is that "small" no matter how you look at it.


----------



## sptrawler (30 May 2016)

Smurf1976 said:


> $10 million I can accept is a reasonably small business. Obviously it's bigger than $2 million but it's still not large as such. But $1 billion? No way is that "small" no matter how you look at it.




Yes, the problem as I see it is, we are losing manufacturing to lower cost and lower taxing countries, eg NZ.

It doesn't follow that we need to give all companies a tax cut, as is the case with our mining companies, they have a distinct advantage anyway.

One, our minerals are one of the most easily extracted in the World, as they mostly are close to the surface.

Secondly, NZ doesn't have a lot of minerals to mine. 

Also most of the large multi nationals, don't seem to have a problem with the tax side of things, it appears to be the inconsistent Government directions that confuse the issue.

It seems to me the political parties need to come to consensus, on how mining companies are to be taxed, be it on tonnage, profit, or whatever.

Changing the goal posts by considerable amounts, in a highly speculative sector, seems opportunistic rather than sustainable.


----------



## McLovin (30 May 2016)

overhang said:


> Non-residents are exempt from receiving the franked proportion of the dividend, they benefit greatly from lower company tax rates.




No they're not. They receive the franking credit, but they're not eligible to use those credits as a tax-offset. If they are paid unfranked dividends then the withholding tax rate is either 15% or 30% depending on whether they are in a tax treaty country or not. The general tax rule is if there are franking credits available then a dividend should be paid franked.



overhang said:


> And yes you hit the nail on the head, it makes no difference to Australian residence but is a windfall for foreign investors who pay no income taxes in Australia.
> 
> The US figure is the forecasted figure from research, I have no idea about the validity of that data.
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-05-16/tax-treaty-to-deliver-billions-to-us-treasury/7416534




I don't believe that. The average American corporation pays a tax rate in the teens (all that profit shifting talk isn't going on for nothing). At a guess, I'd imagine those dividends are being sent to jurisdictions with _lower_ corporate tax rates than Australia (Singapore, Ireland, Netherlands even the Scandinavians have a corporate tax rate around 20%). American companies are only taxed when they repatriate profit, not when the profit is earnt. In any event I'm not sure I see the value in making such a comparison. If the IRS raises company tax to 40% we wouldn't be debating whether to raise Australia's rate. On the flip side, with a lower tax rate, that money won't need to be sent offshore to a lower tax jurisdiction.


----------



## overhang (31 May 2016)

McLovin said:


> No they're not. They receive the franking credit, but they're not eligible to use those credits as a tax-offset. If they are paid unfranked dividends then the withholding tax rate is either 15% or 30% depending on whether they are in a tax treaty country or not. The general tax rule is if there are franking credits available then a dividend should be paid franked.



Thanks McLovin you're correct I have misinterpreted it. What I meant to refer to was


> The imputation system reduces the cost of investing in Australian companies for Australian
> residents. However, it provides little benefit for non-resident shareholders in Australian
> companies, other than exempting the dividend from dividend withholding tax, because
> Australian imputation credits do not reduce their tax liability in their home country. A franked
> ...



So aren't franked dividends basically useless for non-residents if they don't receive tax credits for their returns in their home country?


> I don't believe that. The average American corporation pays a tax rate in the teens (all that profit shifting talk isn't going on for nothing). At a guess, I'd imagine those dividends are being sent to jurisdictions with _lower_ corporate tax rates than Australia (Singapore, Ireland, Netherlands even the Scandinavians have a corporate tax rate around 20%). American companies are only taxed when they repatriate profit, not when the profit is earnt. In any event I'm not sure I see the value in making such a comparison. If the IRS raises company tax to 40% we wouldn't be debating whether to raise Australia's rate. On the flip side, with a lower tax rate, that money won't need to be sent offshore to a lower tax jurisdiction.




I can't find the research as it hasn't seemed to be released to the public so I have know idea how they have come to this figure.  But the comparison is pointing out that in some circumstances the lower corporate tax rate will give US company's no incentive to do business here if they are required to make the difference back up to the IRS which defeats the purpose of the tax cut that is to encourage investment into Australia while also leaving Australia shortchanged for no net gain.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (31 May 2016)

wayneL said:


> With the possibility of a Short'un win, I have started shifting my millions to safer jurisdictions, North Korea, Nigeria and Venezuela.




Not a bad idea mate. I'm voting ALP as the local LNP member did a particularly dirty evil act which cost me and over which he lied to me. He is on a slim majority. Not that I want the ALP in, but revenge is best taken luke warm. I reckon the Short'un with the wandering dick will get in as a minority government. Oh for the days of JW Howard. 

gg


----------



## SirRumpole (31 May 2016)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Not a bad idea mate. I'm voting ALP as the local LNP member did a particularly dirty evil act which cost me and over which he lied to me. He is on a slim majority. Not that I want the ALP in, but revenge is best taken luke warm. I reckon the Short'un with the wandering dick will get in as a minority government. Oh for the days of JW Howard.
> 
> gg




Who do you trust eh gg ?


----------



## trainspotter (31 May 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Who do you trust eh gg ?




Hanson to hold the balance of power


----------



## SirRumpole (31 May 2016)

trainspotter said:


> Hanson to hold the balance of power
> 
> View attachment 66899
> 
> ...




It would be unlikely for one person to hold the balance of power. More likely Xenophon or the Greens.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (31 May 2016)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Not a bad idea mate. I'm voting ALP as the local LNP member did a particularly dirty evil act which cost me and over which he lied to me. He is on a slim majority. Not that I want the ALP in, but revenge is best taken luke warm. I reckon the Short'un with the wandering dick will get in as a minority government. Oh for the days of JW Howard.
> 
> gg






SirRumpole said:


> Who do you trust eh gg ?




Basically I don't trust any of them. None. 

In the Senate I cannot bring myself to vote for either the Coalition or the ALP. If that crazy Vet with the unspellable name Ljenjholm ?? was in Queensland I'd vote for him. 

I've never spoilt a vote in my life. I may , I say may vote for the Brick, but I'm unsure as to whether he is less thick than his monicker. 

I don't trust Hanson at all. I once had a girlfriend whose mum owned a fish and chip shop and she was a proper crook. 

Who's left in Queensland on the Senate ticket who's not barking or howling at the moon of a clear night? You tell me. 

gg


----------



## SirRumpole (31 May 2016)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Basically I don't trust any of them. None.
> 
> In the Senate I cannot bring myself to vote for either the Coalition or the ALP. If that crazy Vet with the unspellable name Ljenjholm ?? was in Queensland I'd vote for him.
> 
> ...




Yes it's a problem allright.

Pity that Xenophon doesn't have the resources to go outside SA. He'd have my vote if he did.


----------



## McLovin (31 May 2016)

overhang said:


> Thanks McLovin you're correct I have misinterpreted it. What I meant to refer to was
> 
> So aren't franked dividends basically useless for non-residents if they don't receive tax credits for their returns in their home country?




The short answer is it depends on the nature of the tax treaty and the tax arrangements in the investors home country. I wouldn't call them useless although outside Australia their value is greatly diminished. Also worthy pointing out, if you're a multinational with operations in Australia your Australian operations would be part of your consolidated tax entity, so you wouldn't be receiving dividends.




overhang said:


> But the comparison is pointing out that in some circumstances the lower corporate tax rate will give US company's no incentive to do business here if they are required to make the difference back up to the IRS which defeats the purpose of the tax cut that is to encourage investment into Australia while also leaving Australia shortchanged for no net gain.




Which is why I said I don't believe it. American companies are not taxed on their worldwide income, they're only taxed once they repatriate profits to America. The tax saving in Australia will not be being sent back to the IRS in the same way the money earnt in Australia currently is not being funnelled back to the IRS, and it will encourage the money to stay here and it will encourage investment even if its only marginal.

Look at the average tax of Unitedhealth who make all their money in the US and don't have any loopholes they can exploit and then compare it to a multinational like Alphabet (Google). (I just picked two random examples to illustrate the point)

Unitedhealth

Net Income Before Taxes	10,231.0
Provision for Income Taxes	4,363.0
Net Income After Taxes	5,868.0

Tax rate: 42.6%

Alphabet


Net Income Before Taxes	19,651.0
Provision for Income Taxes	3,303.0
Net Income After Taxes	16,348.0

Tax rate: 16.8%


----------



## McLovin (31 May 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Yes it's a problem allright.
> 
> Pity that Xenophon doesn't have the resources to go outside SA. He'd have my vote if he did.




He's on the Senate ticket in every state. I'm seriously considering voting for him, and I'm in NSW.


----------



## SirRumpole (31 May 2016)

McLovin said:


> He's on the Senate ticket in every state. I'm seriously considering voting for him, and I'm in NSW.




Glad to hear that.

I'm in NSW too and I'll be voting for him.


----------



## drsmith (31 May 2016)

One needs to be very cautious when considering independents. While they may have broad appeal with words that people like to hear on specific issues, their own perspective may not be broad enough for a leadership role at a national level. Jacquie Lambie is a classic example and her negative reflection on public servants broadly in last night's Q&A is a product of that. She can't work with other people and doesn't strike me as a good listener. It's her way or the highway.

Others such as Clive Palmer didn't have the nation's interests at heart but still got a seat in the Reps and 3 senators because he uttered the words people wanted to hear.

Of these high profile independents, Nick Xenophon is probably the best but he too has made his mistakes and loves the media attention. Looking on his page, he has campaigns on specific issues but major areas such as the economy and border security are absent. Probably a wise political choice if you don't want to risk alienating that portion of the population that is either right or left of centre. Those however are issues he would need to address for one to consider voting for him in the Reps as these are issues most essential to our standard of living. I would regard his party as a Senate only consideration.

More broadly, I see the fracturing of the public vote from the majors to minor parties and independents as detrimental to the nation and I hold up the Gillard government as an example of that as the progressive vote has fractured between Labor and the Greens. If the same happens on the conservative side, it won't be any better and this is where I'm recently disappointed in conservative commentators such as Andrew Bolt.

One needs to be very careful as to what one wishes for when voting for a minor party or independent or pushing for breakaway political groups.


----------



## SirRumpole (31 May 2016)

drsmith said:


> One needs to be very cautious when considering independents.




I agree with a lot of what you say Doc, but I think an alternative is need to the vested interests represented by the major parties.

It comes down to supporting Independents with some commonsense. Lazarus and Xenephon seem to have the most commonsense, Wilkie and Windsor likewise if you happen to be in their seats.

I think the saying "don't vote for the major parties, it only encourages them" has a ring of truth.


----------



## noco (31 May 2016)

drsmith said:


> One needs to be very cautious when considering independents. While they may have broad appeal with words that people like to hear on specific issues, their own perspective may not be broad enough for a leadership role at a national level. Jacquie Lambie is a classic example and her negative reflection on public servants broadly in last night's Q&A is a product of that. She can't work with other people and doesn't strike me as a good listener. It's her way or the highway.
> 
> Others such as Clive Palmer didn't have the nation's interests at heart but still got a seat in the Reps and 3 senators because he uttered the words people wanted to hear.
> 
> ...




Nick Xenophon is very sympathetic towards the Greens.....So would show caution for anyone voting for him.


----------



## Tisme (31 May 2016)

THat's got to irritate LNP tragics


----------



## noco (31 May 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> I agree with a lot of what you say Doc, but I think an alternative is need to the vested interests represented by the major parties.
> 
> It comes down to supporting Independents with some commonsense. Lazarus and Xenephon seem to have the most commonsense, Wilkie and Windsor likewise if you happen to be in their seats.
> 
> I think the saying "don't vote for the major parties, it only encourages them" has a ring of truth.




I don't trust any of those whom mentioned.

Lazarus only managed to get into the Senate on the coat tails of that large piece of no good flab.....He would never made it on his own.
Xenophon will favor the Greens before the major parties.
Wilkie I do not trust.
Windsor is a turn coat in my opinion and  does not deserve another chance...He and Oakshot did the wrong thing by their electorates going from the National Party to independents and then favoring that self confessed communist Julia Gillard.
Pauline Hanson speaks her mind with lots of truth that many people want to hear regarding multi culture and I am one of them.....I wish her luck and I hope she gives the "BRICK" a thumping.


----------



## noco (31 May 2016)

Tisme said:


> View attachment 66905
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Geez Tisme, where did you get that load of rubbish from?

No...Don't tell me.

It must have been from the Guardian news...You know the one who misconstrues the truth with fabricated stories.


----------



## Tisme (31 May 2016)

noco said:


> Geez Tisme, where did you get that load of rubbish from?
> 
> No...Don't tell me.
> 
> It must have been from the Guardian news...You know the one who misconstrues the truth with fabricated stories.





Nah it's one of those things that is circulating on farcebook. I'm waiting for something to surface from the Lib supporters, but they aren't traditionally tech savvy and not given to humour over spite.


----------



## drsmith (31 May 2016)

Julia Gillard was treated very poorly by the Labor party on that measure.


----------



## sptrawler (31 May 2016)

drsmith said:


> One needs to be very cautious when considering independents. While they may have broad appeal with words that people like to hear on specific issues, their own perspective may not be broad enough for a leadership role at a national level. Jacquie Lambie is a classic example and her negative reflection on public servants broadly in last night's Q&A is a product of that. She can't work with other people and doesn't strike me as a good listener. It's her way or the highway.
> 
> Others such as Clive Palmer didn't have the nation's interests at heart but still got a seat in the Reps and 3 senators because he uttered the words people wanted to hear.
> 
> ...




Hows the betting odds looking,doc?


----------



## trainspotter (31 May 2016)

In politics, myth, when repeated often enough, has a way of becoming gospel.


----------



## drsmith (31 May 2016)

sptrawler said:


> Hows the betting odds looking,doc?



Sportsbet still $1.30/$3.50.

The weekly Essential poll today had 2PP at 51/49 in favour of the Coalition.


----------



## noco (31 May 2016)

trainspotter said:


> In politics, myth, when repeated often enough, has a way of becoming gospel.




That is the Fabian ideology.....That is why the Labor Party control the ABC,...I have always stated, "COMTROL THE MEDIA AND YOU WILL CONTROL THE PEOPLE".......Say it over and over again and the naive will believe it.....That is why Shorten was like a broken record on Sunday night's leaders debate......If he said it once, he said it 20 times about that $50 billion handout of tax payers money to big business......It was an absolute lie.


----------



## trainspotter (31 May 2016)

noco said:


> That is the Fabian ideology.....That is why the Labor Party control the ABC,...I have always stated, "COMTROL THE MEDIA AND YOU WILL CONTROL THE PEOPLE".......Say it over and over again and the naive will believe it.....That is why Shorten was like a broken record on Sunday night's leaders debate......If he said it once, he said it 20 times about that $50 billion handout of tax payers money to big business......It was an absolute lie.




Not only the mantra of the Blue singlet brigade unfortunately noco. 

Stop the taxes
Axe the Tax
Repay the debt
Stop the boats
Hope reward opportunity
A stronger Australia
This toxic tax
Stop the waste

Sound familiar?


----------



## Tisme (31 May 2016)

I used to admire Julie upto the moment she decided to be a brain dead drone of the Abott Mr Stupid walking cliche.


She's no longer as sharp as she should be:

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/fed...k/news-story/245d128bf52d25b4bdb0262481b99962


----------



## sptrawler (31 May 2016)

What I'm finding disconcerting is, the amount of people I know retiring early, they just seem to be throwing their arms up and saying WTF I'm out of here.

I think the state of the economy, is scaring the hell out of everyday aussies and they think, if we don't do it now someone will take it off us.

It just shows me, how much confidence has been stripped, from day to day Australia. What people have saved a lifetime for, is being targeted, when others who have been here a few years get full pensions.

Sooner or later the reality is going to bite, big time.IMO

You can only victimise those who have worked and payed their fair share of taxes, for so long, eventually they say why am I paying for saving.

Sooner or later, there has to be a correlation between how long you have worked and how much pension you get, as happens in most OECD countries.

While people can attain social welfare from the cradle to the grave, with no disability, there will be an ongoing ramp up of problems.IMO 

There will be an increase of burden on those who save, to support the lifestyle of those on welfare, that will become unsustainable.

The self funded pensioners will run out of money, technology will take over jobs therefore less income tax, less jobs leads to higher unemployment and higher theft ratios.

Unless one of the major parties comes up with a long term solution, $hits are trumps.IMO


----------



## qldfrog (1 June 2016)

sptrawler said:


> What I'm finding disconcerting is, the amount of people I know retiring early, they just seem to be throwing their arms up and saying WTF I'm out of here.IMO



I basically did that and I am not 50...
Funny how i often share your view, probably because we both cpome from mining states with siumilar populations and economic issues...which seem quite remote from Sydney/Melbourne.
Have a look at western Europe for an image of the future of Australia, and take actions to protect yourself.
This current election is really the end of positivism for me, MT was my last hope, but within the LNP, not much of a chance for the decisions we need, as for the ALP ....
Rudd was a beacon of light as opposed to Shorten...
During that tiome, debt is ticking...how many school/infrastructure/hospitals a month could we pay just with the interest cost (both Fed and state debt BTW)


----------



## luutzu (1 June 2016)

sptrawler said:


> What I'm finding disconcerting is, the amount of people I know retiring early, they just seem to be throwing their arms up and saying WTF I'm out of here.
> 
> I think the state of the economy, is scaring the hell out of everyday aussies and they think, if we don't do it now someone will take it off us.
> 
> ...




Read today the 2.4% increased in minimum wage are considered "too high" and will put the poor retailers and businesses out of business or they'll be forced to cut jobs then go out of business. 

Dam greedy Australians on minimum wage. Getting six dollars (that's $6) a week extra after inflation! Outrageous! Why it almost could buy them 2 600ml bottle of coke from a vending machine. Or almost an entire Happy Meal.

In other news, politicians living 30km away from Canberra's parliament house can get $86 a day for having to drive to work. Some $286 a night if they stay overnight - or stay at their partner's house in Canberra.

So yes, these politicians should start getting off of welfare. We can't afford it.


----------



## noco (1 June 2016)

sptrawler said:


> What I'm finding disconcerting is, the amount of people I know retiring early, they just seem to be throwing their arms up and saying WTF I'm out of here.
> 
> I think the state of the economy, is scaring the hell out of everyday aussies and they think, if we don't do it now someone will take it off us.
> 
> ...




:topic:topic

Whist I realize this is off topic I cannot help making comment on retirement.

Work as long as you can if you want to live longer.

At 65 I retired after being a work alcoholic for the company I successfully managed for 28 years.

The next 23 months was spent as an owner builder of my retirement villa at one of the northern beaches...My wife and I moved into this 340 sq metre brick veneer  within 6 months and the rest of the time was spent on landscaping.....

At 67 my company, which had began to run down due bad management, asked me to come out of retirement, sort out a mess and amalgamate another company.....The deal was for 18 months and all went well....

But after another year or two my feet began to get itchy and my wife and I decided to do some traveling starting with a 12 month  adventure around Australia....After we arrived back home, my wife asked what we should do now and when I suggested to her we start a business, she said have you got rocks in your head?.....But she is a good woman and she agreed......Without going into detail, we started from nothing on a piece of real estate.....Ran the business at a loss for the first year, broke even on the second year and the following years were cream on the cake.....We sold this thriving business after 5 years ...We worked 7 days per week.

The travel bug hit us again and for the next couple of years we traveled to many parts of the world including New Zealand..... the UK.... some 14 countries around Europe....Dubai....Singapore...Thailand....Hong Kong...Macau...China..the Philippines....Canada..Alaska...the USA....Travel is a great education.

Having received my OBE (over bloody 80) a year or two before I was not one to relent and say enough is enough.....So I took  on a small distribution agency which occupied my time 16 to 20 hours a week for the next 3.5 years.

It has keep me alive....It has kept my mind and body active.....For those who are thinking of retiring young ....FORGET IT....

WORK AS LONG AS YOU CAN AND LIVE LONGER but enjoy life at the same time.


----------



## SirRumpole (1 June 2016)

noco said:
			
		

> .Without going into detail, we started from nothing on a piece of real estate.....Ran the business at a loss for the first year, broke even on the second year and the following years were cream on the cake.....We sold this thriving business after 5 years .




What sort of business was this ?

Just interested.


----------



## noco (1 June 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> What sort of business was this ?
> 
> Just interested.




I will PM you.


----------



## dutchie (1 June 2016)

Another good reason NOT to vote for the Greens...

Hanson-Young red-faced after ‘trainwreck’ interview

http://www.news.com.au/finance/supe...w/news-story/5b422490b5fcbb755f6a81362c245384


----------



## dutchie (1 June 2016)

Another good reason NOT to vote for Shorten..

Bill Shorten in embarrassing State of Origin gaffe

http://www.news.com.au/sport/nrl/or...e/news-story/b81269fecb0fbb304a6f33fef40c99de


----------



## drsmith (1 June 2016)

Perhaps the lingering inner glow from Mathias Cormann's unexpected praise last week distracted him.

Of greater concern is the mature of the rhetoric in major policy areas,



> Bill Shorten refused to be drawn on what Labor would do if the independent commission ruled to cut the extra payments that workers are provided on Sundays.
> 
> REPORTER: If the Fair Work Commission, though, says we should cut penalty rates will you accept that decision?
> 
> ...




That definition of independence shows the veneer is coming off.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-06-01/election-live-blog-june-1/7464758


----------



## CanOz (1 June 2016)

noco said:


> WORK AS LONG AS YOU CAN AND LIVE LONGER but enjoy life at the same time.




Thanks for sharing noco inspirational


----------



## luutzu (1 June 2016)

noco said:


> :topic:topic
> 
> Whist I realize this is off topic I cannot help making comment on retirement.
> 
> ...




And here I thought you're just a grumpy old man noco. 

What did you do to get that OBE? Order of the British Empire... I don't really want to believe you got it for what I think it's for


----------



## noco (1 June 2016)

luutzu said:


> And here I thought you're just a grumpy old man noco.
> 
> What did you do to get that OBE? Order of the British Empire... I don't really want to believe you got it for what I think it's for




Perhaps you should read it again .....OBE (**** ****** ******)...!!!!!!..You may have to be an Aussie to know what it means here in Aus.


----------



## luutzu (1 June 2016)

noco said:


> Perhaps you should read it again .....OBE (**** ****** ******)...!!!!!!..You may have to be an Aussie to know what it means here in Aus.




ah see. Good sense of humour there.

oi. I'm also an Aussie.

Maybe not true blue, but yellow blue... green?


----------



## noco (1 June 2016)

luutzu said:


> ah see. Good sense of humour there.
> 
> oi. I'm also an Aussie.
> 
> Maybe not true blue, but yellow blue... green?




I am hoping to get my OBN not far down the track.:topic

That is if I make it. LOL.


----------



## qldfrog (1 June 2016)

noco said:


> :topic:topic
> WORK AS LONG AS YOU CAN AND LIVE LONGER but enjoy life at the same time.



depends what you call retirement, in my case stopped my consultancy with big dollars/big taxes and long hours for own personal (business) project and work in a start up;
income divided by around 4, taxation reduced by 6: hardly any tax, will do a round the world trip in 6 month, enjoying beekeeping and socialising etc
There is no incentive for people who can afford it to work like mad here and then be taxed at 50%.
But I understand what you say, retirement as watching tv and RSL lunches..no thanks even in 20y for me.
To be back in the subject.
When taxes were high at the beginning of Howard reign, I slowed down when I reached the top brackets, when they became reasonable, I worked as hard as I could and made hay.
Obviously some people got stuck in debt, etc but at least for me, and i am often not representative, the level of taxation on work is a major decision maker.Something Labour seems to have no clues about
Motivating and incentising the nation is a priority, you do not get that with super concessions, NDIS or negative gearing.


----------



## luutzu (1 June 2016)

noco said:


> I am hoping to get my OBN not far down the track.:topic
> 
> That is if I make it. LOL.




We all hope you do noco. Stay healthy and start more debates 

My wife's great grandfather recently passed away at 99 - only a few days away from 100... the old folks growing up before modern food industry seems to do very well.


----------



## overhang (1 June 2016)

noco said:


> :topic:topic
> 
> Whist I realize this is off topic I cannot help making comment on retirement.




I admire you work ethic noco, reminds me of a former employer who retired early with his wife.  They also got itchy feet and bought another couple of businesses, sadly his wife passed away of cancer about 8 years after the initial retirement.  Can't put a price on good health.


----------



## Bob (2 June 2016)

noco said:


> :topic:topic
> 
> Whist I realize this is off topic I cannot help making comment on retirement.
> 
> ...




I agree 110 percent.  I worked for 40 years in Defence, the majority of the time in uniform.  After I retired I travelled for 2 years (Asia, Mexico and the US).  I would be still in Asia but it wasn't to my wife's liking so we came back home and was offered a job here in Sydney.  
Having employment gives you income, a purpose to get out of bed and longevity.  Steven Pollan's book "Die Broke" is a great read

Bob


----------



## banco (2 June 2016)

I really hope those  complaining about Turnbull's superannuation charges will STFU about government spending being a problem forever more (I'm thinking particuarly of The Australian).


----------



## Logique (2 June 2016)

Bizarre, but Plibersek (having been set up by a member of the public) appears to have behaved admirably for the animal's welfare.



> http://blogs.news.com.au/dailyteleg...graph/comments/rat_in_the_ranks/#commentsmore
> Tim Blair - Thursday, June 02, 2016
> 
> Tanya Plibersek and Bill Shorten with a rat:
> ...


----------



## noco (2 June 2016)

dutchie said:


> Another good reason NOT to vote for Shorten..
> 
> Bill Shorten in embarrassing State of Origin gaffe
> 
> http://www.news.com.au/sport/nrl/or...e/news-story/b81269fecb0fbb304a6f33fef40c99de




Yes, and here is another reason workers should not vote for Bill Shorten with his shonky deals with big business...It is all about power and money with Shorten and no interest in the welfare of workers.

*SHAME....SHAME....SHAME ON YOU BILL.*


*We all know that penalty rates impose a cost on business operations. What is less understood is how in some sectors only smaller businesses have to pay them, because bigger businesses can do dodgy deals to avoid them.

Provided a business has a large workforce, is prepared to push its workers into union membership, and perhaps even pay the union money, an EBA with below legal pay rates can be secured.

These EBAs should not get registered by the Fair Work Commission, but unfortunately, if an EBA has union sanction, it just gets waved through. With a wink and a nudge, the members of the IR club look after their own.

For the SDA, this decision is devastating. There are other employers that have signed up to its dodgy EBAs. What if these employers dump the union, stop pushing their staff to join, and stop supporting the union financially? The only thing this union has going for it is its partnership with key employers in the corporate sector.

This decision is embarrassing for the Labor Party. How can it campaign on penalty rates when a major backer makes a living by selectively undercutting them? There are a few unions in this country whose core business is to sell cut-price wage deals. How can the party of the workers live with this association?

The FWC, too, needs to review the way it approves agreements. Scrutiny is applied to EBAs with no union involvement, but those with a union seal are simply rubber-stamped. There has always been an assumption that a union has the best interests of workers at heart and can be trusted with their pay cheques. This assumption is no longer true and everyone needs to adjust their thinking accordingly.

*


----------



## noco (2 June 2016)

Logique said:


> Bizarre, but Plibersek (having been set up by a member of the public) appears to have behaved admirably for the animal's welfare.
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 66941




I hope Tanya named the rat Bill !!!!!!


----------



## drsmith (2 June 2016)

She probably took it so Bill couldn't claim it and call it Tanya.


----------



## SirRumpole (2 June 2016)

Well, Mal had his meeting with a rat, so naturally Labor called for equal time.


----------



## McLovin (2 June 2016)

banco said:


> I really hope those  complaining about Turnbull's superannuation charges will STFU about government spending being a problem forever more (I'm thinking particuarly of The Australian).




It's hilariously sad how farcical politics is these days. Bowen, Shorten, Swan all supported a company tax cut until the LNP announced it as policy, now they don't. The LNP was moving toward a policy of at least curbing negative gearing, then the ALP said they'd scrap it and now the LNP has had to take the default opposition position of totally opposing any changes. So they put forward a patchwork of policies that they don't really believe in, but think will play well in marginal seats. And were told that the problem with minor parties is they have large policy gaps.


----------



## Ves (2 June 2016)

noco said:


> For the SDA, this decision is devastating. There are other employers that have signed up to its dodgy EBAs. What if these employers dump the union, stop pushing their staff to join, and stop supporting the union financially? The only thing this union has going for it is its partnership with key employers in the corporate sector.




You do realise that the SDA is the most right-wing Union in Australia?   It's leadership has always had a conservative Catholic agenda.

Go and take a look at the bloke who runs it.   He's on your side.   He's as anti-Communist as they come.

One may ask if it is really a Union or just a front set-up by a group of employers? I mean which Union do you know that actually pays the employers?

Many in ALP circles have asked why they don't just cut it loose.  But that won't happen because there's a big financial incentive.  Until they cut it loose the ALP will remain slightly to the right-wing of the political spectrum with voters having no real major party alternative on the left-side of politics.


----------



## Tink (2 June 2016)

Off topic .. as much as I like Europe just leaving Milano at the moment you notice how many public holidays they have here.


----------



## noco (2 June 2016)

Ves said:


> You do realise that the SDA is the most right-wing Union in Australia?   It's leadership has always had a conservative Catholic agenda.
> 
> Go and take a look at the bloke who runs it.   He's on your side.   He's as anti-Communist as they come.
> 
> ...




Firstly, it would be nice if you could back up your statement with a link.

Secondly, if this "BLOKE" you speak about appears to be running in the opposite direction to Bill Shorten's favorite unions like the AWU and the CFMEU, why don't they do something about him or was it the fact that he was doing such a good job in feeding the union and ALP coffers?


----------



## SirRumpole (2 June 2016)

noco said:


> Firstly, it would be nice if you could back up your statement with a link.
> 
> Secondly, if this "BLOKE" you speak about appears to be running in the opposite direction to Bill Shorten's favorite unions like the AWU and the CFMEU, why don't they do something about him or was it the fact that he was doing such a good job in feeding the union and ALP coffers?




Face it noco, the ALP needs the unions just like the Libs need business and the Nats need the NFF.

 It's all political patronage and no side is any better than the others. They don't work for us they work for their benefactors.


----------



## Logique (2 June 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Well, Mal had his meeting with a rat, so naturally Labor called for equal time.



I'm saving the appellation for the post-election partnership of PM Turnbull and the Aust Liberty Alliance in the Senate,  as they attempt to re-introduce the 15% GST proposal. 

Entirely hypothetical of course!


----------



## Ves (2 June 2016)

noco said:


> Firstly, it would be nice if you could back up your statement with a link.
> 
> Secondly, if this "BLOKE" you speak about appears to be running in the opposite direction to Bill Shorten's favorite unions like the AWU and the CFMEU, why don't they do something about him or was it the fact that he was doing such a good job in feeding the union and ALP coffers?



Links below:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_de_Bruyn

http://www.smh.com.au/national/why-...rs-stopping-gay-marriage-20150430-1mwl32.html

http://www.smh.com.au/national/shop...ions-to-boost-membership-20150501-1mxufa.html

http://slackbastard.anarchobase.com/?p=10902

That'll at least get your feet wet.

*Alarmingly,  this Union was basically absent from the recent Royal Commission into the Unions.*

Why can't they get rid of them?

A) Because it's a massive union

B)  Because of the fact it's financially a massive Union it basically controls 30% of the ALP.   

You know how it got so big?   Well,  go apply for a retail job as a teenager or young adult.   You basically get the paperwork on the spot,  often with a smiling union official in the room. Great!  We'll look after you young lady or young man!  At that stage of life they know no better.

The more they sign up the more control over the ALP they have.

Let's not forget they pay a large amount to big employers like Coles and Woolworths for the privilige to deduct union fees on employee's pay slips.   LOL,  what a rort in disguise.

You can bang on about the ALP being communist as much as you like Noco,  but the vested interests tell a very very different story.  They have much much more in common with the right-wing movement than you realise (or are willing to admit).


----------



## noco (2 June 2016)

Ves said:


> Links below:
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_de_Bruyn
> 
> ...




Thanks for those links Ves.....I did read them but it  does not distract from the fact that it was a dirty deal with Coles....That is something that has been confirmed today.
The other thing that amazes me is that the majority of the Labor and the unions are either Socialists or Communists and these rank in the Atheist group.....De Bruyn is a Catholic and I do not understand why ALP and the unions did not root him out....He would have to be a misfit.


----------



## Ves (2 June 2016)

noco said:


> Thanks for those links Ves.....I did read them but it  does not distract from the fact that it was a dirty deal with Coles....That is something that has been confirmed today.
> The other thing that amazes me is that the majority of the Labor and the unions are either Socialists or Communists and these rank in the Atheist group.....De Bruyn is a Catholic and I do not understand why ALP and the unions did not root him out....He would have to be a misfit.



I think how he has held on to power for so long,  despite his often contrary views and actions, is an important lesson about politics in general.  If anything he certain has shown mastery in maintaining an iron-grip. He definitely knows how to find leverage. 

Perhaps having friends and admirers on both sides of politics has helped him greatly.


----------



## Tisme (2 June 2016)

ABC Empire Strikes back:

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...che-for-malcolm-turnbull-20160601-gp99h8.html


----------



## SirRumpole (2 June 2016)

Tisme said:


> ABC Empire Strikes back:
> 
> http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...che-for-malcolm-turnbull-20160601-gp99h8.html




Bl00dy Commies !


----------



## noco (2 June 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Bl00dy Commies !




Yeah.

Time we had another Royal Commission into them...Thems are bery bad people.


----------



## noco (3 June 2016)

More on Barnacle Bill's hypocrisy on penalty rates......How can this bloke live with himself? 

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...3312177f7?sv=8540256d9e5ac0c4c7f6f49844270253

*Behold the rank hypocrisy of Labor Party leader Bill Shorten. He is mad keen on protecting workers’ rights and penalty rates. Oh yeah, really, he is.

Right now, the Fair Work Commission is holding a formal review of penalty rates. Why?

Because of a law passed by federal Labor, when last in power.

Currently, employers have *applications before the FWC to have penalty rates cut. The commission might decide to cut them.

Who gave the commission the power to do this? Shorten did. He amended the law during Labor’s last term in government.

And what does Shorten have to say now, about whether penalty rates might be cut by the FWC?

“What if alien life makes contact with earth?” Who knows what this nonsense means.

Whatever you think about penalty rates, and whether they should be cut, if they are, blame Bill Shorten … and the aliens.

Then what about workers at big retailers such as Coles, Woolworths, McDonalds, Bunnings and the Super Retail Group? They are unlawfully being robbed of their penalty rates because the Shop Distributive & Allied *Employees Association, Labor’s biggest union backer, did a dodgy deal with big business. The first of those deals has just come spectacularly unstuck.

The longstanding Coles enterprise bargaining agreement has just been struck out by the FWC because it makes about 30,000 of the 77,000 workers it covers worse off. It is estimated these workers are losing out on $70 million a year of lawful entitlements.

The EBA was struck out only because one Coles worker, *Duncan Hart, challenged it. *During the case, the SDA opposed Hart, and sided with Coles.

What does Shorten have to say about that? The SDA and Coles “have to rectify the mistakes, full stop. They need to fix it up”.

Really? How?

Ordinarily, employers are obliged to rectify wage rip-offs by making backpay to workers, for a period of six years. Perhaps not this time though — scenarios like this are in uncharted territory.

Will Shorten make Coles pay $420m in lost wages to these workers? We asked him. No response was given.

If Shorten does, what about all the other retailers? There must be billions of dollars in lost wages owing. Will Shorten extend the same decree to every employer with a dodgy SDA EBA? We asked him. No response.

What about the rivers of gold flowing from these big retailers to the SDA? You didn’t think the SDA would offer employers dodgy EBA’s for nothing, did you? How many hundreds of millions flows from the retailers to the SDA, into their various entities, before finally landing in Labor coffers?

Will Shorten renounce this dirty money, raised from selling out the lowest paid? We asked him. No response was given.*


----------



## SirRumpole (3 June 2016)

noco said:


> More on Barnacle Bill's hypocrisy on penalty rates......How can this bloke live with himself?




There is too much pussy footing around vested interests on both sides.

The Libs are vacillating over super changes because of opposition from a few rich people and Labor is doing the same over penalty rates.

Turnbull should have the guts to tell his lot that they are well enough off already so stop complaining and Shorten should tell the unions that if Sunday penalty rates were the same as Saturday then a lot more people would be employed on Sunday.

In some ways it's amusing to see them both dancing around the issue. Neither of them are high in leadership ability imo.


----------



## trainspotter (3 June 2016)

drsmith said:


> She probably took it so Bill couldn't claim it and call it Tanya.




I thought they both claimed it and called it Kevin ?


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (3 June 2016)

Ves said:


> You do realise that the SDA is the most right-wing Union in Australia?   It's leadership has always had a conservative Catholic agenda.
> 
> Go and take a look at the bloke who runs it.   He's on your side.   He's as anti-Communist as they come.
> 
> ...




There is no way the Shoppies will ever be ditched by the ALP. 

They are the ALP. They run the branches, man the booths, provide scrutineers. The left wing unions are off on Asian tours and rorting. 

gg


----------



## drsmith (3 June 2016)

Sportbet odds have shifted slightly further in favour of the government and are now at $1.28/$3.70.

On The Australian's live election page yesterday, it was also noted that Bill Shorten campaigned in a couple of marginal Labor seats.

Mark Kenny has also penned a piece in the SMH questioning whether Bill Shorten has a two election strategy. 

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...ret-twoelection-strategy-20160531-gp84oc.html

I don't know about that but Bill Shorten's rhetoric does seem to be increasingly directed at the heartland.


----------



## noco (3 June 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> There is too much pussy footing around vested interests on both sides.
> 
> The Libs are vacillating over super changes because of opposition from a few rich people and Labor is doing the same over penalty rates.
> 
> ...




But Shorten is playing with the big boys and milking them dry while he neglects the small business who have to pay higher wages than Coles, Wollies and McDonalds.

He keeps saying one thing about fairness for workers and then decides fairness is not in the dictionary.......He says he wants to keep penalty rates on weekends but duds the workers of $millions if they work for the big boys.

You cannot deny the fact that Shorten is an absolute no hoping hypocrite.....He is all over the place with his rhetoric on policy if he has one....He says a 25% tax on business with create investment and jobs and will be good for the country and now he opposes it....Talk about flip flop Bill.

Does Bill really know what he is doing?


----------



## SirRumpole (4 June 2016)

noco said:


> You cannot deny the fact that Shorten is an absolute no hoping hypocrite.....He is all over the place with his rhetoric on policy if he has one....He says a 25% tax on business with create investment and jobs and will be good for the country and now he opposes it....Talk about flip flop Bill.
> 
> Does Bill really know what he is doing?




He made those comments 4 years ago before the current lot doubled the debt and deficit. Tax cuts might have been affordable then, they are not now.


----------



## wayneL (4 June 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> He made those comments 4 years ago before the current lot doubled the debt and deficit. Tax cuts might have been affordable then, they are not now.




You may want to review your statement with referenceto responsibility for debt there mate.


----------



## SirRumpole (4 June 2016)

wayneL said:


> You may want to review your statement with referenceto responsibility for debt there mate.




Why should I ?

Read the info as to what the debt and deficit was in 2013 and what it is now.


----------



## noco (4 June 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Why should I ?
> 
> Read the info as to what the debt and deficit was in 2013 and what it is now.




Rumpy, you just don't get it do you.

The disaster left by the LUG party just cannot be turned around overnight.....The legacy of the unfunded Gonski and NDIS is still being carried by the current government.....That funding was supposed to have come from Swannies brain fart of the mining tax which cost more to administer than it collected....We are still paying out $billions in welfare to keep those illegal unskilled migrants who are breeding like flies ...we are still paying out $27 million per year to Manus and Narua....There is $18 billion cuts to spending which the useless Labor Party won't pass through the senate....14,000,000 welfare cheques went out in one month in a population of 24,000,000. 

And you have the audacity to condemn the government's increase in the debt and deficit.....I think you should have a rethink of your outrages statement...You, along with your socialist friends, have short memories.

How about giving some bouquets for the 3.1% growth announced this week.....Unemployment is down to 5.8%. It was over 6% under Labor and rising.....Labor inherited 4% unemployment in 2007.....No debt and $22billion in the bank.

This typical Fabian tactics.....Inherit a good economy and then blow the lot......Labor gets kicked out of office and the mess has to be cleaned up again by a Liberal government.....It is vicious circle and history repeating itself over and over again

Had Labor won the election in 2013 the debt and deficit would most likely have doubled again to what it is today.


----------



## SirRumpole (4 June 2016)

No, you don't get it noco. The supposed superior economic managers have doubled the debt and deficit. Can't you get that through your skull ?



> The disaster left by the LUG party just cannot be turned around overnight.....The legacy of the unfunded Gonski and NDIS is still being carried by the current government....




I vividly remember Tony Abbott saying he is on a "unity ticket" with Rudd over the NDIS, and he certainly promised to fund Gonski as well.

So don't give me the "it's all Labor's fault" baloney.


----------



## noco (4 June 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> No, you don't get it noco. The supposed superior economic managers have doubled the debt and deficit. Can't you get that through your skull ?
> 
> 
> 
> ...




This news must sure get up the gisset of the LUG Party particularly during an election period.....If it had been a reduction in the GDP, Labor would have been all over it.......So it just goes to show the Liberals strategy is working wonders.

Great News for the people of Australia.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...p/news-story/7e8257b009b2912d3e85c6cf9183539e

*This week’s gross domestic product figures, which showed our economy powering ahead, were no accident. Rather, they reflect the hard work Australia’s mining industry has put into cutting costs and boosting productivity.

But with Labor and Greens ever more hostile to Australian mining, the sustainability of our growth prospects cannot be taken for granted.

The numbers themselves are impressive.

Since 2013, the world’s advanced economies have struggled to achieve annual growth rates of above 2 per cent; after repeated markdowns, analysts expect the US to grow by barely 1.8 per cent this year, while the euro*zone will expand by only 1.6 per cent. In contrast, Australia’s GDP is rising at 3.1 per cent, comfortably outpacing all the G7 countries.

Moreover, with employee compensation increasing at an annual rate of 3.6 per cent, and household gross disposable income growing by 3.8 per cent, the gains from the economy’s strong performance are being spread widely.

That mining underpins those gains is beyond doubt. On an annualised basis, value added in mining is up 11 per cent, accounting for fully half the growth in the economy’s production of goods and services.

The increase is all the more striking as export prices, which surged during the boom years, are lower now than a decade ago, while our terms of trade have actually dipped below their 20-year average.

Australia’s miners, in other words, have managed to lift output and exports in the face of sustained price declines, propelling the economy’s continued expansion.

In itself, that pattern — of output growth continuing well after the boom is over — is not unusual.*


----------



## SirRumpole (4 June 2016)

noco said:


> This news must sure get up the gisset of the LUG Party particularly during an election period.....If it had been a reduction in the GDP, Labor would have been all over it.......So it just goes to show the Liberals strategy is working wonders.
> 
> Great News for the people of Australia.




Not all that great really.

When commodities are cheap you sell more of them. GDP measures volume produced not income.

Real Net National disposable income fell 1.1% in the last quarter.

ie we produced more but got less for it.


http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/5206.0

Sorry to rain on your parade, but given that, it's not really a matter that either side of politics can do much about.


----------



## bellenuit (4 June 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Not all that great really.
> 
> When commodities are cheap you sell more of them. GDP measures volume produced not income.
> 
> ...




GDP measures the dollar value of product (including services) produced. I cannot see how it could measure volume?  How do you measure the collective volume of disparate items?

One downside of GDP as a measure is that it includes items that may actually reduce our overall wealth and wellbeing. For instance, if a river is polluted and then cleaned up, the cost of the cleaning is a component of GDP, and would account for a bigger GDP than if the spill and cleanup never happened.


----------



## SirRumpole (4 June 2016)

bellenuit said:


> GDP measures the dollar value of product (including services) produced. I cannot see how it could measure volume?  How do you measure the collective volume of disparate items?
> 
> One downside of GDP as a measure is that it includes items that may actually reduce our overall wealth and wellbeing. For instance, if a river is polluted and then cleaned up, the cost of the cleaning is a component of GDP, and would account for a bigger GDP than if the spill and cleanup never happened.




You are right. I was thinking of something else.


----------



## Tisme (4 June 2016)

Anyone else feel insulted the political parties feel the need to cut down brickbats and bouquets policy to bite sized  three word slogans? I can only guess there is an ocean of retards out there who need inculcation through persistent simpleton messages.

If any of our children behaved like this when they were kids we'd probably have taken them to task for unacceptable behaviour.


----------



## explod (4 June 2016)

Tisme said:


> Anyone else feel insulted the political parties feel the need to cut down brickbats and bouquets policy to bite sized  three word slogans? I can only guess there is an ocean of retards out there who need inculcation through persistent simpleton messages.
> 
> If any of our children behaved like this when they were kids we'd probably have taken them to task for unacceptable behaviour.




Yes,  agree.  Feel sorry for the kids actually as clear guidance and common sense seems to have gone.


----------



## SirRumpole (4 June 2016)

Tisme said:


> Anyone else feel insulted the political parties feel the need to cut down brickbats and bouquets policy to bite sized  three word slogans? I can only guess there is an ocean of retards out there who need inculcation through persistent simpleton messages.
> 
> If any of our children behaved like this when they were kids we'd probably have taken them to task for unacceptable behaviour.




We can only hope they lift their game when the campaign proper begins.


----------



## Tisme (4 June 2016)

bellenuit said:


> GDP measures the dollar value of product (including services) produced. I cannot see how it could measure volume?  How do you measure the collective volume of disparate items?
> 
> One downside of GDP as a measure is that it includes items that may actually reduce our overall wealth and wellbeing. For instance, if a river is polluted and then cleaned up, the cost of the cleaning is a component of GDP, and would account for a bigger GDP than if the spill and cleanup never happened.




Yep measures net value added to the economy, IMO using black magic weighted distortion on business lines and intangibles to perceived importance to the economy. 

It was once upon a time the sum of investment, private consumption and govt spend, weighted in part by foreign trade as a tool to measure supply in a manufacturing/factory world. Now it has pointy heads putting values on anything they can find out about and using it to steer everyone into feeling happy with the nation's standard of living, welfare, etc with no apparent derived consistency of value of user quality (e.g Farcebook, versus Twatter ).

Crowing GDP % growth might mean something if there was a stagnant list of variables that always had the same value to the economy year in year out.


----------



## Tisme (5 June 2016)

Some salient points in this article that sums up what a lot of us real mentally grown ups have been thinking about politics in general for a long long time


_"And frankly, if politicians — including the sanctimonious Turnbull — genuinely want to elevate their public standing and retrieve the deservedly dim view with which the electorate regards them, the sooner they grow up, the better."
_

https://theredandtheblue.org/2015/12/02/really-abbott-vs-turnbull-no-better-than-rudd-vs-gillard/



> ......................But when all is said and done, politics is politics — and in a climate where real debate and the willingness to advocate policies that produce losers (even if they are good for the country) has been subsumed by vacuous populism, adviser-driven aversion to risk and an obsession with media appearances — what has been going on since the fall of the Howard government will continue apace.
> 
> In those eight years, Labor and the Liberals have both had three leadership changes; in that time, the Prime Ministership has changed hands four times, but only once (in 2013) at an election.
> 
> Yet the Liberal Party, and especially under Abbott, has trenchantly insisted it is different to Labor in this regard: that it is somehow better behaved, more civilised, imbued with superior principles, more mature, and inherently reluctant to wield the knife against its own...............


----------



## wayneL (5 June 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> No, you don't get it noco. The supposed superior economic managers have doubled the debt and deficit. Can't you get that through your skull ?
> 
> 
> 
> .




While people endorse and perpetuate political subterfuge, we will never get good government.

You are psrt of the problem my friend. I urge you once again, to examined the facts ; the,source of this debt etc.

Libs are not blameless, but come on Horace, let's be real.


----------



## SirRumpole (5 June 2016)

wayneL said:


> While people endorse and perpetuate political subterfuge, we will never get good government.
> 
> You are psrt of the problem my friend. I urge you once again, to examined the facts ; the,source of this debt etc.
> 
> Libs are not blameless, but come on Horace, let's be real.




Wayne, it's a matter of what the debt/deficit was when the Libs took over and what it is now.

If you think that Labor should have been thrown out for getting us into debt/deficit, then surely the same fate should await the other side for making it worse ?


----------



## ghotib (5 June 2016)

Tisme said:


> Some salient points in this article that sums up what a lot of us real mentally grown ups have been thinking about politics in general for a long long time
> 
> https://theredandtheblue.org/2015/12/02/really-abbott-vs-turnbull-no-better-than-rudd-vs-gillard/






> ...whilst everyone knows that Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull ”” with his yearning to lurch savagely to the left on social and environmental issues ”” is hardly what you would call a conservative, the ultimate crime of the Abbott government was its sellout, through ineptitude and incompetence, of the millions of Australians who voted for it looking for a return to conservative governance.



What do people here understand by "conservative governance"? Or by "Conservative" for that matter? 

I've been puzzling over this since I read Tony Abbott's version of conservative values in the first chapter of Battlelines. I got to the end of that with the feeling that he had even less idea of what he meant than I did and he cared less. I'm sure some ASF people can be clearer.


----------



## drsmith (5 June 2016)

A big slice today from Labor's magic pudding,



> Labor's media statement said it had supported $9 billion in social services and childcare savings ”” three times the cost of its childcare announcement.
> 
> But when pressed by reporters on funding, Mr Shorten could not name the savings measures the Opposition had supported in the portfolio.
> 
> ...




http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-06-...to-childcare-rebate-cap-from-jan-2017/7478312


----------



## noco (5 June 2016)

drsmith said:


> A big slice today from Labor's magic pudding,
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-06-...to-childcare-rebate-cap-from-jan-2017/7478312




No worries......Just whack it on the "SPENDOMETER".......It is only about $65 billion over ATM.


----------



## Tisme (5 June 2016)

Jobs Jobs Jobs  ....LNP style.

What the construction industry has been witnessing for some time, but told their observations are a lie. 

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/bus...r-to-unqualified-workers-20160602-gpajfz.html


----------



## explod (5 June 2016)

noco said:


> No worries......Just whack it on the "SPENDOMETER".......It is only about $65 billion over ATM.




Anyhow now the public are realising your mob have more than doubled government debt the libs are sliding off the radar.   I wonder if Turnbull's 10% slide down in the poles is just isolated or because he wants to reward very big business for stuff they have not even done yet.


----------



## noco (5 June 2016)

explod said:


> Anyhow now the public are realising your mob have more than doubled government debt the libs are sliding off the radar.   I wonder if Turnbull's 10% slide down in the poles is just isolated or because he wants to reward very big business for stuff they have not even done yet.




It ain't over until the fat lady sings.

Turnbull is keeping the best until last......Watch this space.


----------



## trainspotter (5 June 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> It would be unlikely for one person to hold the balance of power. More likely Xenophon or the Greens.






> While Malcolm Turnbull comfortably leads Bill Shorten as the better prime minister according to *yesterday’s Newspoll (49 per cent to 27 per cent), the government’s primary vote remains dangerously low.
> 
> It is hard to see the Coalition *securing a working majority with a primary vote of just 41 per cent. Such an outcome on polling day could well result in a hung parliament. In other words, the Prime Minister must win the campaign to win the election.
> 
> If the election continues to be a close contest over the coming seven weeks, expect the dysfunction of a hung parliament to *become a theme the government uses to spruik for votes.




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...t/news-story/20082debd48478b458c49d11f0c3d6a4


Formed an opinion yet? Hanson WILL have her time in the sun


----------



## trainspotter (5 June 2016)

explod said:


> Anyhow now the public are realising your mob have more than doubled government debt the libs are sliding off the radar.   I wonder if Turnbull's 10% slide down in the poles is just isolated or because he wants to reward very big business for stuff they have not even done yet.






> Those increases were predictable. It's what the memo said might happen: "The Reserve Bank through its control over interest rates, determines the overall level of aggregate demand in the economy, and the Bank would likely take account of *any fiscal stimulus in its monetary decisions - that is, more spending would keep interest rates higher than otherwise."*
> 
> As Stephen Kirchner writes, that's a pretty good description of the "monetary offset". When a country has a central bank targeting inflation and growth, fiscal stimulus is redundant. It's both costly and unnecessary.
> 
> ...




http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-08-26/berg-the-cold-calculations-of-the-gfc-stimulus/5696150

Whose debt again explod for political brinkmanship?? Seriously ??


----------



## explod (5 June 2016)

trainspotter said:


> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-08-26/berg-the-cold-calculations-of-the-gfc-stimulus/5696150
> 
> Whose debt again explod for political brinkmanship?? Seriously ??




I was referring to the Governments budget ballance since they came in to office.


----------



## noco (5 June 2016)

explod said:


> I was referring to the Governments budget *balance* since they came in to office.




Perhaps you should read my post #428....You probably did but decided to ignore it. ..I hope that will help you to understand why we still have a deficit which was originally created by the LUG party.

I might add also that had the LUG party still been in power the deficit would have been doubled to what it is today....GDP is now 3.1% for the year so far so the government must be doing something right.


----------



## SirRumpole (5 June 2016)

noco said:


> I might add also that had the LUG party still been in power the deficit would have been doubled to what it is today...




Prove it.


----------



## noco (5 June 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Prove it.




Just have a look at the Labor Party's history....Every tale tells a story.....Just have a look at what they are promising in this election.......$65 billion over their intake...Just add it on to the "SPENDOMETER"......Shortens famous last words.

Unemployment would have been higher......GDP would have been lower.

Need more proof???????


----------



## SirRumpole (6 June 2016)

noco said:


> Just have a look at the Labor Party's history....Every tale tells a story.....Just have a look at what they are promising in this election.......$65 billion over their intake...Just add it on to the "SPENDOMETER"......Shortens famous last words.
> 
> Unemployment would have been higher......GDP would have been lower.
> 
> Need more proof???????




Do I need more prof than your opinion ?


----------



## GalaxyNexus (6 June 2016)

I wonder if the 30% -> 25% tax cut can be offset with let's say 5% dividend tax (fully franked), at least for the big businesses.

That will create incentive for the companies to reinvest their profits (vs divvying it up), bringing new jobs and growth. It will also not send a Christmas gift to our friend the American taxman.


----------



## noco (6 June 2016)

GalaxyNexus said:


> I wonder if the 30% -> 25% tax cut can be offset with let's say 5% dividend tax (fully franked), at least for the big businesses.
> 
> That will create incentive for the companies to reinvest their profits (vs divvying it up), bringing new jobs and growth. It will also not send a Christmas gift to our friend the American taxman.





*Jennifer Westcott believes Labor's opposition to the Business tax cuts is a disaster for the economy of Australia.....But of course we all know what economic vandals the LUG Party are and have been in the past.

Ex union hacks with no business brain.


https://au.finance.yahoo.com/news/business-gobsmacked-labors-attacks-002108459.html

Business Council of Australia boss Jennifer Westacott is "gobsmacked" by Labor's anti-business election campaign, describing it as a dangerous ploy.

Labor opposes the Turnbull government's plan to reduce the business tax rate to 25 per cent over the next 10 years, saying it is unaffordable and not in the interests of the country to make a $50 billion giveaway to the top end of town.

"It's gobsmacking, it's very dangerous ... for our reputation and it's dangerous to set us on the course that we are not going to improve our competitiveness," Ms Westacott told Sky News on Sunday.

Ms Westacott said anyone who is anti-business is anti the 10 million people who work in business and against the ability to create jobs.

"I think people are bewildered by this attack," she said.

"How are we going to grow our economy when 80 per cent of our economic output is dependent on business?"*


----------



## Logique (6 June 2016)

Way to erode a lead in the polls Labor! Jumping the shark on the middle class welfare "Spend-o-meter".

Tactical blunder that will send voters scurrying back to the Coalition.



> Labor unveils $3 billion childcare plan to win over families - Nicole Hasham, Jane Lee - June 5, 2016
> 
> SMH: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...lan-to-win-over-families-20160604-gpbtz5.html
> 
> The Turnbull government has rubbished Labor's $3 billion childcare cash-splash including a rise in the annual rebate to *$10,000 per child*, saying Opposition Leader Bill Shorten did not have "the faintest clue" how he would fund the pledge...


----------



## Knobby22 (6 June 2016)

I agree Logique.
it's stopped my wavering.

The other stupid part of the money throw is that it will end up going to the operators as occurred last time they did this.

The Liberals plan which is the same amount of money but is fully funded makes sure the funds go where they are needed. Labor stung by the criticism say they will have a price watch website. Didn't Rudd try that with petrol


----------



## Tisme (6 June 2016)

noco said:


> *Jennifer Westcott believes Labor's opposition to the Business tax cuts is a disaster for the economy of Australia.....But of course we all know what economic vandals the LUG Party are and have been in the past.
> 
> Ex union hacks with no business brain.
> 
> ...




There's never a shortage of wannabe business oracles who think they talk enmasse for business owners/managers. Of course there are two types of business owners: 1) the puritan who thinks hard work, long hours, strict discipline and skinny margins is the trophy to their success and 2) the clever one who profits from the puritan's attitude by differentiation and value add.

Our country is being run like a puritan outpost, with interference at every level by the council of elders who deal in pennies rather guineas. There is no demonstrable will for empire building, just titivation with a worn out colonial system of wealth for toil ... a cultural cringe that never seems to abate. We crave attention and forever look to being put "on the map" for the umpteenth time.

The one good thing about being a stagnant community, is that no matter what is thrown at it, it will be resilient to any major change.

And here's the rub: for more than a century we have been fed the line of imminent doom and gloom because of the same old hackneyed and unsubstantiated distracting bogeys: union power, taxation, subsidies, quotas, bounties, protectionism, social security, a faux divide between left and right, etc ... it's all just bu77**** that is coming undone as we increasingly become aware of a bigger world opening up to us via the internet.... that's why the electorate is happy to throw chaos into the mix by electing independents and stirrers. We had a taste of adventure back in the Hawke/Keating era and we lost it to twenty years of pipe and slippers, now we want to reinvigorate.

I say f#$k the LNP, f#$k the LABS, f#$k the rest of them and the ship they all sail in and give us some friggen peace from the incessant dirty rotten lying talking heads.  And f#$k Penny, if that is at all possible


----------



## SirRumpole (6 June 2016)

Logique said:


> Way to erode a lead in the polls Labor! Jumping the shark on the middle class welfare "Spend-o-meter".
> 
> Tactical blunder that will send voters scurrying back to the Coalition.




Maybe or maybe not. I think Chris Bowen seems a fairly responsible wanna be Treasurer. Labor will certainly face a backlash if they fail to say how they will fund their promises but I believe they will do so in due course.

They say they will release their costings earlier than the Libs did last election. Which probably means the Wednesday before the election.


----------



## SirRumpole (6 June 2016)

Tisme said:


> And f#$k Penny, if that is at all possible




Not even with yours



But she had a baby didn't you know ?


----------



## Tisme (6 June 2016)

Coming soon:


----------



## SirRumpole (6 June 2016)

Tisme said:


> Coming soon:
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 66994




Bill the Beast ?

Will certainly be a change from Shorten the snore.


----------



## SirRumpole (6 June 2016)

Good article that explains why we are stuffed, regardless of who wins government.

We've left ourselves hopelessly exposed to China

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-06-...ourselves-hopelessly-exposed-to-china/7479750


----------



## luutzu (6 June 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Good article that explains why we are stuffed, regardless of who wins government.
> 
> We've left ourselves hopelessly exposed to China
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-06-...ourselves-hopelessly-exposed-to-china/7479750




And China is going to be snuffed out by the Yanks in coming years. If the Yanks succeed at screwing China's economy the way they've done with Russia and Venezuela's, we better find new places to dump them ores.

But on the bright side, if China doesn't quietly go away, there'll be WW3 with Australia being the major prize - to be courted or liberated.

Better get that innovation boom going Canberra.


----------



## SirRumpole (6 June 2016)

luutzu said:


> And China is going to be snuffed out by the Yanks in coming years. If the Yanks succeed at screwing China's economy the way they've done with Russia and Venezuela's, we better find new places to dump them ores.
> 
> But on the bright side, if China doesn't quietly go away, there'll be WW3 with Australia being the major prize - to be courted or liberated.
> 
> Better get that innovation boom going Canberra.




The thing that interests me is, if China is so in debt, and the US is so in debt and Europe is so in debt, and Japan is so in debt, then who do they actually owe all that money to ?


----------



## noco (6 June 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Good article that explains why we are stuffed, regardless of who wins government.
> 
> We've left ourselves hopelessly exposed to China
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-06-...ourselves-hopelessly-exposed-to-china/7479750




It did not take much effort to check out your hero Ian Verrender.

He is a typical ABC leftie promoting doom and gloom....Full of criticizem of the Liberal Government but not a bad word about  Barnacle Bill.

He is only one opinion which is contrary to other well informed persons. 

INHO we can thank the militant unions for the loss of manufacturing in Australia dating back to the 50's and the 60'.....They have well and truly stuffed this once great country of ours..


https://search.waterfoxproject.org/?q=Ian+Verrennder


----------



## luutzu (6 June 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> The thing that interests me is, if China is so in debt, and the US is so in debt and Europe is so in debt, and Japan is so in debt, then who do they actually owe all that money to ?




To me. Or the Rothschild. 

Good questions. I skipped the lecture on when Nixon moved away from the gold standard and they just print money and let the market deal with it, so no idea.

YouTube kinda helped and I remember some egghead was saying how money is just some imaginary thing the central banks produce.


----------



## explod (6 June 2016)

luutzu said:


> To me. Or the Rothschild.
> 
> Good questions. I skipped the lecture on when Nixon moved away from the gold standard and they just print money and let the market deal with it, so no idea.
> 
> YouTube kinda helped and I remember some egghead was saying how money is just some imaginary thing the central banks produce.



Unbacked money printing and loans on loans as Allan Bond went to gail for. 

Nixon's removal of the gold standand in 1971 and no tangible productivity means total default and collapse of the worlds financial system is coming to a place near you.


----------



## SirRumpole (6 June 2016)

Turnbull's father died 30 years ago, why is he bringing him up now ?

Going for the sympathy vote ?

Election 2016: Malcolm Turnbull pays tribute to father in online video

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-06-...ays-tribute-to-father-in-online-video/7480418


----------



## Smurf1976 (6 June 2016)

noco said:


> INHO we can thank the militant unions for the loss of manufacturing in Australia dating back to the 50's and the 60'.....They have well and truly stuffed this once great country of ours..




Unions were responsible for globalisation and free trade?

In that case I must say that Australian unions have been incredibly effective. Took the funds of their members and managed to change policy everywhere from the UK to the US as well as locally. Now that's an incredible degree of power and influence they somehow managed.


----------



## drsmith (6 June 2016)

At the 1/2 way mark of the election campaign, I'm prepared to offer where the result will land on election day.

While Malcolm Turnbull has struggled with the legacy of his leadership coup and public expectation, the Libs will win the upcoming election with a 2PP result between 51/49 and 52/48 with a preference between the two towards 52/48.

That's barring something unexpected. 

Malcolm is simply more statesman like when compared to Bill Shorten and his unfunded promises.


----------



## SirRumpole (6 June 2016)

drsmith said:


> *At the 1/2 way mark of the election campaign...*




It's a phony war at the moment doc, the real one starts at the official campaign launches.


----------



## drsmith (6 June 2016)

We know who the phony is.


----------



## SirRumpole (6 June 2016)

drsmith said:


> We know who the phony is.




Indeed we do.

The guy that is saying that the great unwashed will all be better off if we give tax cuts to the rich.

Who is he kidding ?


----------



## drsmith (6 June 2016)




----------



## noco (6 June 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Indeed we do.
> 
> The guy that is saying that the great unwashed will all be better off if we give tax cuts to the rich.
> 
> Who is he kidding ?




Geez Rumpy that is old hat.....You have been reading the little Fabian red book too much.


----------



## luutzu (6 June 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Turnbull's father died 30 years ago, why is he bringing him up now ?
> 
> Going for the sympathy vote ?
> 
> ...




A bit like Hillary when she was announcing her run - it's for her mother, and all mothers like hers who's working too hard and not seeing enough of their children because people like Clinton herself thought $15 an hour is way too generous, but $5,000 a minute for a back-scratching speech is the sharing of wisdom.

See, they came from humble beginnings. Their parents made sacrifices for them; worked hard; gotten a few great breaks and made it in the world.

So now they understand that for the current generation of kids to make it in the world, their parents must earn less and work more hours and their schools funding be cut and uni fees be increased - tough times build characters. That's why it's gonna get tougher kids.


----------



## luutzu (6 June 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Indeed we do.
> 
> The guy that is saying that the great unwashed will all be better off if we give tax cuts to the rich.
> 
> Who is he kidding ?




You don't get it because you didn't go to the proper school SirR.


----------



## luutzu (6 June 2016)

explod said:


> Unbacked money printing and loans on loans as Allan Bond went to gail for.
> 
> Nixon's removal of the gold standand in 1971 and no tangible productivity means total default and collapse of the worlds financial system is coming to a place near you.




Near us or on us? 

Now that you mention it, I think the US is doing an Alan Bond. They print and borrow money to lend to the big banks, then those very same big banks lend those loaned money back to the US gov't (at interests) and round and round we go til the next collapse.


----------



## Tisme (6 June 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Turnbull's father died 30 years ago, why is he bringing him up now ?
> 
> Going for the sympathy vote ?
> 
> ...




Desperate to be seen as a man of the people. There's a real threat of him being at best a minority leader.


----------



## Tisme (7 June 2016)

I wonder how she will poll


----------



## noco (7 June 2016)

Tisme said:


> Desperate to be seen as a man of the people. There's a real threat of him being at best a minority leader.




Rudd did the same thing with his parenting.

I believe both were trying to get the message through that were self made and were not brought up with a silver spoon in their mouths.

The difference being it was Rudd's wife who mad the money.


----------



## Logique (7 June 2016)

The Liberal Democrats have some appealing policies, but a 20% Flat Tax...really?

[video=youtube_share;-n_8r0LU1i0]http://youtu.be/-n_8r0LU1i0[/video]


----------



## Tisme (7 June 2016)

noco said:


> Rudd did the same thing with his parenting.
> 
> I believe both were trying to get the message through that were self made and were not brought up with a silver spoon in their mouths.
> 
> The difference being it was Rudd's wife who mad the money.




I think it would be Kevin who was the force majeure behind the woman.

My heart bleeds for Malcolm, but not interested as an indicator of his required leadership


----------



## Tisme (7 June 2016)

Prime Ministering 101: perhaps Malcolm could do with a few hours watching Paul feeding the chooks:





and how to handle personal attacks:


----------



## trainspotter (7 June 2016)

An economics professor at a local university made a statement that he had never failed a single student before, but had recently failed an entire class. That class had insisted that Labor's socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer.

The professor then said, "OK, we will have an experiment in this class on Labor's plan".. All grades will be averaged and everyone will receive the same grade so no one will fail and no one will receive an A.... (substituting grades for dollars - something closer to home and more readily understood by all).

After the first test, the grades were averaged and everyone got a B. The students who studied hard were upset and the students who studied little were happy. As the second test rolled around, the students who studied little had studied even less and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted a free ride too so they studied little.

The second test average was a D! No one was happy.
When the 3rd test rolled around, the average was an F.

As the tests proceeded, the scores never increased as bickering, blame and name-calling all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for the benefit of anyone else.

To their great surprise, ALL FAILED and the professor told them that socialism would also ultimately fail because when the reward is great, the effort to succeed is great, but when government takes all the reward away, no one will try or want to succeed. Could not be any simpler than that. These are possibly the 5 best sentences you'll ever read and all applicable to this experiment:

1. You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity.

2. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving.

3. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.

4. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it!

5. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that is the beginning of the end of any nation.

Pauline Hanson to hold the balance of power


----------



## SirRumpole (7 June 2016)

trainspotter said:


> An economics professor at a local university made a statement that he had never failed a single student before, but had recently failed an entire class. That class had insisted that Labor's socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer.




You really think Labor is socialist ?

I suggest you don't know what the word means.


----------



## trainspotter (7 June 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> You really think Labor is socialist ?
> 
> I suggest you don't know what the word means.




I suggest you go read their constitution Horace ...

Labor's constitution states: "The Australian Labor Party is a democratic *socialist party *and has the objective of the democratic *socialisation* of industry, production, distribution and exchange, to the extent necessary to eliminate exploitation and other anti-social features in these fields".

also ..

To achieve the political and social values of equality, democracy, liberty and social cooperation
inherent in this objective, the Australian Labor Party stands for:
(a) *redistribution of political and economic power* so that all members of society have
the opportunity to participate in the shaping and control of the institutions and
relationships which determine their lives;
(b) establishment and development of public enterprises, based upon federal, state
and other forms of social ownership, in appropriate sectors of the economy;
(c) democratic control and strategic social ownership of Australian natural resources
for the benefit of all Australians;

https://cdn.australianlabor.com.au/documents/ALP_National_Constitution.pdf

Ooopsssiees 

P.S. This one is my favourite ..

_No attitude being expressed which is contrary to the provisions of the Party
platform or any other decision of National Conference or National
Executive._

NO DISSENT OF ANY KIND WILL BE TOLERATED !!


----------



## noco (7 June 2016)

trainspotter said:


> I suggest you go read their constitution Horace ...
> 
> Labor's constitution states: "The Australian Labor Party is a democratic *socialist party *and has the objective of the democratic *socialisation* of industry, production, distribution and exchange, to the extent necessary to eliminate exploitation and other anti-social features in these fields".
> 
> ...




What a wonderful rendition of how the Fabian indoctrinated Labor Party operates their ideology.

CENTRAL CONTROL UNDER THE RED BANNER.

I don't know why the Labor Party does not rename their party the Communist Party because they are so far removed from the originally Labor Party.


----------



## luutzu (7 June 2016)

trainspotter said:


> An economics professor at a local university made a statement that he had never failed a single student before, but had recently failed an entire class. That class had insisted that Labor's socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer.
> 
> The professor then said, "OK, we will have an experiment in this class on Labor's plan".. All grades will be averaged and everyone will receive the same grade so no one will fail and no one will receive an A.... (substituting grades for dollars - something closer to home and more readily understood by all).
> 
> ...






In reality, it is the poor that subsidise the rich, trainspotter.

It is a myth that the rich made the country rich. It just does not happen, ever.

Take any country at its foundation. Who sweat and bled for the country's independence or genocide? Not the rich, not the aristocrats - but the plebs.

Once established and land and wealth are divided, who gets the biggest spoilt and booties? Not the plebs but the Lords and the Kings.

Who work and toil on the land, producing the crop and bringing it to market?

At the market, who buy the crop and other goods? Ultimately it's the plebs who make demand and those demand induce the rich to invest and supply.

Without demand all supplies will go to waste and never to return. With demand, innovation and ways will be found to meet it - i.e. job creation, industry and entrepreneurship arise from demand; demand of any meaning and progress comes from the plebs. Hence, more houses than castles; more earthen wares than fine porcelains. 

So when you give those who have everything more of the mean to get everything (more money), what does the country have? A few gated communities with a few gleaming mansions in a sea of desperation.

Desperation leads to crimes; crimes to punishment; punishment to repraisals and revolution and chaos.

The Dark Side take hold, it will.


----------



## trainspotter (7 June 2016)

luutzu said:


> In reality, it is the poor that subsidise the rich, trainspotter.
> 
> It is a myth that the rich made the country rich. It just does not happen, ever.




Ermmmmmm nope ...



> The Treasurer’s statement that the top 10% of incomes from working age persons pay 50% of personal income tax is correct. This reflects the progressive nature of Australia’s personal income tax system, which is applied to a society that features significant income inequality.




http://theconversation.com/factchec...ia-paid-by-10-of-the-working-population-45229


----------



## luutzu (7 June 2016)

noco said:


> What a wonderful rendition of how the Fabian indoctrinated Labor Party operates their ideology.
> 
> CENTRAL CONTROL UNDER THE RED BANNER.




Maybe you're not on Medicare or drive the national highway much noco; but if you do, it's all our money that made it possible. 

That kind of Socialism ain't so bad right?


----------



## SirRumpole (7 June 2016)

trainspotter said:


> I suggest you go read their constitution Horace ...
> 
> Labor's constitution states: "The Australian Labor Party is a democratic *socialist party *and has the objective of the democratic *socialisation* of industry, production, distribution and exchange, to the extent necessary to eliminate exploitation and other anti-social features in these fields".




So when Keating sold the Commonwealth Bank and Qantas he was being socialist was he ?

The fact is that Labor has moved a long way to the Right of their "Constitution", the old Reds under the bed scare campaign doesn't cut any ice any more, except for the tin foil hat brigade that is.


----------



## trainspotter (7 June 2016)

noco said:


> What a wonderful rendition of how the Fabian indoctrinated Labor Party operates their ideology.
> 
> CENTRAL CONTROL UNDER THE RED BANNER.
> 
> I don't know why the Labor Party does not rename their party the Communist Party because they are so far removed from the originally Labor Party.




Not quite so noco ... they are a "democratic socialist party" (which to me is an oxymoron but that is another story)

Not sure if they are the reds under the bed we are looking for old **** 

So far the only red I have seen from them is on the balance sheet of Australian debt thus far Pfffffffffffttt !!


----------



## trainspotter (7 June 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> So when Keating sold the Commonwealth Bank and Qantas he was being socialist was he ?
> 
> The fact is that Labor has moved a long way to the Right of their "Constitution", the old Reds under the bed scare campaign doesn't cut any ice any more.




Politics Rumpy is not always what it seems ....



> Among the policies for which the Hawke-Keating Labor government is remembered, two of the most prominent were privatisation and financial deregulation. The combination of these two policies was symbolised by the conversion of the Commonwealth Bank from the 'people's bank' to a private organisation devoted to maximising returns to its shareholders and managers, and free of any social or community obligations. Even more than financial deregulation, the Hawke-Keating government's embrace of privatisation represented a fundamental break with the traditional policies of the Labor Party. *The political damage associated with privatisation was immense. **Not only was the sale of 'icons' like the Commonwealth Bank regarded with immense hostility, even in conservative sections of the electorate, but these actions, taken in breach of the most explicit promises, destroyed Labor's credibility in arguing against the sale of Telstra in the 1996 election campaign.*
> 
> More fundamentally, privatisation provided a clear refutation of the claims, put forward particularly by the NSW Right of the Labor Party, that the Hawke-Keating government was in the mainstream Labor tradition represented by such leaders as McKell. However far from dogmatic socialism McKell and others might have been, *no one could imagine them selling off the Commonwealth Bank.* Privatisation was a key factor in eroding Labor's base of committed supporters, the 40 per cent or so of the population who could, until around 1987, be relied upon to vote Labor through thick and thin. By 1996, Labor's primary vote had fallen to 38.7 per cent, the lowest since World War II, and one of the lowest since Federation.
> 
> *Prior to the 1983 election, Labor had reaffirmed its socialist objective and condemned the proposals for financial deregulation put forward by the Campbell Committee. Labor's position on financial deregulation was rapidly reversed.* In December 1983, the dollar was floated and, by 1986, policies of deregulation more radical than those proposed by the Campbell Committee had been adopted.




http://www.uq.edu.au/economics/johnquiggin/JournalArticles01/CBAPrivatisation01.html

Crack on then shall we ?



> The commitment of the leading figures in the government to privatisation was evident by the late 1980s, but it took some years before the opposition of the Labor party membership could be overcome, and large scale privatisation could be implemented. *Over this period, the Labor leadership displayed almost unparalleled hypocrisy;* attacking the coalition's proposals to privatise the Commonwealth Bank in the election campaign of early 1990, but making a decision in favour of partial privatisation later in the same year. *At each stage in the privatisation of the Commonwealth Bank, solemn assurances were given that this sale would be the last.*


----------



## luutzu (7 June 2016)

trainspotter said:


> Ermmmmmm nope ...
> 
> 
> 
> http://theconversation.com/factchec...ia-paid-by-10-of-the-working-population-45229




You might lose a few people quoting that the Treasurer is right 

Were those income before or after allowable deductions? You know, before or after a high-end tax consultant got through with it?

Sounds a lot like our current Treasurer's claim that Negative Gearing is for the those earning around "$80K". Yea, it's for the average Joe earning $80K *after* NG reduces their much higher income.

I'm sure those who don't claim much "business expense" but still don't need to pay tax... they are so because their income is too low to tax. They would be fine with paying income tax if their (gross) income was higher.


----------



## trainspotter (7 June 2016)

luutzu said:


> You might lose a few people quoting that the Treasurer is right




Not quoting the EX Treasurer ... quoting a FACT that 10% of the people in Australia pay 50% of income tax which destroys your assertion that ...



> In reality, it is the poor that subsidise the rich, trainspotter.
> 
> It is a myth that the rich made the country rich. It just does not happen, ever.




Who cares what usage of tax aversion is necessary under the current laws. Like Packer said _"I am not evading tax in any way, shape or form. Now of course I am minimizing my tax and if anybody in this country doesn't minimize their tax they want their heads read because as a government I can tell you you're not spending it that well that we should be donating extra."_


----------



## SirRumpole (7 June 2016)

Tisme said:


> I wonder how she will poll
> 
> View attachment 67007




No doubt she will pick up a few ex Palmerites.


----------



## luutzu (7 June 2016)

trainspotter said:


> Not quoting the EX Treasurer ... quoting a FACT that 10% of the people in Australia pay 50% of income tax which destroys your assertion that ...
> 
> 
> 
> Who cares what usage of tax aversion is necessary under the current laws. Like Packer said _"I am not evading tax in any way, shape or form. Now of course I am minimizing my tax and if anybody in this country doesn't minimize their tax they want their heads read because as a government I can tell you you're not spending it that well that we should be donating extra."_




That's what Joe Hockey quoted, right?

Regardless, if you look at the details of those "top 10%", I bet you all the money I have ($5) that it does not include the top 10% gross earnings. E.g. some who earn $1 million may pay just as much income tax as those earning $1. 

That is, while the poorer end of town don't pay income tax because of poverty level income; those at the other end don't pay income tax because certain laws and incentives and friends in high places mean they don't have to. e.g. Negative gearing; setting up trusts, corporations, shell company... hence, poor subsidising the rich.

And let's give it to you and our Treasurer that top 10% Aussie pay half of all income tax... there are other taxes the poor pays a disproportionate amount (most) of their income on, yet receive little of the other benefits.


----------



## trainspotter (7 June 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> No doubt she will pick up a few ex Palmerites.




:iagree: 

The brick with eyes has a huge job in front of him. 

Not to mention Tony Windsor taking on the Joyce stick !!


----------



## trainspotter (7 June 2016)

luutzu said:


> That's what Joe Hockey quoted, right?
> 
> Regardless, if you look at the details of those "top 10%", I bet you all the money I have ($5) that it does not include the top 10% gross earnings. E.g. some who earn $1 million may pay just as much income tax as those earning $1.
> 
> ...




No ... Joe Hockey STATED this in a presser .. FACTCHECK proved it and I QUOTED it. 

I will see your $5 and raise you the $4.35 I have in my cars ashtray. Your argument is nonsensical as you can earn up to $18.200 TAX FREE

0 to $18,200 = Nil
$18,201 to $37,000 =19c for each $1 over $18,200
$37,001 to $80,000 = $3,572 plus 32.5c for each $1 over $37,000
$80,001 to $180,000 =$17,547 plus 37c for each $1 over $80,000
$180,001 and over = $54,547 plus 45c for each $1 over $180,000

Refer Packer quote luutzu

What taxes exactly does the poor pay luutzu that the rich don't ... do tell? Remember you just said "poor subsidising the rich" ??


----------



## Tisme (7 June 2016)

trainspotter said:


> An economics professor at a local university made a statement that he had never failed a single student before, but had recently failed an entire class. That class had insisted that Labor's socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer.
> 
> ........
> 
> Pauline Hanson to hold the balance of power




I'm pretty sure that old chestnut is a made up story. It has been circulating for years as a USA Republican versus Democrat beatup.

There is a difference between Socialism and Communism. Both majors in Oz advocate various degrees of socialism, it's just that it is packaged to look like something else. I'm not sure there is any communism in play by any of our parties?

We all get to own our own private wealth, private assets, practice our own religions (socialism) but secularism promoted (socialism), compulsory education (socialism), free health care (socialism), marry whom we choose (socialism), chose our own jobs (socialism), class doesn't figure in decisions (socialism), etc

Neither party advocates state ownership of production and factories, but both variously hold onto utilities and qangos, both parties redistribute excess govt income into social schemes (that helps the party elective too),  universal pensions were introduced here by Pig Iron Bob, etc, etc


----------



## trainspotter (7 June 2016)

Tisme said:


> I'm pretty sure that old chestnut is a made up story. It has been circulating for years as a USA Republican versus Democrat beatup.
> 
> There is a difference between Socialism and Communism. Both majors in Oz advocate various degrees of socialism, it's just that it is packaged to look like something else. I'm not sure there is any communism in play by any of our parties?
> 
> ...




Yes but it has a ring of truth about it.

I never mentioned Communism - Animal Farm anyone? Both parties have their noses in the trough.

Constitutionally Labor is about the redistribution of wealth 







> (a) redistribution of political and *economic power* so that all members of society have



 Whether it is true or not it IS in their constitution.

Ummm being pretty broad brush strokes with the (socialism) remarks don't ya think? Since when is marrying someone you choose (socialism) ??????? I would have thought it was free thinking or even libertarianism??

Isn't Labor screaming that Medicare is not Liberals to sell? HUH ??


----------



## Tisme (7 June 2016)

trainspotter said:


> Yes but it has a ring of truth about it.
> 
> I never mentioned Communism - Animal Farm anyone? Both parties have their noses in the trough.
> 
> ...




My reply was to illustrate socialist constructs. Things like universal freedom of choice to marriage were not so long ago unavailable to indentured servants/workers; banks and the public service dismissed females on getting marriage in the very near immediate past. It took social reform mainly via Labour/Labor to rip those injustices from the social elite.... Lib and Lab share the same attitude these days.


----------



## trainspotter (7 June 2016)

Tisme said:


> My reply was to illustrate socialist constructs. Things like universal freedom of choice to marriage were not so long ago unavailable to indentured servants/workers; banks and the public service dismissed females on getting marriage in the very near immediate past. It took social reform mainly via Labour/Labor to rip those injustices from the social elite.... Lib and Lab share the same attitude these days.




No .. It was the suffragettes that did this and had NOTHING to do with either Labor or Liberal schisms. Labor under Whitlam offered no-fault divorce and National and Equal Pay to women. Totally different from some borgeouis, elitist, idealistic fundamentalism you are banging on about.


----------



## trainspotter (7 June 2016)

Ruger is coming out with a new pistol for sale in Australia in honour of our politicians and bureaucrats. 

It will be named the Public Servant.

It doesn't work and you can’t fire it.


----------



## luutzu (7 June 2016)

trainspotter said:


> No ... Joe Hockey STATED this in a presser .. FACTCHECK proved it and I QUOTED it.
> 
> I will see your $5 and raise you the $4.35 I have in my cars ashtray. Your argument is nonsensical as you can earn up to $18.200 TAX FREE
> 
> ...




So will the $5 go towards a discount on those pearl or what?

Here we go:

Claim that top 10% earners pays 50% of income tax come from (a misrepresentation) of ATO's breakdown below:

"Below we show the proportion of all net tax paid when we ranked our *100 people by their taxable incomes*.

People with the top three taxable incomes paid 27% of all net tax.
The next six paid 20% of all net tax.
The next 30 paid 42% of all net tax.
The next 35 paid 11% of all net tax.
The last 26 didn't pay any tax."
-- from https://www.ato.gov.au/About-ATO/Research-and-statistics/In-detail/Tax-statistics/Taxation-statistics-2012-13--100-people/


True?


What does the ATO mean by *taxable income*?

"What is taxable income?

Your taxable income is the income you have to pay tax on. It is the term used for the amount left after you have deducted all the expenses you are allowed to claim from your assessable income.

Assessable income – allowable deductions = taxable income

-- https://www.ato.gov.au/Individuals/Income-and-deductions/In-detail/How-tax-works/What-is-income-/?page=4


i.e. taxable income *is not* the same as assessable income.

So if the CEO earns $1M assessable income (what his board pays him), and if the CEO have a very good accountant and so claim a lot of business expenses, negative gearing, capital loss, trips overseas with the spouse (or "secretary") as co-director... the taxable income could drop all the way down to zero.

That's some of the ways how a few Aussie battler earning $1M in income but pay no income tax.

---------

*Packer*

Paying tax is not a charity. If there are no taxes, who pays for the police to protect Packer's many mansions? Who would hire the police commissioner who will personally see to it the Packers sleeps without thieves and other trash climbing his walls?

Who pays for the politicians who make the laws that benefit his gambling, media empire?

But to be fair to Packer, if we're all that rich we'd think we did it all ourselves too.

----

Key word was proportionate, but anyway...


----------



## noco (8 June 2016)

luutzu said:


> That's what Joe Hockey quoted, right?
> 
> Regardless, if you look at the details of those "top 10%", I bet you all the money I have ($5) that it does not include the top 10% gross earnings. E.g. some who earn $1 million may pay just as much income tax as those earning $1.
> 
> ...




You don't pay tax until you hit $18,200 unfortunately the shadow Treasurer Chris Bowen did not know that until someone told him.


----------



## trainspotter (8 June 2016)

luutzu said:


> So will the $5 go towards a discount on those pearl or what?
> 
> Here we go:
> 
> ...




OH DEAR GOD !!! On your own figures as well !! 



> People with the top* three* taxable incomes paid 27% of all net tax.
> The next *six *paid 20% of all net tax.




Lets round it up shall we? *three *+ *six* + (*1 *for rounding purposes) = 10 RIGHT?

10 /100 = 10% RIGHT? out of 100 people who put their NET TAX RETURNS IN RIGHT ?

Below we show the proportion of all net tax paid when we ranked our 100 people by their taxable incomes.



> People with the top three taxable incomes paid *27%* of all net tax.
> The next six paid *20%* of all net tax.
> The next 30 paid 42% of all net tax.
> The next 35 paid 11% of all net tax.
> The last 26 didn't pay any tax.




So based on the ATO link you supplied in the 2012/13 figure 47% of NET TAX paid came from 9% of the population who pay tax 

So if I round it up to 2014/15 figures @10% of population = 50% of NET TAX 

Packer does not require police as he has his own security detail. You missed the point luutzu. If the government was doing such a good job he would happily give more in tax. Reverse engineering if you will. 

Remember YOU supplied the link to the ATO ... not me 

61% of people paid 11% tax

30% of people paid 42% tax

9% of people paid 47% tax

DO THE MATH luutzu !! It INCLUDES the minimisation of all these flogs on 1 million a year already ... BAH HUMBUG


----------



## GalaxyNexus (8 June 2016)

Luutzu and fellow Labor leaners seems to like to wave around this "high-end tax minimizer super accountant" story. Truth of the matter is, to claim deduction you actually have to *lose* money. And it's harder than you think. If you look at the individual cases of the people who reduced their income by millions, all the years where they make "profit", not just the years they make a "loss", perhaps they actually still pay more *tax* than ordinary people *earn* during those years.

Has it ever occurred to you that there are a lot of people, perhaps most of the high-income people, who actually pay tax, a *lot* of tax, to fund these nonsense middle class welfare?


----------



## Tisme (8 June 2016)

trainspotter said:


> No .. It was the suffragettes that did this and had NOTHING to do with either Labor or Liberal schisms. Labor under Whitlam offered no-fault divorce and National and Equal Pay to women. Totally different from some borgeouis, elitist, idealistic fundamentalism you are banging on about.




I'm open to your suggestion, but can you back those claims. In my lifetime I saw my sisters subjected to enforced sacking from their jobs upon marrying. 

I'm not banging on at all and you should resist closing a debate by insults because you don't agree, you might just learn something that doesn't cost you your pride. Life doesn't have to be a battlefield of egos.

edit: I should add that Queensland had indentured servitude well into the early 1900's. Australian troops could not return to WWII Australia with their e.g. Japanese wives. Aborigines had to wait until ~1967 for the "protection" rules to be nullified.


----------



## trainspotter (8 June 2016)

Tisme said:


> I'm open to your suggestion, but can you back those claims. In my lifetime I saw my sisters subjected to enforced sacking from their jobs upon marrying.
> 
> I'm not banging on at all and you should resist closing a debate by insults because you don't agree, you might just learn something that doesn't cost you your pride. Life doesn't have to be a battlefield of egos.
> 
> edit: I should add that Queensland had indentured servitude well into the early 1900's. Australian troops could not return to WWII Australia with their e.g. Japanese wives. Aborigines had to wait until ~1967 for the "protection" rules to be nullified.




I do not have the time or the inkling for you to be brought up to speed on what the suffragettes did for the rights of women. Try doing your own research.  Your sisters were sacked because they got married? Really Tisme you are embarrassing yourself now. You must have been born in 1933 to see this happening  deducing your sisters were older than you and got married around 1951.

You should try your  own  medicine sometime.


----------



## SirRumpole (8 June 2016)

GalaxyNexus said:


> Has it ever occurred to you that there are a lot of people, perhaps most of the high-income people, who actually pay tax, a *lot* of tax, to fund these nonsense middle class welfare?




What middle class welfare would you like to see abolished ?


----------



## wayneL (8 June 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> What middle class welfare would you like to see abolished ?




What *middle class* welfare shouldnt be abolished would be a much shorter list.

Or shall we just call a spade a spade and call it electoral pork barrelling?


----------



## SirRumpole (8 June 2016)

wayneL said:


> What *middle class* welfare shouldnt be abolished would be a much shorter list.
> 
> Or shall we just call a spade a spade and call it electoral pork barrelling?




It all depends on your definition of "middle class welfare" doesn't it ?

I'd call negative gearing deductions, CGT discounts, tax free super , family trust concessions, family tax benefits for those on $80k + to be middle class welfare.

Would you ? 

Or what else fits your definition ?


----------



## drsmith (8 June 2016)

The surplus years are here, well, almost.


----------



## Knobby22 (8 June 2016)

drsmith said:


> The surplus years are here, well, almost.
> 
> View attachment 67037




Yes, we are going to spend up big and claw it back next term.
I really thought he had a good plan at the start but the pork barrelling doesn't stop.


----------



## trainspotter (8 June 2016)

Knobby22 said:


> Yes, we are going to spend up big and claw it back next term.
> I really thought he had a good plan at the start but the pork barrelling doesn't stop.




Isn't this what the Libs did with the debt ceiling? And then blamed it on Labor? I am no economic genius but I fail to see how spending your way out of debt is going to work?


----------



## Knobby22 (8 June 2016)

trainspotter said:


> Isn't this what the Libs did with the debt ceiling? And then blamed it on Labor? I am no economic genius but I fail to see how spending your way out of debt is going to work?




I know. Abbott let us all down in so many ways.
Jeez I hope Turnbull gets in and manages to run this country properly. The problem is the power of the large donators and the obstructiveness of the upper house.

Bowen seems to have a few brains but his problem is the powerful public sector Unions, especially in health and education, who won't let him clean up the mess.


----------



## trainspotter (8 June 2016)

Knobby22 said:


> I know. Abbott let us all down in so many ways.
> Jeez I hope Turnbull gets in and manages to run this country properly. The problem is the power of the large donators and the obstructiveness of the upper house.
> 
> Bowen seems to have a few brains but his problem is the powerful public sector Unions, especially in health and education, who won't let him clean up the mess.




Two bushy eyebrows and a drovers dog could win this election. 

*WILL THE NEXT PRIME MINISTER OF AUSTRALIA PLEASE STAND UP* !


----------



## noco (8 June 2016)

drsmith said:


> The surplus years are here, well, almost.
> 
> View attachment 67037



Doc, I am disappointed it did not have a RED cover on the front page.


----------



## Tisme (8 June 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> What middle class welfare would you like to see abolished ?




Never really managed to get into the middle class ...jumped from poverty to getting s4it off having no welfare relief, paying the highest rate of tax and listening to what became Howard's Battlers whiney class, complaining about where my contribution to "50%" of income tax take was going....no one officially asked or has asked me  where i want my payments to go, but it sure as s4it isn't to subsidise negative gearing slum lords.


----------



## SirRumpole (8 June 2016)

Tisme said:


> Never really managed to get into the middle class ...jumped from poverty to getting s4it off having no welfare relief, paying the highest rate of tax and listening to what became Howard's Battlers whiney class, complaining about where my contribution to "50%" of income tax take was going....no one officially asked or has asked me  where i want my payments to go, but it sure as s4it isn't to subsidise negative gearing slum lords.




Yep fair enough.

I reckon the top tax rates for professional people delivering services should be cut to 40% or lower on the salaries or payments they get for actually delivering those services, and paid for by cutting out the perks like -ve gearing and all the other stuff I've already mentioned.

That might actually encourage people to improve their education and deliver real productivity, rather than becoming professional tax avoiders.


----------



## drsmith (8 June 2016)

Tisme said:


> Never really managed to get into the middle class ...jumped from poverty to getting s4it off having no welfare relief, paying the highest rate of tax and listening to what became Howard's Battlers whiney class, complaining about where my contribution to "50%" of income tax take was going....no one officially asked or has asked me  where i want my payments to go, but it sure as s4it isn't to subsidise negative gearing slum lords.






SirRumpole said:


> Yep fair enough.
> 
> I reckon the top tax rates for professional people delivering services should be cut to 40% or lower on the salaries or payments they get for actually delivering those services, and paid for by cutting out the perks like -ve gearing and all the other stuff I've already mentioned.
> 
> That might actually encourage people to improve their education and deliver real productivity, rather than becoming professional tax avoiders.



I've long since argued that the top marginal rate of income tax is too high and that more broadly, taxes bases should be as broad as possible so that the rate(s) can be as low as possible.


----------



## SirRumpole (8 June 2016)

drsmith said:


> I've long since argued that the top marginal rate of income tax is too high and that more broadly, taxes bases should be as broad as possible so that the rate(s) can be as low as possible.




We may be edging towards agreement Smithy.



I wonder why past Conservative governments did not take the route we have espoused and proceded to simply introduce more loopholes into the system that middle to high income earners could safely pass through and avoid tax ?


----------



## trainspotter (8 June 2016)

drsmith said:


> I've long since argued that the top marginal rate of income tax is too high and that more broadly, taxes bases should be as broad as possible so that the rate(s) can be as low as possible.




Easy Doc ... are you suggesting the people pay a flat rate income tax and a broad based consumption tax ?

This would not be fair on the other end of the tax scale? Do you think it would drive incentive to earn more thus producing a velocity of money into the system ?

Then a person digging a ditch earning say $50,000 a year is on the same income tax rate as say a Doctor on $250,000 per annum but they both pay the same on a GST level?

This might have an effect on the Phillips curve and also increase inflation.


----------



## drsmith (8 June 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> I wonder why past Conservative governments did not take the route we have espoused and proceded to simply introduce more loopholes into the system that middle to high income earners could safely pass through and avoid tax ?



The Howard government did in terms of large cuts to income tax rates. Where it failed was on increasing middle class welfare and the blunt nature of its CGT reform. More broadly, it didn't adhere to a broad principal of broadening the income tax base to further reform income tax rates in its latter years. 

In this sense, a problem with Labor's proposed changes to NG and CGT is that it wants to direct the revenue towards spending and not reductions in marginal tax rates.


----------



## drsmith (8 June 2016)

trainspotter said:


> Easy Doc ... are you suggesting the people pay a flat rate income tax and a broad based consumption tax ?



That's the ideal in my view but with a tax free threshold and welfare support for those below that threshold.

The flat rate of income tax would apply above a tax free threshold. Those below such a tax free threshold would receive welfare support which would be reduced at the flat tax rate for every additional dollar earned. This would serve to offer income support for those on low incomes and everyone would have the same EMTR. 

The LDP illustrate an example of the above,

http://ldp.org.au/archives/index.ph...1238-30-flat-tax-to-increase-living-standards

Despite it being a flat rate of tax, the tax free threshold would still result in those on higher incomes paying a greater share of tax as a proportion of income than those on lower tax rates and the EMTR wouldn't at any level act as a disincentive provided the flat tax rate itself wasn't set too high.

A tax free threshold of $30k and a flat rate of 35% may be more appropriate than the LDP's 30% suggestion from 2010 above. That would result in $10,500 of income support at no earnings and persons on $30k/$50k/$100k/$200k/$500k/$1m paying 0%/14%/24.5%/29.75%/32.9%/33.95% of their income as tax respectively.


----------



## trainspotter (8 June 2016)

drsmith said:


> That's the ideal in my view.
> 
> The flat rate of income tax would apply above a tax free threshold. Those below such a tax free threshold would receive welfare support which would be reduced at the flat tax rate for every additional dollar earned. This would serve to offer income support for those on low incomes and everyone would have the same EMTR.
> 
> ...




But then would not the boffins figure out a way of minimising the tax rate through NG, Trusts and other such corporate identities or are we talking about getting rid of them as well?

I am not sure but is there any other 1st world country implementing this ideal system?

Also current New Start is $501 per fortnight for a single eligible person = $13,026 per annum.

Under the 30/30 proposal it would drop to $9,000 per annum. Cant see the lower end of the scale currying much favour in that one Doc  Then you have to top it up with welfare as well?


----------



## drsmith (8 June 2016)

The principal is what I'm attempting to illustrate. Where the tax free threshold and the flat rate of tax are set with regard to budget balance and social objectives can be a discussion within that principal.

Clearly, the income tax base would need to be broadened to satisfy reasonable budget goals within the above principal through the reduction and/or elimination of options for income tax deductions.


----------



## trainspotter (8 June 2016)

drsmith said:


> The principal is what I'm attempting to illustrate. Where the tax free threshold and the flat rate of tax are set with regard to budget balance and social objectives can be a discussion within that principal.
> 
> Clearly, the income tax base would need to be broadened to satisfy reasonable budget goals within the principal through the reduction and/or elimination of options for income tax deductions.




I concur but once the pollies see the extra $$$ this system will generate do you think they will stick to budget goals or do a Howard and create a war chest for future elections / pork barrelling etc?

After all look what they did with the GST revenue


----------



## drsmith (8 June 2016)

trainspotter said:


> I concur but once the pollies see the extra $$$ this system will generate do you think they will stick to budget goals or do a Howard and create a war chest for future elections / pork barrelling etc?



The political environment is not sufficiently conducive so see us going significantly down this path (and perhaps never will be) but that doesn't invalidate the underlying principal.  

The best opportunity to take significant steps down this path was the final term of the Howard government when it had a majority in the senate and strongly growing revenue to help politically support the income tax base broadening measures.


----------



## DB008 (8 June 2016)

trainspotter said:


> Easy Doc ... are you suggesting the people pay a flat rate income tax and a broad based consumption tax ?
> 
> This would not be fair on the other end of the tax scale? Do you think it would drive incentive to earn more thus producing a velocity of money into the system ?
> 
> ...




Yes, I agree with Doc

KISS

​


----------



## trainspotter (8 June 2016)

Ken Henry tried to tax reform and look where that got him. Both parties have ignored his advice.



> Recommendation 1: Revenue raising should be concentrated on four robust and efficient broad-based taxes:
> 
> 1) personal income, assessed on a more comprehensive basis;
> 
> ...




http://taxreview.treasury.gov.au/co...ons/papers/final_report_part_1/chapter_12.htm


Howard and the Libs had the best opportunity but squandered any real reform ...



> ANOTHER surge in the federal budget surplus has opened the door to massive spending commitments by the major parties in the lead-up to the election, increasing the risk of inflationary pressures and higher interest rates.
> 
> The Government has found another $3.7 billion in just over three months, taking the 2006-07 budget surplus to $17.3 billion ”” a large chunk of which it has vowed to invest in higher education and health.
> 
> ...




http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/billions-in-election-war-chest/2007/08/21/1187462266506.html

Turnbull attacking Hanson backfired eh what? The people have spoken ....



> Pensioner Pete 01/06/2016, 6:27 am
> 
> I have news for the PM, we, the electors will decide who will be welcome and who will not be welcome within the halls of power. Truly, the heights of arrogance this galah is able to achieve are astonishing. Personally, I would dearly enjoy Pauline Hanson taking a seat in the Senate after the way she was treated by the media and politicians over past years, *it certainly takes a lot of guts to keep going like she has which is a demonstration of her true blue Aussie spirit*.




http://morningmail.org/turnbull-pauline-hanson-not-welcome-politics/


----------



## sptrawler (8 June 2016)

Tax reform isn't going to happen, until everyone accepts they have to give a bit, like that is going to happen.

Isn't fast food the only growth industry in Australia.

Would you like fries with that.

It really does boil back to what Noco says, we are a very high priced Country, to value add in.

Recently bauxite has been exported to China from W.A, normally we refine it to alumina, the writing is on the wall for our refineries.IMO

How we make Australia a value adding Country, as opposed to a mine pit, I don't know.


----------



## Smurf1976 (8 June 2016)

sptrawler said:


> Recently bauxite has been exported to China from W.A, normally we refine it to alumina, the writing is on the wall for our refineries.IMO




Bauxite - mined in Qld, NT, WA.

Alumina - was refined in Qld, NT, WA but now the NT refinery is gone.

Aluminium - we had 6 smelters (Qld, 2 in NSW, 2 in Vic, Tas) but now we're down to 4 (one each in Qld, NSW, Vic, Tas) with plenty of rumors about the future of the one in Vic especially.

Slowly but surely aluminium is going the same way as countless other industries and we're losing the value added part of it in Australia.


----------



## wayneL (9 June 2016)

Bill Short'un caught out exaggerating again


----------



## trainspotter (9 June 2016)

Penny Wong is just ... just ... just WRONG !




The tipping point for my vote !


----------



## noco (9 June 2016)

explod said:


> Anyhow now the public are realising your mob have more than doubled government debt the libs are sliding off the radar.   I wonder if Turnbull's 10% slide down in the poles is just isolated or because he wants to reward very big business for stuff they have not even done yet.




Barnacle Bill says he match Turnbull and will double it again over the next 4 years...What happened to his "ECONOMIC PLAN" to reduce the debt and deficit?......Looks like he has given up. 

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/fed...s/news-story/20e17cc9651e120748971c79a536f7d0

*Labor will go to the election promising deeper budget deficits throughout the first term of a Shorten government in a high-risk political play that asks voters to accept bigger commonwealth debt in the hope of a brighter outlook over 10 years.

Bill Shorten was battling to justify the decision last night as economists rejected his claim that the higher spending was needed to spur demand and shore-up growth, turning his budget plan into a key test on economic management.

The government seized on the move to declare that Labor “could not be trusted” to balance the budget amid warnings from economists that growing debt and deficit would threaten the *nation’s valuable AAA credit rating. In a sign of the political danger around his decision, Mr Shorten described the new stance as a delay to a “fiscal contraction” rather than stating directly that the deficits would be bigger under Labor.*


----------



## SirRumpole (9 June 2016)

noco said:


> Barnacle Bill says he match Turnbull and will double it again over the next 4 years...What happened to his "ECONOMIC PLAN" to reduce the debt and deficit?......Looks like he has given up.




Bowen said this morning that Labor will produce a surplus in the same year that the Libs will.

Furthermore Labors changes to tax measures will continue to strengthen the budget bottom line while the Coalitions corporate tax cuts will weaken the budget over the next 10 years, Labor says.

I tend to take more notice of Bowen. There seems to be no Coalition plan to rectify the deficit. Cutting company tax alone just won't do it. Where is the LNP going to cut spending to pay for corporate tax cuts ?

The LNP are definitely hiding their real plans and are playing their usual shifty games.


----------



## noco (9 June 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Bowen said this morning that Labor will produce a surplus in the same year that the Libs will.
> 
> Furthermore Labors changes to tax measures will continue to strengthen the budget bottom line while the Coalitions corporate tax cuts will weaken the budget over the next 10 years, Labor says.
> 
> ...




The deficit would have been lower today if the bloody minded Labor senators and some of the independent dingbats  had passed the $18 billion in savings......You know as well as every one else what Labor has been trying to do........They have politicized the the deficit to make the Government look bad.....Never mind what might be in the National interest....Shorten says he believes in FAIRNESS.....He should look up the dictionary to find out what the word FAIRNESS really means.......There was no fairness with the workers of Chiquita, Clean Event and Coles and how many more we don't know about.

So Shorten does not know what FAIRNESS is...He is such a darned hypocrite.


----------



## So_Cynical (9 June 2016)

Saw Tony Burke on the train today travelling into the city (Syd) seems a normal kind of bloke, gave me a knowing nod, probably recognised me as a fabian.


----------



## noco (9 June 2016)

So_Cynical said:


> Saw Tony Burke on the train today travelling into the city (Syd) seems a normal kind of bloke, gave me a knowing nod, probably recognised me as a fabian.




You must have been wearing a red tie or pullover.


----------



## trainspotter (9 June 2016)

So_Cynical said:


> Saw Tony Burke on the train today travelling into the city (Syd) seems a normal kind of bloke, gave me a knowing nod, probably recognised me as a fabian.




There is a person inside afterall


----------



## GalaxyNexus (10 June 2016)

noco said:


> *Labor will go to the election promising deeper budget deficits throughout the first term of a Shorten government in a high-risk political play that asks voters to accept bigger commonwealth debt in the hope of a brighter outlook over 10 years.*




So... we're going to spend-spend-spend-spend in the next 4 years, and pinky promise it's going to be rainbows and unicorns on the 5th year. Yeah, right!


----------



## moXJO (10 June 2016)

GalaxyNexus said:


> So... we're going to spend-spend-spend-spend in the next 4 years, and pinky promise it's going to be rainbows and unicorns on the 5th year. Yeah, right!




This is pretty much all labor has ever done. 
Now is probably the worst time to employ this strategy.
Labors election strategy is derailing from something sensible and transformed into bribes and desperation.
Wong and the rest of the PC cronies are beginning to come out from the shadows again as well.


----------



## moXJO (10 June 2016)

So_Cynical said:


> Saw Tony Burke on the train today travelling into the city (Syd) seems a normal kind of bloke, gave me a knowing nod, probably recognised me as a fabian.




I've met a lot of pollies while they are outside of work from both sides and generally they are ok.
One of the nicest was an old labor back bencher who was a close family friend up until he passed away.

Even Abbott is a very down to earth guy that is always willing to lend a hand. Can't say I liked him as pm though.
One of the worst was an inner city lib.  Talk about a deluded f@#kwit. But then again, most people from the rich suburbs of Sydney are.


----------



## SirRumpole (10 June 2016)

moXJO said:


> I've met a lot of pollies while they are outside of work from both sides and generally they are ok.
> One of the nicest was an old labor back bencher who was a close family friend up until he passed away.
> 
> Even Abbott is a very down to earth guy that is always willing to lend a hand. Can't say I liked him as pm though.
> One of the worst was an inner city lib.  Talk about a deluded f@#kwit. But then again, most people from the rich suburbs of Sydney are.




Some of the Nats are rather strange though.


----------



## SirRumpole (10 June 2016)

How is each party going to handle this type of corporate bastardry ?

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-06-09/chevron's-$7b-loan-aims-to-shift-income-offshore,-critics-say/7498002


----------



## Logique (10 June 2016)

Lib Democrats - Flat Taxers
ALA - the GST party
Xenophon Team - a taskforce of political analysts couldn't decipher what NXT actually stands for

Hanson - ...!!
Lazarus - him I would vote for

Turnbull - in sheep's clothing. See ALA.
Shorten - negative gearing/CGT, good.. but to pay for childcare $10k per child?

Going to need some aspirin on polling day. And that's before attempting to figure out which part of the Senate ballot paper to mark, and how often.


----------



## drsmith (10 June 2016)

More to go overboard today from the Labor budget ship,



> Labor will also announce today that it will support some of the $18 billion in Coalition budget measures blocked in the Senate.
> 
> But Labor will continue to oppose some of the other so-called "zombie" measures, which date back to the Coalition's 2014 budget and are yet to legislated.
> 
> These measures include higher education reforms, phasing out end-of-year supplements for Family Tax Benefit (FTB) recipients, restructuring FTB Part B rates for some families and a new adult and child public dental scheme.




http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-06-...-tough-and-unpopular-savings-measures/7498400


----------



## explod (10 June 2016)

Actually the labor present today was reasonable and had achievable content as apposed to the empty but loud rants of the libs. 

It ok to say we have great financial finess and planning abilty which will create jobs.  But what and how are those plans and how/why will they be achieved and or effective. 

There is just no content coming across and the many people I speak to on the door to doors and on the street here at Bendigo are saying so.   

Anyway,  some private polling suggests there may be 3 to 4 greens and several new independents in the new lower house. Now that will set up some change.  Maybe a bit more bottom up policy decided openly on the floor of the house (democracy) instead of top down totalitarianism.  

Time will tell and after last time I have given up calling election results.


----------



## Tisme (12 June 2016)

Not surprising that Marcus has taken this stand:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-06-...ornish-to-preference-labor-in-lindsay/7500262


but what is even less surprising is that it appears the LNP continues its lies (as do others) about preferencing the Greens.

The hate within the party must be strong if it can't get over it own attitude that creates the micro parties and expands the Greens chances.....not saying that the Greens are better or worse than the other dill parties, just sayin'.


With about (max) 40% of their particular party loyal voting how they are told by the handout cards at the booths, preferences are a big deal and prescribing them to hurt another party out of spite rather than bolster the nation seems rather selfish to me. How many elections is it going to take of protest voting for the majors to realise the public want good honest governance, leadership and less anxiety......rhetorical so no question mark req'd lol.

Of course I expect those party tragics who put a thin veneer of soluble varnish on their discussions for national gain, non partisanship or at best poly partisanship, growth and jobs, etc. etc. to wrap their true opinion in a page one Newscorp tabloid sheet and savour the moment as some kind of benediction from the adoring crowds who line the pathways to the polling booths, the invisible good fairy who rides on their shoulder, the scribbling of instructed numbers witnessed from a similarly invisible, but approving fairy audience who reside inside polling booths. 

This would also be true for, if not all then 100% of galvanised any party loyal who, no doubt, cannot peel away from their consequent feeling of betrayal (imprinted by family, peers, trauma, whatever it took to take over the free will and adventure of spirit during those vexing youth years  ).

I am starting to think Labor might have a show in this election, which is pretty remarkable given the way they screwed up their image and have baggage like Wong and Tanya to contend with. I would have thought as soon as everyone's sphincter and chest pains returned to normal after Bill announced future budgetted J curve debt, his party polling would have taken a major dive, but it seems the public are resigned to horror shows from both sides of the argument.


----------



## Tisme (12 June 2016)

The food must be expensive in Vaucluse, is that because because kosher costs? Rather interesting place Vaucluse., much like island pockets on the Gold Coast where people act like they are elite, but get inside their homes and there's either nothing but wilderness or depression quality furniture and fittings...it's as if they have had to sacrifice comfort for the address.

Anyway I digress ... Malcolm going to home turf (cue the Local Hero movie theme song by Dire Straits) and a bunch of undesirable street urchins crash the party:

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...emmes-liberal-fundraiser-20160611-gph5es.html


----------



## SirRumpole (12 June 2016)

Tisme said:


> ... but it seems the public are resigned to horror shows from both sides of the argument.




The Libs will have to put on a horror show too, only in their case it will be after the election, if they win...


----------



## drsmith (12 June 2016)

Libs to preference Labor ahead of the Greens and $2bn more on Bill's spend-o-meter from Labor,

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...s-preference-labor-first-20160611-gph7qs.html

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-06-...promises-to-increase-hospital-funding/7502940


----------



## drsmith (12 June 2016)

A shift in the Sportsbet betting odds today from $1.28/$3.70 in favour of the Coalition to $1.22/$4.20.


----------



## sptrawler (12 June 2016)

So_Cynical said:


> Saw Tony Burke on the train today travelling into the city (Syd) seems a normal kind of bloke, gave me a knowing nod, probably recognised me as a fabian.




Might have been your blushing and hot flush was a give away.


----------



## sptrawler (12 June 2016)

Talking to my bell weather mate, who works on the junk collection at the local council, he reckons Silly Billy has blown his feet off.

I think Labor will do the same as Turnbull and push preferences away from minor parties.

Any more of this stupid blocking of essential legislation will end up in tears for Australia.

A drop in living standards is on the cards, IMO, how far that drop is depends on who you vote for.

Only my opinion, which isn't worth much, but I don't charge.


----------



## drsmith (12 June 2016)

sptrawler said:


> Talking to my bell weather mate, who works on the junk collection at the local council, he reckons Silly Billy has blown his feet off.



In a week where Labor has, despite its increased taxes, admitted it will still run bigger deficits than the Coalition over the 4-year budget period, cobbled together a range of spending cuts and then today promised an extra $2bn for health, any economic credibility they had is in tatters. The icing on the flying pig will be if they commit to going back to an FTTP NBN as indicated in an election flyer from the Labor candidate in my electorate.

Smart move By Malcolm Turnbull to preference the Greens behind Labor and sell it as his decision.

If the Coalition wins this election, which is now increasingly likely, the past week will be seen as the week Labor lost the battle.


----------



## sptrawler (12 June 2016)

drsmith said:


> In a week where Labor has, despite its increased taxes, admitted it will still run bigger deficits than the Coalition over the 4-year budget period, cobbled together a range of spending cuts and then today promised an extra $2bn for health, any economic credibility they had is in tatters. The icing on the flying pig will be if they commit to going back to an FTTP NBN as indicated in an election flyer from the Labor candidate in my electorate.
> 
> If the Coalition wins this election, which is now increasingly likely, the past week will be seen as the week Labor lost the battle.




Bill seemed to implode a bit this week, it is probably difficult to justify blocking spending cuts, then near the election agree to them.

Mixed messages just instill distrust, it just shows a mentality of blocking measures that really were required, then saying we agree with them because an election is nearing.

Silly Billy.

It isn't the same as convincing a union meeting, that they just have to trust the outcome, everyone has moved on from that era.


----------



## sptrawler (12 June 2016)

I think Peta Credlin has called it right with this statement:

Voters don't like Bill and don't trust Mal.

Absolutely perfect call. IMO

Whether Abbott would have fared better, no one knows, but it does show Malcolm wasn't a stand up walk In, just a preferred candidate for rusted on Laborites.


----------



## drsmith (12 June 2016)

drsmith said:


> A shift in the Sportsbet betting odds today from $1.28/$3.70 in favour of the Coalition to $1.22/$4.20.



$1.20/$4.50 now.

Tisme and Rumpy must be placing their bets.


----------



## sptrawler (12 June 2016)

drsmith said:


> $1.20/$4.50 now.
> 
> Tisme and Rumpy must be placing their bets.




I think they will be down there, Billy, $1000 on the nose.

That statement could be taken two ways, sorry.lol


----------



## Tisme (12 June 2016)

drsmith said:


> $1.20/$4.50 now.
> 
> Tisme and Rumpy must be placing their bets.





It seems you have cornered the betting bug, so I will let you run with that....and as usual with punters I'm sure the result will be just as you predicted.


----------



## drsmith (12 June 2016)

Perhaps Barnaby was right,



> Jakarta. Authorities in Aceh intercepted a boat carrying at least 35 Sri Lankan asylum seekers bound for Australia on Saturday (11/06) but refused to arrest them for immigration violation or have their refugee status processed on shore.
> 
> The Indian-flagged boat was found drifting with its engine dead just 300 meters off Lhoknga in the Aceh Besar district.
> 
> ...




http://jakartaglobe.beritasatu.com/...australia-bound-boat-carrying-asylum-seekers/

My bolds.


----------



## drsmith (12 June 2016)

Tisme said:


> It seems you have cornered the betting bug, so I will let you run with that....and as usual with punters I'm sure the result will be just as you predicted.



I'm confident at this stage that it will.


----------



## Tisme (12 June 2016)

sptrawler said:


> I think they will be down there, Billy, $1000 on the nose.
> 
> That statement could be taken two ways, sorry.lol




Oh I get it! That was deliberate  juvenile humour, wow how do you two guys do that at your fossilised ages .. funny stuff guys keep it up.


----------



## drsmith (12 June 2016)

Tisme said:


> Oh I get it! That was deliberate  juvenile humour, wow how do you two guys do that at your fossilised ages .. funny stuff guys keep it up.



Bill is on the nose, well, more than Malcolm Turnbull and probably more than ever after Labor's economic gymnastics over the past week.


----------



## Tisme (12 June 2016)

drsmith said:


> Bill is on the nose, well, more than Malcolm Turnbull and probably more than ever after Labor's economic gymnastics over the past week.




It's probably better to just make conversation with others.  I just don't trust anything you say as honest, merely a  tool to some sarcastic or inflammatory snide personal remark. You probably wonder why you are always right in the absence of anyone arguing the toss.

Rumpole is probably your man for a tete a tete ... he's far wiser than I. If I wanted complicated I'd go design something electronic.


----------



## drsmith (12 June 2016)

Tisme said:


> It's probably better to just make conversation with others.  I just don't trust anything you say as honest, merely a  tool to some sarcastic or inflammatory snide personal remark. You probably wonder why you are always right in the absence of anyone arguing the toss.
> 
> Rumpole is probably your man for a tete a tete ... he's far wiser than I. If I wanted complicated I'd go design something electronic.



It probably is if you struggle to that extent with points of view that don't fit with your own.


----------



## noco (12 June 2016)

drsmith said:


> It probably is if you struggle to that extent with points of view that don't fit with your own.




I reckon it will be Liberal 52%..Labor 48% with Labor picking up 6 seats....I would not like to predict the senate....Pauline is on my favorite list ATM......She thinks like a lot of Aussies but is the only one with the gutz to speak her mine on multi culture.


----------



## drsmith (13 June 2016)

drsmith said:


> The icing on the flying pig will be if they commit to going back to an FTTP NBN as indicated in an election flyer from the Labor candidate in my electorate.



The caveat on the icing,



> The total cost of Labor’s NBN policy is $49bn-$57bn compared to the Coalition cost range of $46bn-$56bn. Labor insists it would cap the funding for the NBN at $57bn, in a bid to quell concerns about the runaway costs of the party’s original “Rolls-Royce” NBN fibre to every home policy.
> 
> *“This cap will have priority over the number of additional homes and businesses to get fibre-to-the-premises in the initial rollout,” the policy states.*




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/fed...s/news-story/08be79ba1dfbb7f24fbda3fa62f6859b

My bolds.


----------



## SirRumpole (13 June 2016)

drsmith said:


> Bill is on the nose, well, more than Malcolm Turnbull and probably more than ever after Labor's economic gymnastics over the past week.




I see, so now Labor is being criticised for being economically responsible and not promising things they can't deliver ?

You can bet that all the LNP broken promises will be dredged up in election advertising to remind people what liars the LNP are.


----------



## noco (13 June 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> I see, so now Labor is being criticised for being economically responsible and not promising things they can't deliver ?
> 
> You can bet that all the LNP broken promises will be dredged up in election advertising to remind people what liars the LNP are.




The useless Labor Party should have been more economically responsible during the last 3 years instead of obstructing savings in the senate.....instead of telling lies about the $80 billion the Liberals removed from health and education....the money was never there in the first place......What a grubby lot we have in the Labor Party.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/fed...s/news-story/85a50f1aecb500422ddc334007f5896b

*Bill Shorten has been accused of another costings retreat after he conceded he could not replace every dollar taken out of the health system by the Coalition government despite spending two years criticising $57 billion in “cuts” in the 2014 budget.

The Opposition Leader yesterday announced a Labor government would increase funding for public hospitals by $2bn over the next four years and blamed the state of the budget for the “tough decision” not to restore the rest of the funding. “We can’t replace every dollar the Liberals have taken out of the system,’’ he said.

Labor has now given ground on several reforms linked to the 2014 budget, including changes to the Age Pension as well as the abolition of the Schoolkids Bonus.

Malcolm Turnbull seized on the announcement. “Bill Shorten has talked about $57bn. What does he talk about today? Two,’’ the Prime Minister said, declaring the policy “another Schoolkids Bonus all over again’’.

“Labor campaigns for years and years and years on promises and claims that they are going to provide additional funding or *reverse savings measures that we have made. And then ... having milked the political benefit of that to the enth degree, then they come back and say we’re not going to do that. We are going to put in, in this case, $2bn more.’’

On Friday, Labor gave ground on cuts to family payments after spending two years opposing them on “fairness’’ grounds.*

And here are some of the readers comments and there are a lot more.

Robyn
48 minutes ago

“…he conceded he could not replace every dollar taken out of the health system by the Coalition government”. Most of those dollars never existed but were pie-in-the-sky announcements by Julia Gillard and, once she and her cabal of incompetents realised they would not be re-elected, she deliberately left an unfunded series of promises for the incoming Coalition government to deal with and for a Labor Opposition to wield as a weapon.

Why isn’t that made clear every time that Bill Shorten makes statements like this?

Robyn S. 
FlagShare
17LindaGrantJohanmurrayLikeReply
Cameron
Cameron
23 minutes ago

@Robyn spot on Robyn.  The media has been negligent on this allowing the oft repeated claim of $80B in cuts to to go through without challenge.
FlagShare
LikeReply
Elizabeth
Elizabeth
49 minutes ago

The point is, Tony Abbott and the Liberals never cut health and education spending, yet the media has gone along with Labor's absurd '$80 billion in cuts' spin. In fact, spending in both areas was increased, but not by the ridiculous and totally unfunded amount Julia Gillard promised. Bill Shorten has now indirectly admitted that Labor have been lying for three years and the media spread that lie to undermine Abbott.
FlagShare
15LindaGrantNeilmurrayLikeReply
Cameron
Cameron
22 minutes ago

@Elizabeth he has also effectively admitted they opposed budget repair measures for purely political purposes thus cause damage to the long term health of the economy and inflicting further burden on future taxpayers.  He is unfit to ever be PM of this country.


----------



## trainspotter (13 June 2016)

Yes Labor has a wonderful track record when it comes to the Health portfolio ....



> THE federal government has suspended funding to three GP super clinics promised under* Labor’s bungled $650 million rollout *and will audit a dozen more after it was discovered that they had been sitting on millions of dollars of taxpayers money since 2010 without a sod being turned.
> 
> The Daily Telegraph has learned that Health Minister Peter Dutton has ordered that funding of $25 million be suspended to at least three of the clinics, in Darwin, Rockingham south of Perth and Brisbane, and will seek to recover the money.
> 
> ...




http://www.news.com.au/national/sup...saster-abandoned/story-fncynjr2-1226877225677


----------



## trainspotter (13 June 2016)

Tisme said:


> Oh I get it! That was deliberate  juvenile humour, wow how do you two guys do that at your fossilised ages .. funny stuff guys keep it up.




Funnily enough from someone who claimed he saw his sister(s) sacked from their public/bank jobs for getting married. Well ... you do the chronological math


----------



## Logique (13 June 2016)

sptrawler said:


> I think Peta Credlin has called it right with this statement:
> Voters don't like Bill and don't trust Mal.
> Absolutely perfect call. IMO
> Whether Abbott would have fared better, no one knows, but it does show Malcolm wasn't a stand up walk In, just a preferred candidate for rusted on Laborites.



Nice potted summary spT and Peta

Too dangerous to elect:
Trump or Hillarrious?
Turnbull or Shorten? 
Hanson or Xylophone?

During the Rudd-Gillard-Rudd years, we knew what to expect. But what will a Turnbull administration provide? Potts Point isn't 'Mum and Dad Australia'. 

Nor is Fairlight. That's a NSW reference, to an equally in-touch, man-of-the people Lib Premier. 

Suggestion: if you're going to follow Doc's bookies, then wave goodbye to bulk billing. And pensioners will need to look to their best interests.


----------



## Tisme (13 June 2016)

I'm looking at buying Ron Walker out of his 98% stake in Parakeelia Pty Ltd. A million bucks a year of tax payer money for doing nothing sounds like a great deal.


----------



## Smurf1976 (13 June 2016)

$77 million budget surplus down here in Tas. At least it seems that way until you read a bit deeper and find that they're spending $134 million more than they're taking in which, in layman's terms, is a deficit not a surplus.

OK so that's a state issue not a national one but it shows how financial figures can be and are manipulated by governments no matter what their political persuasion. Treasurer says there's a surplus, most believe it, digging a bit deeper finds it's really a substantial deficit.

No doubt if someone examined the federal budget in sufficient detail they'd find that the true position is different than the "headline" figure. Most likely the truth will be worse (since nobody's likely to hide a surplus if there was one).


----------



## sptrawler (13 June 2016)

Smurf1976 said:


> $77 million budget surplus down here in Tas. At least it seems that way until you read a bit deeper and find that they're spending $134 million more than they're taking in which, in layman's terms, is a deficit not a surplus.
> 
> OK so that's a state issue not a national one but it shows how financial figures can be and are manipulated by governments no matter what their political persuasion. Treasurer says there's a surplus, most believe it, digging a bit deeper finds it's really a substantial deficit.
> 
> No doubt if someone examined the federal budget in sufficient detail they'd find that the true position is different than the "headline" figure. Most likely the truth will be worse (since nobody's likely to hide a surplus if there was one).




That's nice smurph, over here in the West, we are running big deficits, due to the tanking of commodity prices. However, it isn't all bad news, we are still paying your budget surplus with our gst.


----------



## drsmith (13 June 2016)

William Bowe (Poll Bludger) has produced a graph which shows the betting market's implied probability of a Coalition victory,





https://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/2016/06/13/highlights-week-five/


----------



## sptrawler (13 June 2016)

drsmith said:


> William Bowe (Poll Bludger) has produced a graph which shows the betting market's implied probability of a Coalition victory,
> 
> View attachment 67098
> 
> ...




Obviously Bill hasn't struck the right cord yet.

Not that I think Malcolm is a shining light, I as a SF retiree, feel Malcolm's $1.6m cap and a freeze on after tax contributions, is just a huge slap in the face to middle Australia.

If a couple wish to downsize and contribute to their self funded retirement, the cap should reflect a sensible balance, the cap shouldn't be per person.

If as is normally the case, the majority of super has been contributed by the male, the partner who has brought up the children, shouldn't be disadvantaged.

Maybe lower the cap i.e $1.6m for an individual, $2.5m for a couple.

Currently it is $3.2m for a couple, which doesn't seem right, the couples pension isn't twice the singles pension.


----------



## drsmith (13 June 2016)

Malcolm thus far hasn't been a shining light.

If he had, the lines on the above graphic would be at 90%+ and we wouldn't have Tony Windsor and Rob Oakeshott thinking they could potentially run the country again.


----------



## sptrawler (13 June 2016)

drsmith said:


> Malcolm thus far hasn't been a shining light.
> 
> If he had, the lines on the above graphic would be at 90%+ and we wouldn't have Tony Windsor and Rob Oakeshott thinking they could potentially run the country again.




Absolutely, at the moment we have two out of touch politicians, trying to look like the smallest dicks.:1zhelp:

That doesn't sound good.

I actually think someone needs to draw a line in the sand, that makes sense and has credibility.

We don't have a sustainable super system. Make sensible justifiable changes that people can understand.

We don't have a viable welfare system, people who are on welfare shouldn't be able to afford to smoke.

We don't have a viable welfare housing system, make welfare housing a partnership, they look after it and pay their rent, they gain equity in it.

We need to return nursing and teaching, back to in house Government run, teaching colleges and public hospitals, it is a hands on skill not a taught skill.

Engineers who are out of work should be encouraged to become lecturers, especially those who have worked in their profession. 

In the eighties there was a big push by Government, to say, it isn't our responsibility to train apprentices, nurses, teachers, the private sector want them they can foot the bill.

The problem is, it is the Governments responsibility, if it wants any say in the quality of the outcome.

You can delegate responsibility, but you can't delegate accountability, for the outcome  

My rant for the week.


----------



## Tisme (14 June 2016)

Watching QANDA last night and to my mind the ALP are using their long held magpie tactic of skirting around the edges of society picking up voter scraps. No wonder the budgets blow out, trying to buy happiness for the voter individuals rather than the populace as a whole.


----------



## noco (14 June 2016)

Tisme said:


> Watching QANDA last night and to my mind the ALP are using their long held magpie tactic of skirting around the edges of society picking up voter scraps. No wonder the budgets blow out, trying to buy happiness for the voter individuals rather than the populace as a whole.




I switched off after 5 minutes of listening the BS from BS and his melodious voice is enough to put any one off.


----------



## Tisme (14 June 2016)

Notice anything different about the behaviour of the opposition loudness back then to now? 

Of course pollies used to line up for the chance of getting a dressing down by Paul and the fame that came with it. LOL


----------



## Tisme (14 June 2016)

noco said:


> I switched off after 5 minutes of listening the BS from BS and his melodious voice is enough to put any one off.





Yes he could sell sleep to Hypnos that fella.


----------



## Tisme (14 June 2016)

I'm guessing govt's ignored the bleeding obvious since the mid 1990's?



> _"We took the view in the 1970s – it's the old cargo cult mentality of Australia that she'll be right. This is the lucky country, we can dig up another mound of rock and someone will buy it from us, or we can sell a bit of wheat and bit of wool and we will just sort of muddle through."
> 
> Australia had "let the sophisticated industrial side fall apart" and become a third world economy that relies on selling raw materials. Without addressing "these fundamental problems", Mr Keating said, "you are a banana republic"._




and the new Liberal Mantra under Turnbull, twenty years down the track, which apparently resonates with Liberal voters because Malcolm said it recently ...... demonstration in how adversarial politics for votes puts the brakes on cooperative nation building and proves business acumen and cred does not equate to a "can do" outcome when handled by parliament.



> _"Clearly you have to be on the frontier of innovation, got to be more productive, more competitive, more open to the big new markets, you've got to be able to take advantage of them.
> 
> "You have to make sure you have technologically based industries where your higher labour cost is not a disadvantage because the labour cost is relatively low to the value of the product – you are essentially talking about advanced manufacturing."
> 
> _


----------



## SirRumpole (14 June 2016)

Tisme said:


> Yes he could sell sleep to Hypnos that fella.




Even the faithfull in the audience could barely raise a cheer, and he hardly presented a commanding presence in the room.

He answered most of the questions reasonably well though.


----------



## Tisme (14 June 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Even the faithfull in the audience could barely raise a cheer, and he hardly presented a commanding presence in the room.
> 
> He answered most of the questions reasonably well though.




Veering away, but by comparison I see Arrium has pulled in Paul Keating as the heavy hitter in negotiations between it, govt, receivers and suiters, under the Lazard mantle. Can't kill him with a stick and I think he still has Julieanne Newbould on his arm when he needs a bit of distraction?

Be interesting to know how wealthy Keating is/was compared to Turnbull. 

I'll let you connect the dots:

In 1999 Neville Wran and Turbull owned a merchant bank that had shares in Ozemail. They brokered (read jagged a dotcom victim) a deal with WorldCom to buy the Ozemail for $520m and Malcom got $40m and Neville $20m. Two years (ish) after our Mr Keating was launching Ozemail's P2P telephony in 1997service.


----------



## SirRumpole (14 June 2016)

Tisme said:


> Veering away, but by comparison I see Arrium has pulled in Paul Keating as the heavy hitter in negotiations between it, govt, receivers and suiters, under the Lazard mantle. Can't kill him with a stick and I think he still has Julieanne Newbould on his arm when he needs a bit of distraction?
> 
> Be interesting to know how wealthy Keating is/was compared to Turnbull.
> 
> ...




Don't know about Keating's wealth. He had shares in a piggery for a while (pork eating ?). 

If he is mega rich he hid it well.


----------



## moXJO (14 June 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Don't know about Keating's wealth. He had shares in a piggery for a while (pork eating ?).
> 
> If he is mega rich he hid it well.




Probably a master at telling porkies 



> The Liberal tactics were dodgy but Keating's dealings were much worse
> 
> Serious questions remain about Keating's piggery millions and this week's Four Corners expose will hopefully force everyone to answer some of the key questions. This transcript of the original 60 Minutes masterpiece by Paul Lyneham is a salient reminder of just how dodgy the piggery dealings were.
> 
> Serious questions remain about Keating’s piggery millions and this week’s Four Corners expose will hopefully force everyone to answer some of the key questions. This transcript of the original 60 Minutes masterpiece by Paul Lyneham is a salient reminder of just how dodgy the piggery dealings were.



From crikey 2001
There are few shining lights in the political world. Plenty of showmen though.


----------



## Tisme (15 June 2016)

Rather interesting how Turnbull and Scotty are espousing concern over things like raiding of state and federal superannuation funds when the Libs have a history of whipping up hysteria about the evils of universal superannuation and the union movement that more or less invented and promoted it. 

I was lucky to have a progressive employer back in the mid 70s who paid into superannuation (long before the Hawke Govt tripartite), which I later used in the late 80's to buy a house in Qld while holding another in Perth. That company is still going gangbusters and now a multinational ....the employees felt ownership over the operation. These days the company would be labelled socialist because it valued it's staff, safety and training as paramount and renumerated all of us well above market/award, 37.5 hour working week, free medical, paid union dues, free issue shares, etc. They took out some fairly large mutual institutions along the way and almost succeeded in swallowing management of one major bank. None of us would have been regarded as extraordinary people.

So I guess I have a blinkered view when it comes to scare tactics and doom merchants within parliament who seem to prefer fear to justify their existence rather than leading the nation into meeting its full potential.

My spies tell me that the Libs are very concerned about ALP and Greens polling figures, thus the fear campaign ramping up.


----------



## Tisme (15 June 2016)

Just had a friend complain about the white and green voting sheets she was confronted with toady at the pre polling. Particularly the convoluted senate sheet has raised her anger levels...... must be hard to find Pauline


----------



## sptrawler (15 June 2016)

Tisme said:


> Just had a friend complain about the white and green voting sheets she was confronted with toady at the pre polling. Particularly the convoluted senate sheet has raised her anger levels...... must be hard to find Pauline




The white senate sheet, certainly is a monster, take a chair with you, if you are going to fill in every box.


----------



## noco (15 June 2016)

Chris Bowen's credentials are under scrutiny. 

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...f/news-story/cc8ef81a4ce95ee46f5e881ad458ea5c

*Bowen’s credentials

It is about time that someone took to task Chris Bowen’s economic credentials, which should have been damned forever by his support for the 2013 budget, which as Henry Ergas explains was full of landmines for the Coalition (“The real price of Shorten’s conjured costings”, 13/6).

Interest payments on Labor’s debt, back-ended and unfunded programs and a hostile Senate made the Coalition’s task to save the fiscal position impossible from day one. It is Labor’s spoiler tactics which we should be blaming, rather than confused crossbenchers.

As Ergas observes, the more who are dependent on the public purse, the more Labor likes it. This is a sure recipe for ruin. Orwellian allusions are particularly appropriate when Labor describes taxing saving, spending, and pork-barrelling as fairness. Labor today believes in nothing but power and perks, and when this present rabble is comfortably retired, generations of Australians will suffer from their actions.

John Morrissey, Hawthorn, Vic*


----------



## SirRumpole (15 June 2016)

noco said:


> John Morrissey, Hawthorn, Vic[/B]




Who is John Morrissey ?


----------



## Tisme (15 June 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Who is John Morrissey ?




He's a serial pest letter to editor writer, who obviously sees things Noco's way


----------



## drsmith (15 June 2016)

Sportsbet has today moved further in the government's favour with the odds now at $1.17/$5.00.

Interesting in light of an Essential Media poll published today which has 2PP at 51%/49% in favour of Labor (50%/50% last week).


----------



## noco (15 June 2016)

Tisme said:


> He's a serial pest letter to editor writer, who obviously sees things Noco's way




You cannot deny the fact as what he has reported is not true....Time for you and Rumpy to open your eyes to reality....The Fabian indoctrinated LUG party know exactly what they have done and will continue to do and that is wreck our economy.

It is not the Labor Party of yesteryear....Listen to Mark Latham's version of the current Labor Party on various TV commentaries.......He sums them up in a nut shell.


----------



## sptrawler (15 June 2016)

drsmith said:


> Sportsbet has today moved further in the government's favour with the odds now at $1.17/$5.00.
> 
> Interesting in light of an Essential Media poll published today which has 2PP at 51%/49% in favour of Labor (50%/50% last week).




After filling in the senate paper today, everyone will be picking up a how to vote card.IMO 

Otherwise they will be invalid.


----------



## drsmith (15 June 2016)

sptrawler said:


> After filling in the senate paper today, everyone will be picking up a how to vote card.IMO
> 
> Otherwise they will be invalid.



While not recommended by the AEC, a 1 in a single box above the line will still be valid.


----------



## sptrawler (15 June 2016)

drsmith said:


> While not recommended by the AEC, a 1 in a single box above the line will still be valid.




They never passed that info on.lol

The way the info was passed on today, would have been very confusing, for someone who doesn't have English as their first language.

They basically said, you had to fill in 1-6 above the line, or 12 below the line and it is as long as a toilet roll. lol

So xenophon should do well, he is number two or three box, above the line.


----------



## sptrawler (15 June 2016)

drsmith said:


> While not recommended by the AEC, a 1 in a single box above the line will still be valid.




I will be interested to see how Pauline goes.

Anyone with a memory, of how we have arrived at this point, will make a statement.

Somewhat like the Brexit, eventually people make a statement, "we've had a gutfull".


----------



## Tisme (15 June 2016)

noco said:


> You cannot deny the fact as what he has reported is not true....Time for you and Rumpy to open your eyes to reality....The Fabian indoctrinated LUG party know exactly what they have done and will continue to do and that is wreck our economy.
> 
> It is not the Labor Party of yesteryear....Listen to Mark Latham's version of the current Labor Party on various TV commentaries.......He sums them up in a nut shell.





 How many times do I have to post that I'm not welded to any party. It seems it's too much overload for many here to fathom the idea that someone doesn't have to be on a political team. 

Rumpole doesn't make any doubt about his battle with his old allegiances and his pursuit for something more in tune with his beliefs. You make no bones about your politics, but apart from you two the rest are too scared to tip their hats... I admire both of you for being open about an apparently taboo subject.


----------



## Tisme (15 June 2016)

sptrawler said:


> I will be interested to see how Pauline goes.
> 
> Anyone with a memory, of how we have arrived at this point, will make a statement.
> 
> Somewhat like the Brexit, eventually people make a statement, "we've had a gutfull".




I'm tending to voting for Pauline.


----------



## sptrawler (15 June 2016)

Tisme said:


> I'm tending to voting for Pauline.




I for once agree with you, most of the silent majority are sick of the politically correct crap, it is a bit like the Britex vote in the U.K.

Pauline was slapped down, years ago, for saying what is happening now.

She pushes for equality and buying Australian, if we don't we will sink.


----------



## noco (16 June 2016)

Tisme said:


> I'm tending to voting for Pauline.




Believe it or not Tisme, Pauline has my number 1 vote too.

I wrote to her 20 years ago congratulating her on her stance with a copy to John Howard....I suggested to John Howard at the time that he should he sit up and take some notice of what she was saying. She is not afraid to speak her mind.


----------



## Tisme (16 June 2016)

noco said:


> Believe it or not Tisme, Pauline has my number 1 vote too.
> 
> I wrote to her 20 years ago congratulating her on her stance with a copy to John Howard....I suggested to John Howard at the time that he should he sit up and take some notice of what she was saying. She is not afraid to speak her mind.




I think we can do this Noco. I spent some time talking rubbish down the pub last night and there are plenty who are openly for Pauline....young and old alike. I think she carries old skool themes that both majors used to enshrine, but perhaps not in tune with our current sophisticated, everyone gets a trophy society.

Besides it can't get any worse....can it....can it ?!!!


----------



## SirRumpole (16 June 2016)

noco said:


> Believe it or not Tisme, Pauline has my number 1 vote too.
> 
> I wrote to her 20 years ago congratulating her on her stance with a copy to John Howard....I suggested to John Howard at the time that he should he sit up and take some notice of what she was saying. She is not afraid to speak her mind.




So maybe you could tell us what you think of your hero Tony Abbott's part in putting dear Pauline in prison ?


----------



## SirRumpole (16 June 2016)

Taxpayers money going to a Liberal Party slush fund.

Sounds like grubby money laundering to me.


----------



## Tisme (16 June 2016)

sptrawler said:


> I for once agree with you, most of the silent majority are sick of the politically correct crap, it is a bit like the Britex vote in the U.K.
> 
> Pauline was slapped down, years ago, for saying what is happening now.
> 
> She pushes for equality and buying Australian, if we don't we will sink.




I'm pretty sure you have agreed with at least one other of my posts, even if cause you choke on your own spit 

The thing with Pauline is that she is older now and less likely to hold back like she did all those years ago  

I'm mind made up .... I'm going in.... WAGONS HO !


----------



## Knobby22 (16 June 2016)

drsmith said:


> Sportsbet has today moved further in the government's favour with the odds now at $1.17/$5.00.
> 
> Interesting in light of an Essential Media poll published today which has 2PP at 51%/49% in favour of Labor (50%/50% last week).




I've noticed, even watching the ABC satirical shows, that Labor made a tactical disaster by saying that they will spend more over the first four years and then wind it back to meet the ten year target. As has been commented a few times even Communist China only has 5 year plans. People have lost belief in Labor because of this.

They could have won the election with the tax increases they proposed if they had of promised to use the money to pay back debt, instead they have done the reverse and decided to spend heaps on another dodgy education spend as well as outbid the coalition on just about every policy.

I was undecided at one stage but am now with the Coalition. I think my thinking is how many swing voters think and why Labor will lose this election.


----------



## SirRumpole (16 June 2016)

Tisme said:


> I'm pretty sure you have agreed with at least one other of my posts, even if cause you choke on your own spit
> 
> The thing with Pauline is that she is older now and less likely to hold back like she did all those years ago
> 
> I'm mind made up .... I'm going in.... WAGONS HO !




I doubt if Pauline has the brains to learn from her experiences, but her simplistic boganism has its attractions for many and there is a place for people like her and Katter to represent a certain portion of the electorate.

Trouble is, neither party listens to them, at least publicly anyway. Privately they might agree with their views but are too PC to say so.


----------



## SirRumpole (16 June 2016)

> People have lost belief in Labor because of this.




Not necessarily, they are telling the truth. Do we want them to tell porkies like the Libs did ? 

I think Labor's strategies for long term growth via education and skills is much more appealing than giving a tax cut to the rich and hope it trickles down. That's pure voodoo economics.


----------



## qldfrog (16 June 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Not necessarily, they are telling the truth. Do we want them to tell porkies like the Libs did ?
> 
> I think Labor's strategies for long term growth via education and skills is much more appealing than giving a tax cut to the rich and hope it trickles down. That's pure voodoo economics.



About education: interesting study in AFR last week end, which shows that increasing the number of students per class by 2 would free 1.5 billion a year with no negative effect on students, trouble is Labour can not go behind that (unions..) and liberals would be cruxified if they tried, so going the pathetic french way here again where most education department bodies are never in a class, investment is massive and results pathetic and downhill but plenty of procedures, policies and a grand reform every 5 years.
here in qld, Labour is raiding the Super funds while increasing debt and number of public servants...
Not exactly something any taxpayer would like to see on a fed scale..again.
Just another reason we need a different ALP party , and a different LNP as well!.
A man is not enough to change a partyL see our current PM and see how Rudd was pushed when he started going off the main union dictated line.
In the mean time, we have to try to survive on an individual matter on the Titanic.So many wasted opportunities time and time again in this country.


----------



## overhang (16 June 2016)

drsmith said:


> Sportsbet has today moved further in the government's favour with the odds now at $1.17/$5.00.
> 
> Interesting in light of an Essential Media poll published today which has 2PP at 51%/49% in favour of Labor (50%/50% last week).




Mark Latham has been providing special comments on odds and polls.
A few interesting points.


> Essential Poll is run by a left-wing Labor-leaning guy off a suspect computer database. He often asks questions suited to his own political agenda. Essential has low credibility.






> In my campaign against John Howard in 2004, the ALP track poll showed that we were never in a winning position during the six-week campaign.
> 
> Yet Newspoll consistently had us as the campaign frontrunner – highlighting how there can be a big gap between nationwide newspaper polling and what’s actually happening in the seats that matter.




I think I have read elsewhere too that even though Latham was constantly winning the polls before the election that Howard was still a firm favorite with the bookies.

Here is Lathams tips  http://www.oddschecker.com.au/tips/...615-a-punters-guide-to-polling-lingo-part-two


----------



## Logique (16 June 2016)

sptrawler said:


> I will be interested to see how Pauline goes.
> Anyone with a memory, of how we have arrived at this point, will make a statement.
> Somewhat like the Brexit, eventually people make a statement, "we've had a gutfull".



We have Jacqui, why shouldn't we have Pauline. 

For Malcolm Turnbull it might be a case of '..be careful what you wish for' in the Senate.

But I have '_Xylophobia_' and won't be voting that way on my Senate ballot paper.


----------



## drsmith (16 June 2016)

overhang said:


> Mark Latham has been providing special comments on odds and polls.
> A few interesting points.
> 
> I think I have read elsewhere too that even though Latham was constantly winning the polls before the election that Howard was still a firm favorite with the bookies.
> ...



There was a piece in the ABC news yesterday where Chris Ullman suggested that based on internal party polling on the marginal, Labor would presently fall ~10 seats short however South Australia was somewhat of an unknown due to the Xenophon factor. That information may be the reason for the Sportsbet betting odds shift. It's shifted further today to $1.12/$6.25.


----------



## SirRumpole (16 June 2016)

Are the punters better than the pollsters at predicting elections?

Read more:

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...-at-predicting-elections-20160528-gp64e9.html


----------



## noco (16 June 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> So maybe you could tell us what you think of your hero Tony Abbott's part in putting dear Pauline in prison ?




Rumpy, as you know in politics, "IT IS DOG EATS DOG"....It is a dirty business ...One which both you and me would probably  both stay away from.

Don't forget the Queensland Labor Party had some influence in her demise as well....they certainly do not have clean hands....It was in the Queensland Parliament where she hit Labor the hardest when she took 6 Labor seats and 5 Liberal seats....Both major parties were terrified of Hanson and now the same thing is happening with Xenophon....The Labor Party are even as late as yesterday, are trying to dig up dirt on Xenophon.

But it does not detract from the fact that Hanson makes a lot of sense when it come to race.....We should all be equal irrespective of the fact that our indigenous population was here first.....No discrimination like the Labor Party are doing....You must admit, our indigenous people receive a lot more benefits than their white counterparts......You must admit the Muslim boat people with 7 and 8 kids and breeding like rabbits are also doing very well out of welfare thanks to Rudd and Gillard........They say you Aussies are stupid....you work hard and we get the benefits.


----------



## drsmith (16 June 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Are the punters better than the pollsters at predicting elections?
> 
> Read more:
> 
> http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...-at-predicting-elections-20160528-gp64e9.html



I don't think the perspective outcome is as far one sided as the present Sportsbet odds suggest but then, I don't have skin in the game in terms of money. For a lazy $10, there's presently a juicy return of $62.50 on Labor if your sufficiently game.

Remember though, as always, to gamble responsibly.


----------



## Knobby22 (17 June 2016)

I've made a little money on USA politics recently.

I put a bet on Trump to win the nomination and the Presidency. Cashed out of the Presidency on a nice profit and have now used the money to back Hilary. (Sorry for thread drift).


----------



## SirRumpole (17 June 2016)

Election 2016: Treasury documents undermine Government's negative gearing claims




> The Federal Government's argument that negative gearing mainly benefits average Australians has been undermined by documents obtained from its own Treasury.
> Key points:
> 
> FOI report shows more than half of negative gearing tax benefits go to top 20 per cent of incomes
> ...


----------



## GalaxyNexus (18 June 2016)

Knobby22 said:


> I've made a little money on USA politics recently.
> 
> I put a bet on Trump to win the nomination and the Presidency. Cashed out of the Presidency on a nice profit and have now used the money to back Hilary. (Sorry for thread drift).




I might be able to hedge against Labor's victory using this method. If Labor wins, the bet winnings will cover my extra tax. Either way, the cost of the ticket might be deductible under "cost for managing my tax affairs" :run:. So either way, I win!


----------



## Logique (18 June 2016)

I'd like to see somewhere a nutshell summary of all the Senate microparty policies.

Some of them look interesting, but you could spend hours trawling through Google to find their full set of policies.

Some are reasonably obvious, eg Seniors Party, Voluntary Euthanasia Party, Hunters and Fishers Party etc, but what's their positions on Medicare and GST?


----------



## SirRumpole (18 June 2016)

Logique said:


> I'd like to see somewhere a nutshell summary of all the Senate microparty policies.
> 
> Some of them look interesting, but you could spend hours trawling through Google to find their full set of policies.
> 
> Some are reasonably obvious, eg Seniors Party, Voluntary Euthanasia Party, Hunters and Fishers Party etc, but what's their positions on Medicare and GST?




Tried their web sites ?


----------



## noco (18 June 2016)

I wonder if this guy is right in his predictions.

https://everaldcompton.com/2016/06/18/death-of-majority-governments/


----------



## Logique (19 June 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Tried their web sites ?



Gradually working through these. It's no picnic, believe me.


----------



## Logique (19 June 2016)

noco said:


> I wonder if this guy is right in his predictions.
> 
> https://everaldcompton.com/2016/06/18/death-of-majority-governments/




It will be a big shake up if he is right! My bolds.



> Everald Compton, 2016
> https://everaldcompton.com/2016/06/18/death-of-majority-governments/
> 
> ...My forecast for 2 July 2016 is that Independents will do well in the House of Representatives. *Windsor, Oakshott, McGowan, Wilkie and Katter will win and a relatively unknown Independent could beat Abbott*. A former WA Liberal MP could exact revenge on his old Party.
> ...


----------



## noco (19 June 2016)

Logique said:


> It will be a big shake up if he is right! My bolds.




Logiique, I have never been so disgruntled with politics in all my long life as I have been these last couple of years and I blame the media....Both TV and Newspapers.

The media are controlling voters minds as to the way they think and vote......

How often have we heard the media carry on reporting on how voters are fed up with both the major parties for not making the hard decisions on the economy when a majority of us do know the reasons why......But there are a few who think yes the media are right so lets vote for the Greens or some other minor party,...Then chaos sets in and the country gets bogged down even further with some "numb scull" senate independents who want to use their power over the elected government....They will use their power to stop progress and legislation whether it is good or bad without consideration that it may be in the national interest.

No matter what the government does to try and fix the economy, the media jump up and down and the ABC are the biggest culprits when they let loose their biased propaganda....It is all about persuasion of the mind and there are many who cannot either think for themselves or just plainly don't care.  

Nobody wants to give a little only take what they can get.

When the country was prosperous we gladly accepted higher wages, less working hours per week, longer holidays, leave loading and a multitude of benefits but when things are tough nobody wants to give up their entitlements.

If we continue on in the same vain of the last decade, we will inevitably finish up like Greece.

AND I BLAME THE MEDIA FOR NOT HELPING TO GET OUR COUNTRY BACK ON TRACK.


----------



## moXJO (19 June 2016)

It's a horrible situation at the moment. Both major parties have enough bad policy to not warrant voting for either of them. But at the same time- too many independents could cause cost blowouts, as they all want their bribes to satisfy their electorate.
Just noticed labors $20000 tax deduction for hiring out of work mums. God help us.


----------



## drsmith (19 June 2016)

drsmith said:


> There was a piece in the ABC news yesterday where Chris Ullman suggested that based on internal party polling on the marginal, Labor would presently fall ~10 seats short however South Australia was somewhat of an unknown due to the Xenophon factor. That information may be the reason for the Sportsbet betting odds shift. It's shifted further today to $1.12/$6.25.



A slight shift towards Labor in the Sportbet betting odds this morning to $1.13/$6.05.

That may be in response to this,



> • In a corrective to recent published marginal seat polling and the resulting impression that Labor is not getting the swings where it needs them, Laurie Oakes reports Labor polling shows them picking up 6% swings in the Hunter region seat of Paterson, giving them a lead of 57-43; the Central Coast seat of Robertson, for a lead of 53-47; and the Perth seat of Hasluck, putting them at 50-50 (compared with a 53-47 to the Liberals in the ReachTEL poll). In the Perth fringe seat of Pearce, which Christian Porter holds for the Liberals on a margin of 9.5%, the swing is said to be 9%.




https://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/2016/06/19/highlights-week-six/


----------



## Smurf1976 (19 June 2016)

noco said:


> Nobody wants to give a little only take what they can get.
> 
> When the country was prosperous we gladly accepted higher wages, less working hours per week, longer holidays, leave loading and a multitude of benefits but when things are tough nobody wants to give up their entitlements.
> 
> If we continue on in the same vain of the last decade, we will inevitably finish up like Greece.




Agreed in principle but there's also a long established Australian concept of a "fair go" which seems to have been lost in more recent times.

We have some very large businesses operating in Australia, resource extraction and other things, which if we believe their owners are so unprofitable that they pay no tax.

OK then, here's a solution. Just outright nationalise them and take the assets. The owners should be thankful that Aussie taxpayers have relieved them of their unprofitable business and they'll no longer need to incur such losses. 

I'm not in favour of a "hit the rich" approach but it needs to be fair. If someone's making $ billions and paying nothing in tax due to whatever creative accounting methods then that's just not on. 

So long as this continues then I don't blame the average person for not seeing a problem. If we can afford to boost the profits of multinationals then we sure as hell can afford schools, hospitals, the aged pension and so on for Australians. The propping up of the big end of town needs to go before the masses will accept cuts to the rest.


----------



## noco (19 June 2016)

Smurf1976 said:


> Agreed in principle but there's also a long established Australian concept of a "fair go" which seems to have been lost in more recent times.
> 
> We have some very large businesses operating in Australia, resource extraction and other things, which if we believe their owners are so unprofitable that they pay no tax.
> 
> ...




But hasn't the Government taken moves in co-operation with other countries to clamp down  on TAX EVASION from overseas companies?....I thought that was one of Joe Hockey's agreements at one of the world summits like the G20 meeting.

Nationalizing business is the same as central control which Bill Shorten's Socialists would like to do.

Under Socialism they first control the media (look at the ABC), then the banks followed by mining, manufacturing and agriculture....Under Socialism profit is a dirty word even though Bill Shortens pretends to support small business.


----------



## SirRumpole (19 June 2016)

Smurf1976 said:


> We have some very large businesses operating in Australia, resource extraction and other things, which if we believe their owners are so unprofitable that they pay no tax.
> 
> OK then, here's a solution. Just outright nationalise them and take the assets. The owners should be thankful that Aussie taxpayers have relieved them of their unprofitable business and they'll no longer need to incur such losses.




As we own the assets in the first place, we have a right to say what share of the price we get for those resources.

Why not just say we want say 5% of the price the miners get for the resources in return for no tax on profits which they can easily avoid anyway.

That's a much simpler system for both the government and the miners because they can't avoid those royalty charges.

I keep talking about Norway which has a 78% tax on oil and gas profits with no loss of investment. We are being conned by the miners at the moment.


----------



## Tisme (19 June 2016)

Hey Noco :

https://www.buzzfeed.com/markdistefano/where-was-rudd?utm_term=.vdLDRJLPm#.yf2b6qael


----------



## wayneL (19 June 2016)

Tisme said:


> Hey Noco :
> 
> https://www.buzzfeed.com/markdistefano/where-was-rudd?utm_term=.vdLDRJLPm#.yf2b6qael






> *Everybody Lost Their Collective ****.... *




I was listening on News Radio while driving, I actually lost my lunch into my lap. :


----------



## orr (19 June 2016)

noco said:


> Nobody wants to give a little only take what they can get.
> 
> When the country was prosperous we gladly accepted higher wages, less working hours per week, longer holidays, leave loading and a multitude of benefits but when things are tough nobody wants to give up their entitlements.
> 
> AND I BLAME THE MEDIA FOR NOT HELPING TO GET OUR COUNTRY BACK ON TRACK.




But then this from a Media outlet;

"BlueScope Steel workers have voted in favour of a union-devised plan to forfeit jobs and working conditions in a bid to prevent the closure of the Port Kembla plant."
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-10-08/bluescope-workers-vote-yes/6836414


But don't let reality get in the way of your dogma. Or is it memory lapses? convenient either way.

I look forward to the AMA putting forward a similar approach as robotics and automation techniques, in the near term future, out strip the capacities of human diagnosis of most human ailments. This giving rise to huge savings in the health budget.


----------



## noco (19 June 2016)

orr said:


> But then this from a Media outlet;
> 
> "BlueScope Steel workers have voted in favour of a union-devised plan to forfeit jobs and working conditions in a bid to prevent the closure of the Port Kembla plant."
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-10-08/bluescope-workers-vote-yes/6836414
> ...




Is it possible that the unions have finally woken up?

Perhaps at long last they have faced reality that their past demands for higher wages and conditions have weakened the prospects of future jobs and prosperity....Their chickens have finally com home to roost.


----------



## explod (19 June 2016)

orr said:


> But then this from a Media outlet;
> 
> "BlueScope Steel workers have voted in favour of a union-devised plan to forfeit jobs and working conditions in a bid to prevent the closure of the Port Kembla plant."
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-10-08/bluescope-workers-vote-yes/6836414
> ...




Yep we can die knowing there is nothing left to do and our children can ride the sky on lovely drugs and float away.


----------



## noco (20 June 2016)

The useless Labor Party in Queensland is now one of Turnbull's best assets along with Victoria and South Australia.....They have all proven to be economic vandals....Western Australia is in trouble with the mining down turn due to the drop in Mining Royalties which may favor Labor in that state but you could  not label WA in the same vain as the others.

We won't mention the Rudd/Gillard/Rudd 2007/2013.....Nah...that is all history.....nothing to see there. 

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...e/news-story/bc66b53801445507efa4b2320e4fc195

*Total public debt in Queensland is eight times the levels of 30 years ago.

New economic analysis shows that, since 1986, the size of debt as a proportion of Queensland’s economic output, gross state product, has jumped from 4 per cent to more than 33 per cent, and rising.

The figures come after the Palaszczuk government last week delivered its second budget, raiding a public servant’s superannuation fund to pay $2 billion off its borrowings.

Budget figures show debt levels began to soar in the last few years of the Beattie Labor government, and then through the Bligh Labor government as it moved to meet infrastructure shortfalls and pay for services in the face of falling revenues.

Queensland University of Technology economist Mark McGovern, who conducted the latest analysis, said rising debt levels in Queensland were unprecedented and it was a “major concern’’ as to whether they could be serviced.

Dr McGovern said budget pap*ers — which reported debt of $75.2bn for the 2014-15 financial year — did not reveal the “full picture’’ of liabilities held by the government’s financial arm, the Queensland Treasury Corporation. “The total debt that is now over $101bn is historically very high for Queensland, which is *apparent when you measure it as a proportion of GSP,’’ he said.

“The last decade especially, since about 2005-06, has seen an exceptionally rapid rise in debt.*


----------



## dutchie (20 June 2016)

It's obvious that the Coalition is on it's way to victory as the Labor party becomes more and more desperate.

Bull Sh*t Shorten is bringing out the big lies regarding Medicare.

Can't trust Labor over the economy and that's what pays for all the promises.


----------



## noco (20 June 2016)

dutchie said:


> It's obvious that the Coalition is on it's way to victory as the Labor party becomes more and more desperate.
> 
> Bull Sh*t Shorten is bringing out the big lies regarding Medicare.
> 
> Can't trust Labor over the economy and that's what pays for all the promises.




Labor's motto.......WHAT EVER IT TAKES TO WIN


----------



## SirRumpole (20 June 2016)

dutchie said:


> It's obvious that the Coalition is on it's way to victory as the Labor party becomes more and more desperate.
> 
> Bull Sh*t Shorten is bringing out the big lies regarding Medicare.
> 
> Can't trust Labor over the economy and that's what pays for all the promises.




Big lies about Medicare privatisation ?

Medibank private has just been sold off by the Libs.

There are people in the Liberal party who think Medicare should be sold off.

Malcolm Fraser tried it and Hawke had to reverse the decision.

Sure it's a Labor scare campaign, but not an entirely baseless one.


----------



## DB008 (20 June 2016)

I never understood the 'selling of assets', both state and federal. 
Why would you sell an asset?


----------



## noco (20 June 2016)

DB008 said:


> I never understood the 'selling of assets', both state and federal.
> Why would you sell an asset?




To pay for Labor's bad economic management.......Labor has a history of running up high debt at both state and Federal levels.......The interest bill alone on those high debts could be paying for infrastructure, schools and hospitals.

Howard sold off part of Telstra to cover the bad debt of $80 billion left by Labor.

Campbell Newman wanted to lease or sell off assets to pay for the Beattie/Bligh bad debt of $80 billion which is now $101 billion racked up by the Palazuzck Labor state government.....Palazuzck crawled over the line to win government with her union propaganda not to sell assets.


----------



## Tisme (20 June 2016)

noco said:


> To pay for Labor's bad economic management.......Labor has a history of running up high debt at both state and Federal levels.......The interest bill alone on those high debts could be paying for infrastructure, schools and hospitals.
> 
> Howard sold off part of Telstra to cover the bad debt of $80 billion left by Labor.
> 
> Campbell Newman wanted to lease or sell off assets to pay for the Beattie/Bligh bad debt of $80 billion which is now $101 billion racked up by the Palazuzck Labor state government.....Palazuzck crawled over the line to win government with her union propaganda not to sell assets.




I was rather interested to hear Scott Morrison in full hate mode the other week, spraying spit and vitriol at the Labor camp and including a figure of ~50bn as the debt left by a Labor govt. As I recall that marries up with what the finance dept had on its book when I looked at the time.


----------



## Tisme (20 June 2016)

Back into the election campaign with the usual adverts: 


http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-06-20/'fake-tradie'-liberal-party-advertising-under-fire/7525090


----------



## trainspotter (20 June 2016)

Whichever way it goes ....





Sums it up really ...


----------



## basilio (20 June 2016)

Totally unfair to trash the Liberal Party for the Fake Tradies political ad.  

It is in fact  an excellent piece of _Avante Garde_ Performance Art. Check it out.  It is clearly a daringly brilliant strategy of Malcolm Turnball to be recognised as part of the Creative Culture in Oztralya.

Cheers....




> *Behind the Liberal Party’s #FakeTradie ad: Massif artistic excellence*
> David Donovan 20 June 2016, 12:00pm 3
> Politics  Advertising and marketing
> 
> ...




https://independentaustralia.net/li...faketradie-ad-massif-artistic-excellence,9130


----------



## noco (20 June 2016)

We need more Judith Sloans to expose Bill Shorten for the fake he is.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/fed...k/news-story/f27d0a31182ea83aa3c23c756de39682

*Here we go again — another jobs scheme dream. Take close to $260 million of taxpayers’ money, give a 140 per cent tax break to microbusinesses (with turnover less than $2m) that take on young workers, old workers or parents returning to work and, voila, 30,000 jobs are created annually.

Pull the other one, Bill Shorten. Couldn’t you have come up with something better than this for Labor’s big campaign launch?

We have experience with these sorts of wage subsidy programs going back more than 40 years. We know they don’t work, that they carry very high administration costs and that any apparent new jobs are offset by displaced workers. We also know they are gamed by employers.

So why would you bother? After all, most of the state governments have a raft of these useless policies. In Victoria, for example, we have the Back to Work program and the Youth Employment Scheme. The key driver of these schemes is the scope for the government to demonstrate that “something is being done” while keeping the rising number of bureaucrats busy.

So it is with federal Labor’s weekend thought-bubble, even though this new federal scheme would be tripping over state schemes that have the same targets. Labor is “all about people”, helping marginal workers into work, even if it is at the expense of other workers.*


----------



## trainspotter (20 June 2016)

The problem basilio is that 90% of the voting public will believe the "Fake Tradie" advert and wash it down with a glass of beer while they chain smoke the Winnie Blues


----------



## GalaxyNexus (20 June 2016)

In the past months I saw media (in my case, the SMH) continuously trashes the liberals and Turnbull. In the past week I have seen them change direction, more cynical to the Labor instead. If this is any indication (and the desperate-ish medicare scare campaign by Shorten), the game is well and truly over. Labor has no chance.


----------



## basilio (20 June 2016)

> Re: Australian Federal Election - 2016
> In the past months I saw media (in my case, the SMH) continuously trashes the liberals and Turnbull. In the past week I have seen them change direction, more cynical to the Labor instead. If this is any indication (and the desperate-ish medicare scare campaign by Shorten), the game is well and truly over. Labor has no chance. Galaxy Nexus




I'm not sure I agree with this analysis.  The Medicare scare campaign will hit a very raw nerve.  The facts are,  (the indisputable  facts)  that the Liberal government did attempt to put in train a series of measures that would have hamstrung Medicare.

Freezing rebates till 2020. Reducing payments. Attempting to hive off "back end "operations. Reducing funds to Public Hospitals. The majority of the public are extremely aware of health costs and the prospect of being seriously hurt by big cuts to Medicare is cause for concern. Malcolm can say what he likes but the recent history of Liberal actions on cutting public health says far more about the Liberal Parties inclinations.

Why would any sentient voter trust Malcolms word over Bill's ? Wouldn't make sense folks..


----------



## qldfrog (21 June 2016)

basilio said:


> Why would any sentient voter trust Malcolms word over Bill's ? Wouldn't make sense folks..



History? The disasters of previous labour Governments?
I stop my history at Howard, was not here before and I would probably vote Keating if he was around today, but frankly why would anyone paying tax or caring about his children future vote for Bill?Not that I am feeling good voting for my LNP MP either...


----------



## overhang (21 June 2016)

qldfrog said:


> History? The disasters of previous labour Governments?
> I stop my history at Howard, was not here before and I would probably vote Keating if he was around today, but frankly why would anyone paying tax or caring about his children future vote for Bill?Not that I am feeling good voting for my LNP MP either...




Well we have the more recent history of the Abbott lead coalition government breaking many election promises, no cuts to the ABC or SBS, no new tax increases, CBA on all infrastructure projects over 100m, changes to super.. and I could go on.


----------



## noco (21 June 2016)

overhang said:


> Well we have the more recent history of the Abbott lead coalition government breaking many election promises, no cuts to the ABC or SBS, no new tax increases, CBA on all infrastructure projects over 100m, changes to super.. and I could go on.




There will never be a carbon tax under the Government I lead.....Sound familiar??


----------



## noco (21 June 2016)

basilio said:


> I'm not sure I agree with this analysis.  The Medicare scare campaign will hit a very raw nerve.  The facts are,  (the indisputable  facts)  that the Liberal government did attempt to put in train a series of measures that would have hamstrung Medicare.
> 
> Freezing rebates till 2020. Reducing payments. Attempting to hive off "back end "operations. Reducing funds to Public Hospitals. The majority of the public are extremely aware of health costs and the prospect of being seriously hurt by big cuts to Medicare is cause for concern. Malcolm can say what he likes but the recent history of Liberal actions on cutting public health says far more about the Liberal Parties inclinations.
> 
> Why would any sentient voter trust Malcolms word over Bill's ? Wouldn't make sense folks..




THE INDISPUTABLE FACTS ??????

What measures are you talking about to hamstring Medicare?

What big cuts to hospitals.....The funds are increasing every year under the Coalition......Oh , I see you are talking about that $80 billion that was never there from Labor.

What are the big cuts to Medicare?

Medicare pays out $24 billion each year and recoups $10 billion.....Who would wanted to buy it?...What should be happening is an increase in the Medicare levee to sustain the growth in costs.....Don't you agree?


----------



## noco (21 June 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Big lies about Medicare privatisation ?
> 
> Medibank private has just been sold off by the Libs.
> 
> ...




I think you will agree, when Medibank Private was sold off it had to enter into a very competitive industry and competition helps to keep prices down.

In the case of Medicare if it was ever sold off there would no competition......The medicare levee is paid out of taxpayers wages and collected by the government...I fail to see how it could ever be privatized in the first place.

Why is Barnacle Bill still promoting his lies and propaganda about the privatization of Medicare when Turnbull has given an assurance that it will remain under Government control...If he were to go back on his word that would be the end of him just as it was the demise of Gillard's ," THERE WILL BE NO CARBON TAX UNDER A GOVERNMENT I LEAD".


----------



## Tisme (21 June 2016)

noco said:


> THE INDISPUTABLE FACTS ??????
> 
> What measures are you talking about to hamstring Medicare?
> 
> ...




It's LNP DNA to kill anything that has a whiff of Labor origins. We all know the Libs will put it up for sale and allow the premiums to rise and wages/salaries of the medical staff to fall.

Medicare was one of those many landmark issues that the LNP historically attack as the beginning of the end of the world when it's being implemented by Labor, but oddly enough so far we haven't found ourselves going backwards into the bowels of desperation and poverty and the forecasted yellow peril running the show.

We have watched what spit and vitriol can do merely watching the NBN train wreck before our very eyes. It is so f$%ked up that we try to convince ourselves it can't be that bad and that it will turn out alright, because we are conditioned by previous predictions of destruction and decay like e.g. the medicare argument.


----------



## moXJO (21 June 2016)

Tisme said:


> .
> 
> We have watched what spit and vitriol can do merely watching the NBN train wreck before our very eyes. It is so f$%ked up that we try to convince ourselves it can't be that bad and that it will turn out alright, because we are conditioned by previous predictions of destruction and decay like e.g. the medicare argument.




Can't you get fiber to the node if you pay for it?


----------



## SirRumpole (21 June 2016)

noco said:


> I think you will agree, when Medibank Private was sold off it had to enter into a very competitive industry and competition helps to keep prices down.
> 
> In the case of Medicare if it was ever sold off there would no competition......The medicare levee is paid out of taxpayers wages and collected by the government...I fail to see how it could ever be privatized in the first place.
> 
> Why is Barnacle Bill still promoting his lies and propaganda about the privatization of Medicare when Turnbull has given an assurance that it will remain under Government control...If he were to go back on his word that would be the end of him just as it was the demise of Gillard's ," THERE WILL BE NO CARBON TAX UNDER A GOVERNMENT I LEAD".




There is no competition when the health funds can collude to raise premiums.

Having a government controlled competitor is the only way to provide some competition in this market.

As for Turnbull's "assurances", we heard the "never ever" from John Howard over the GST, so why should we believe Turn*bull *?


----------



## noco (21 June 2016)

Here is a bit of mirth to swallow with your weeties this morning.

I would to be instrumental in sacking the Labor socialist Party and all the  unions .....down with the loonie Greens and their pseudo environmental mirage.....Out with the weak kneed LNP and begin a new political revolution.

We need One Nation to rise from the ashes.....Everybody are Australians....No treaties that would split the nation......No tolerance for radical religious groups who step out of line and are hell bent on forcing their ideology 
on everybody outside their group....No bullying, intimidation and extortion.

What we need is a Donald Trump as Prime Minister and Pauline Hanson as his deputy...Include in parliament people like :-
Janet Albrechten
Grace Collier
Judith Sloan
Amanda Divine
Chris Kenny
Paul Murray
Campbell Newman
Tony Abbott
Michelia Cash
Rowan Dean.

All politician should do a special 3 year uni course in politics and economics and only allowed to enter parliament with a degree.

Eliminate all the state governments.

And finally install Bob Katter as Parliaments deputy sheriff to shoot any who step out of line.

What a wonderful country we would have if everybody worked together instead of all this political turmoil.


----------



## Tisme (21 June 2016)

moXJO said:


> Can't you get fiber to the node if you pay for it?




I can't get s4it !!!! They pulled draws wires in all over the place as soon as Malcolm announce the election and now it's a waiting game to see if fibre will make it's way out of the exchange. As much as I ask the boffins in charge they stick by the same mum routine.

How something that is costing tens of  billions of taxpayer monies does not have a micro plan than timelines individual suburbs, streets and premises escapes me. I'm not sure if it's because we don't have enough nuclear physicists who have never applied their trade in charge, but I'm prepared to hoe in and help dig a trench here and there if it means the fabled fibre eventuates


----------



## drsmith (21 June 2016)

Tisme said:


> We have watched what spit and vitriol can do merely watching the NBN train wreck before our very eyes. It is so f$%ked up that we try to convince ourselves it can't be that bad and that it will turn out alright, because we are conditioned by previous predictions of destruction and decay like e.g. the medicare argument.



It's so f$%ked up that last week alone, over 50,000 FTTN premises were declared RFS. 

It's so f$%ked up that it's going to meet and beat the June 30 rollout target outlined in last year's corporate plan.

That's a far cry from the situation it was in in the period that preceded the 2013 election.


----------



## explod (21 June 2016)

Its privatisation folks,  so move on

Dear Maggie Thatcher "... You can trust them"  :1zhelp:

Well you cannot trust them at all.   The old PMG and SEC had a chain of command right up to and accountable to Government.

Sure a public service can be seen as a cost to taxpayers but those workers are not on tge dole,  the money stays and circulates within our own community and no monies dissappear offshore either.


----------



## trainspotter (21 June 2016)

trainspotter said:


> The problem basilio is that 90% of the voting public will believe the "Fake Tradie" advert and wash it down with a glass of beer while they chain smoke the Winnie Blues




Well well well - 3 more holes in the ground .... "Fake Tradie" not so Fake afterall ?!?!?!!



> The identity of the ‘real’ Andrew MacRae was revealed on Tuesday, to be a 50-year-old ute-driving Sydney metalworker, who revealed his New South Wales government contractor's licence to the Daily Mail to prove it.
> 
> *The licensed metal fabricator and former electrical supervisor has been running his own small business, Teamwork Maintenance, for 20 years and lives in a modest house in Sydney's Lane Cove.*




https://au.news.yahoo.com/a/3188350...is-confirmed-a-fair-dinkum-metalworker/#page1

Now to debunk the Medicare Sell Off BS ....



> *The Turnbull government is preparing to privatise a swath of government payments in a bid to drag the Commonwealth's under-funded and outdated payment delivery systems into the digital age*.
> 
> But the move will expose the Turnbull government to a gathering pre-election scare campaign about wrecking Medicare, shedding Australian jobs, and endangering the privacy of Australians by handing their medical records to private companies.




Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...an-reports-20160209-gmpe0r.html#ixzz4CBQQDkqw


----------



## Tisme (21 June 2016)

drsmith said:


> It's so f$%ked up that last week alone, over 50,000 FTTN premises were declared RFS.
> 
> It's so f$%ked up that it's going to meet and beat the June 30 rollout target outlined in last year's corporate plan.
> 
> That's a far cry from the situation it was in in the period that preceded the 2013 election.




You running the project or something? 

Mate it is a dogs breakfast and everyone knows it, you just need to find another crusade to brow beat people with


----------



## drsmith (21 June 2016)

Tisme said:


> You running the project or something?
> 
> Mate it is a dogs breakfast and everyone knows it, you just need to find another crusade to brow beat people with



Bill Shorten used the term mate in response to a couple questions from journalists in a presser this morning in a somewhat condescending tone. The questions were around his Medicare scare campaign.

You know I follow the NBN project through my contributions in the relevant thread.


----------



## Tisme (21 June 2016)

Someone isn't happy with Malcolm's answers on QANDA



> Instead, what we got was a repeat of the standardised set of talking points which virtually every Coalition MP has been parroting about the NBN for the past two to three years.
> 
> I find this insulting, to say the least





https://delimiter.com.au/2016/06/21...al&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer


----------



## CanOz (21 June 2016)

trainspotter said:


> Well well well - 3 more holes in the ground .... "Fake Tradie" not so Fake afterall ?!?!?!!
> 
> 
> 
> ...




You bloody realists always ruin a good yarn don't you!


----------



## drsmith (21 June 2016)

trainspotter said:


> Now to debunk the Medicare Sell Off BS ....
> Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...an-reports-20160209-gmpe0r.html#ixzz4CBQQDkqw



In the context of the present discussion, that article from earlier in the year is an interesting read.

The government still presently has an option for outsourcing the Medicare payments system.


----------



## trainspotter (21 June 2016)

drsmith said:


> In the context of the present discussion, that article from earlier in the year is an interesting read.
> 
> The government still presently has an option for outsourcing the Medicare payments system.




Not just the Medicare system Doc. I thought the Labor Party would back it as it would bring the outdated systems into the "digitised" world !!


----------



## Tisme (21 June 2016)

NBN party policies


----------



## trainspotter (21 June 2016)

CanOz said:


> You bloody realists always ruin a good yarn don't you!




Ermmm YEP !!!


----------



## Smurf1976 (21 June 2016)

noco said:


> I think you will agree, when Medibank Private was sold off it had to enter into a very competitive industry and competition helps to keep prices down.
> 
> In the case of Medicare if it was ever sold off there would no competition......The medicare levee is paid out of taxpayers wages and collected by the government...I fail to see how it could ever be privatized in the first place.




No doubt in much the same way as plenty of other things have been privatised in situations where there's limited (or no) competition.

Private operator either approaches government itself (an "unsolicited proposal") or government asks them to come forward.

They tender a price that's way below the present cost of providing the service and so it all looks good. This is known as buying the contract and that's basically what it is. Losses at first, big profits not too far down the track once it's locked in.

12 months later they say sorry but you have to spend $$$ to upgrade something that doesn't fit with our systems. And yes, you need to use our equipment to do it and also you need to get us to do the work (that's where the first big profit comes in).

Then with the government operation long gone the price goes up. See point above about making sure it's hard for anyone else to take over at this stage now that a proprietary system has been installed.

Then the price goes up some more.

Then someone realises the quality or other aspects have greatly deteriorated and the whole thing is now costing more than it did in government hands for an inferior outcome.

Seen this game play out and once it happens government is backed into a corner. For political reasons the path of least resistance is just pay up since discontinuing the service is way too hard and trying to get back into it themselves ends up with an NBN-style drama (noting that the NBN is effectively a nationalisation of fixed communications infrastructure in addition to the technical aspects of being a new system - but it's a change from Telstra's privately owned network to a government owned one fundamentallly).

PS - "Unsolicited proposal" tends to be code for a dodgy deal and there's nothing even slightly "unsolicited" about such things generally. Sometimes there would be, but more likely some bureaucrat had dinner with the CEO of whatever company and then surprise surprise, the "unsolicited" proposal turns up shortly afterward. 

In the event that the public, workers or unions resist the change then it's just a matter of top-down micromanagement to put a few things in place to ensure the present government-run operation fails in some way. The bigger and more visible the failure the better, then the outsourcing goes through pretty quickly with not too many questions asked since those supporting it simply point to there being no choice.

Cynical? Well I've seen this one play out in another field (not in the power industry for the record, was the public service as such). Dodgy to the max but it's how the game is played. Changed the way I vote having seen that and realising how it's done and that it's not uncommon.


----------



## basilio (21 June 2016)

Thanks for your contribution Smurf.  It's an open secret in business that once you have control of an essential piece of a government organisation you basically have them by the xalls.  Undoing the deal just isn't realistic.  That's why talk of privatising the back room operations is just a trojan horse.

As you said in another post we now have a myriad examples of how private enterprise has ripped the government/the public off in delivering services.  We don't have the political will to recognise this and  plan for the orderly reintroduction of services that lend themselves to independent, cost effective delivery - as distinct from full commercial exploitation in a rent seeking business system.

______________________________________________

Has anyone else been following Playground Politics with Sammy J on the ABC ?  Totally wicked.  Only a few minutes an episode but worth it's weight in dark laughs.

Don't get too spooked by teh first episode; Sammy makes sure every party and every person cops a serve.

http://www.techly.com.au/2016/06/20...olitics-is-the-best-thing-about-the-election/

http://iview.abc.net.au/programs/sammy-js-playground-politics/LE1525V001S00


----------



## noco (21 June 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> There is no competition when the health funds can collude to raise premiums.
> 
> Having a government controlled competitor is the only way to provide some competition in this market.
> 
> As for Turnbull's "assurances", we heard the "never ever" from John Howard over the GST, so why should we believe Turn*bull *?




I am sure the ACCC would be most interested in your collusion claim with Health Funds......I have looked at a few schemes and you have to compare apples with apples and they vary from one Fund to the other.....Do some research on the subject.

Having a Government controlled competitor????...It is a pity the Labor Party didn't think of that when they sold off the Commonwealth Bank......Look what has happened in the banking system......No government controlled competitor.

I think you should check your facts on the GST argument........John Howard stated he would never introduce A GST during that term in office.....He did have the gutz to go to the next election seeking a mandate and won it fair and square, so what is your problem?......I recall the Labor Party's propaganda during that election campaign that everything would cost us 10% more......Once again it was a disgraceful Labor Party lie .....They could not be honest enough with themselves to tell the truth that whist 10% GST would be added to selective items, the hidden Sale Tax was be removed......At one stage there was a hidden 20% S/T on motor vehicles and at the stroke of his pen, Paul Keating increased the S/T to 25% without anyone knowing it.....There was a 20% S/T on white goods......You paid 22.5% S/T on soft drinks...you paid 33.3% S/T on stationery...All those hidden S/T charges were removed and the 10% GST added....Nobody was ever informed as to how much S/T they were paying because it was never ever indicated on the invoice.......It was the seller who paid the S/T and then it was added to the price of the article.......At least you knew what GST tax you were paying....So show a little bit of honesty to ASF viewers if that is not too much trouble.

BTW...Paul Keating wanted to introduce the GST and Hawke stopped him.....No gutz, no glory on Hawke's part
for fear of losing votes.

Chris Bowen had some Treasury modelling done to increase the GST to 12.5%......What happened with that idea?...once again no gutz no glory on Bowen's part.

So Rumpy do some home work before you make any  more outlandish remarks.


----------



## Tisme (22 June 2016)

*Jobs and Growth*

Boutique recruiting firm OneIRC Australia is advertising in the Emerald Isle for "copper gurus" to work on "Australia's largest telecommunications project" – the National Broadband Network.


http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...tional-broadband-network-20160611-gpgyid.html


----------



## SirRumpole (22 June 2016)

> I think you should check your facts on the GST argument........John Howard stated he would never introduce A GST during that term in office.....




Maybe you should check your facts.

What do the words "no way the GST will ever be part of our policy, never ever, it's dead" mean to you ?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XtZLV7MvcLI



> Having a Government controlled competitor????...It is a pity the Labor Party didn't think of that when they sold off the Commonwealth Bank......Look what has happened in the banking system......No government controlled competitor.




Glad you agree that there should be government entities providing competition.


----------



## Tisme (22 June 2016)

My bet is that these blokes didn't understand electoral fraud through safe seat boundaries


*The Poor Voter on Election Day*
by
John Greenleaf Whittier


The proudest now is but my peer,
The highest not more high;
To-day, of all the weary year,
A king of men am I.
To-day, alike are great and small,
The nameless and the known;
My palace is the people’s hall,
The ballot-box my throne!
Who serves to-day upon the list
Beside the served shall stand;
Alike the brown and wrinkled fist,
The gloved and dainty hand!
The rich is level with the poor,
The weak is strong to-day;
And sleekest broadcloth counts no more
Than homespun frock of gray.
To-day let pomp and vain pretence
My stubborn right abide;
I set a plain man’s common sense
Against the pedant’s pride.
To-day shall simple manhood try
The strength of gold and land;
The wide world has not wealth to buy
The power in my right hand!
While there’s a grief to seek redress,
Or balance to adjust,
Where weighs our living manhood less
Than Mammon’s vilest dust, ””
While there’s a right to need my vote,
A wrong to sweep away,
Up! clouted knee and ragged coat!
A man’s a man to-day! 


*One-Man-One-Vote *

Henry Lawson, 1891

"ONE-MAN-ONE-VOTE!" You hear the people shouting. 
The walls of Mammon tremble ere they fall. 
ONE-MAN-ONE-VOTE! Is this a time for doubting? 
The poets have been prophets after all. 

ONE-MAN-ONE-VOTE! The cry is growing stronger! 
ONE-MAN-ONE-VOTE! It echoes o'er the wave! 
ONE-MAN-ONE-VOTE! The Wealthy dead no longer 
Shall rule us through their children from the grave! 

ONE-MAN-ONE-VOTE! The knell of Retrogression! 
The greatest triumph of the tongue and pen! 
ONE-MAN-ONE-VOTE! The right of long possession 
Is right no longer in the minds of men! 

ONE-MAN-ONE-VOTE! There's lightning in the thunder! 
ONE-MAN-ONE-VOTE! The reign of Greed is o'er! 
ONE-MAN-ONE-VOTE! The cursed Vote of Plunder 
Shall rule the plundered slaves of earth no more. 

ONE-MAN-ONE-VOTE! We're waking from our slumbers, 
ONE-MAN-ONE-VOTE! To rule the fields we farmed! 
If thus we triumph with diminished numbers, 
What will the triumph be when all are armed?


----------



## noco (22 June 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Maybe you should check your facts.
> 
> What do the words "no way the GST will ever be part of our policy, never ever, it's dead" mean to you ?
> 
> ...




So what is your problem with the GST?......Howard went to the voters and won a mandate.

Labor, under Kim Beasley, were going to dismantle the GST...What stopped them?.....Labor did not dismantle it because they knew it was a good thing.....Another all smoke and mirrors with Labor....Labor wanted the GST but did not have the gutz to do it.

Gillard went to the 2010 election promising there would never ever be a carbon tax under the Government she led and 5 days later the Greens twisted her arm....So don't talk about never ever.


----------



## Tisme (22 June 2016)

noco said:


> So what is your problem with the GST?......Howard went to the voters and won a mandate.
> 
> Labor, under Kim Beasley, were going to dismantle the GST...What stopped them?.




I would have said the same excuse the Libs have been using for the last ~3 years ...... too expensive to unravel, honouring the tradition of passed budgets, bu775hit, lies, and political advantage.


----------



## SirRumpole (22 June 2016)

noco said:


> Gillard went to the 2010 election promising there would never ever be a carbon tax under the Government she led and 5 days later the Greens twisted her arm....So don't talk about never ever.




Get it through your skull noco, *Gillard got thrown out.*

Politicians lie and they pay the price, but maybe now voters won't want to give them the chance to lie and have them force their lies onto the electorate.


----------



## Logique (22 June 2016)

"Mr 17 Minutes" might get 34 minutes. 



> Rob Oakeshott could win - A.Bolt - 22 June 2016
> http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/rob_oakeshott_could_win/
> 
> Amazing. Rob Oakeshott could actually win, such is the disillusionment with both parties:
> ...


----------



## noco (22 June 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Get it through your skull noco, *Gillard got thrown out.*
> 
> Politicians lie and they pay the price, but maybe now voters won't want to give them the chance to lie and have them force their lies onto the electorate.




Gillard got thrown out because she was the worst Prime Minister in Australian history....A devout Fabian and confessed communist.....Even worse still she became tangled up with that crock Wilson.....That side of things is not over yet.

Howard went on to be Prime Minister for another 6 years after the introduction of the GST...So what price did Howard pay?

Your argument does not hold water.


----------



## SirRumpole (22 June 2016)

noco said:


> Gillard got thrown out because she was the worst Prime Minister in Australian history....A devout Fabian and confessed communist.....Even worse still she became tangled up with that crock Wilson.....That side of things is not over yet.
> 
> Howard went on to be Prime Minister for another 6 years after the introduction of the GST...So what price did Howard pay?
> 
> Your argument does not hold water.




The public are less tolerant of lies or perceived hypocrisies these days.

We shall see.


----------



## overhang (22 June 2016)

noco said:


> Gillard got thrown out because she was the worst Prime Minister in Australian history....A devout Fabian and confessed communist.....Even worse still she became tangled up with that crock Wilson.....That side of things is not over yet.
> 
> Howard went on to be Prime Minister for another 6 years after the introduction of the GST...So what price did Howard pay?
> 
> Your argument does not hold water.




She was thrown out for doing a deal with the devil aka Greens.

I don't think you can go past Abbott as worst PM in Australian History, his constant gaffs and broken promises combined with his ideology having far too much bearing on his governing makes him difficult to beat in that department.


----------



## noco (22 June 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> The public are less tolerant of lies or perceived hypocrisies these days.
> 
> We shall see.




Yeah, like the lies Shorten is telling about the privatization of Medicare.....I am sure the public are awake to that grubby propaganda....Even the Medicos have shown Shorten up for what he really is....WHAT EVER IT TAKES.....that is Barnacle Bill's motto....Lies lies and more lies.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...e/news-story/0baf1d6067475195247ca7cb2d45d74e

*If you want to grasp why Australia has a dysfunctional political system, struggles to improve its budget and government services and baulks at innovation then look no further than the great Medicare privatisation scare designed to make Bill Shorten prime minister.

It is a sad and telling story. Medicare is one of Australia’s most original social policies. It has been bipartisan since John Howard, returned as Liberal leader in 1995, ended the Coalition’s war on Medicare and backed Medicare during 13 years of office.

The last 12 days of the election campaign are declared by Labor to be about an issue that does not exist — Malcolm Turnbull’s plan to privatise Medicare. Turnbull has no such plan and does not entertain the idea. His denials are comprehensive and credible. The Medicare Scare is about a final fuel injection for Labor. It originates in market research not Coalition policy. Shorten is rising to the occasion: he says that “piece by piece, brick by brick” the Liberals want to tear down Medicare or, put another way, they are bent upon “Americanising Medicare”.

These are powerful phrases without any basis in policy reality. On display now is the central problem in our politics — the divorce between politics and the national interest or, more ominously, how politics hurts the public interest.*


----------



## trainspotter (22 June 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> The public are less tolerant of lies or perceived hypocrisies these days.
> 
> We shall see.




So when Bill Shorten claims he will be spending a billion here and a billion there we should believe him?



> *The Labor party had already promised more than $16 billion in new spending in the course of the election campaign, more than triple the Coalition's $5 billion.*.
> 
> Now the leader spelt out promises worth a further $3 billion. There was Cross River Rail for Brisbane at $800 million, a rail link for Sydney's Badgerys Creek airport at $400 million, Metro Rail for Melbourne at $380 million, a park and ride plan for Melbourne at $120 million.
> The nearest hospital, Nepean, was promised $86 million.





Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...ney-to-everyone-20160619-gpmn8d#ixzz4CGls3LXy 

"We will not be a big spending government" - Bill Shorten Pffffffffffffffttttttttttttttttt !!


----------



## SirRumpole (22 June 2016)

trainspotter said:


> So when Bill Shorten claims he will be spending a billion here and a billion there we should believe him?
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Depends on how he intends to pay for that spending.

If he doesn't tell us then we shouldn't believe him.

Has Turnbull told us who is paying for his corporate tax cuts ?


----------



## Tisme (22 June 2016)

No one is innocent when it comes to election pledges ....no one

https://independentaustralia.net/po...kflips-bring-broken-promises-tally-to-85,7722


----------



## trainspotter (22 June 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Depends on how he intends to pay for that spending.
> 
> If he doesn't tell us then we shouldn't believe him.
> 
> Has Turnbull told us who is paying for his corporate tax cuts ?




As a matter of fact he has as well as economists agree?



> The government announced in its May budget that it would cut the corporate tax rate from 30 cents in the dollar to 25 cents for all companies by 2026-27, and conceded some days later that this move would cost the budget an estimated $48.2 billion over the decade.
> 
> Key modelling behind the proposal undertaken by *Independent Economics' Chris Murphy states that the cut would be mostly self funding becaus*e, in addition to improved revenue flows from stronger jobs growth and higher wages, fewer companies will attempt to hide profits or send them abroad.





Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...tax-claims-20160529-gp6ika.html#ixzz4CGvqURir


----------



## SirRumpole (22 June 2016)

trainspotter said:


> As a matter of fact he has as well as economists agree?
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Self funding ? What was it 0.1% GDP growth over 20 years ?

Very dodgy figures and very dependent on overseas factors over which we have no control.

This is tissue paper thin and very optimistic modelling.


----------



## Tisme (22 June 2016)

trainspotter said:


> As a matter of fact he has as well as economists agree?
> 
> 
> *fewer companies will attempt to hide profits or send them abroad*


----------



## drsmith (22 June 2016)

Results of further modelling today on Labor's NG policy,



> Labor’s proposed negative gearing changes could see property prices fall by up to 15 per cent and rents rise by 6 per cent, according to the worst-case scenarios in a new independent analysis.
> 
> Under the best-case scenario, the new report by property analysts SQM Research states that Australian house prices would fall by a combined 4 per cent over 2018, 2019 and 2020 if Labor’s proposal to limit negative gearing is implemented.






> The 4 per cent dip in price rises pre-supposes a half a per cent rate cut by the Reserve Bank to compensate, and the biggest dip pre-supposes no rate cut by the RBA. The worst losses are predicted in 2019, when prices could fall by between 3 and 8 per cent in 12 months.
> 
> Off-the-plan investors would be exposed to a substantial risk of their property being valued below purchase price, the report warned, and a three-year, phase-in period to the changes should be considered, according to SQM Research managing director Louis Christopher.
> 
> ...




http://www.domain.com.au/news/feder...abor-negative-gearing-policy-20160621-gpoae4/


----------



## trainspotter (22 June 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Self funding ? What was it 0.1% GDP growth over 20 years ?
> 
> Very dodgy figures and very dependent on overseas factors over which we have no control.
> 
> This is tissue paper thin and very optimistic modelling.




No different to Labor's 10 year modelling on forecasts of company profits and costings of policies? Didn't Labor promise to cut company taxes to 25% last election as well? 



> It is only 70 per cent certain that the cash balance in 2017-18 will be somewhere between a small surplus or a $60bn deficit. So economic *models producing long-range forecasts need to be taken with a large pinch of salt. *That applies as much to Labor’s 10-year costings of its policies as it does to the budget’s medium-term projections.*




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...s/news-story/f6783024fde4eee684f3e22992e173c6

Both sides should have stuck to the 4 year modelling for a degree of foreseeable certainty.


----------



## trainspotter (22 June 2016)

Tisme said:


> View attachment 67173




Is that you on the dance floor at your sisters wedding?


----------



## SirRumpole (22 June 2016)

Tanya is on TV droning on about gay rights.

Bloody hell this subject does not matter to the majority of people. I wish she'd stick to the mainstream issues.


----------



## noco (22 June 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Depends on how he intends to pay for that spending.
> 
> If he doesn't tell us then we shouldn't believe him.
> 
> Has Turnbull told us who is paying for his corporate tax cuts ?




Just borrow more and increase the usual Labor debt or put it on Barnacle Bill's SPEND-O-METER......No problem for Bill.......Just let the Liberal Government sort it out in the usual way next time the Liberals get re-elected.....Let the Liberals be the bad boys when austerity measure have to be put in place to reduce Labor high debt and deficit.

The corporate tax cuts, as you well know, does not come into effect for nearly 10 years....It is the small business who when benefit first and the most.....Shorten also knows it but he continues with his big fat lie again that the large corporations will get a tax cut of $50 billion when in actual fact it is only $7.5 billion....The difference going to small business which Shorten and Bowen told us it would be good for business and reduce the unemployment......Shorten and Bowen last year stated they wanted to reduce the tax for small business to 25%...They are out and out hypocrites.


----------



## trainspotter (22 June 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Tanya is on TV droning on about gay rights.
> 
> Bloody hell this subject does not matter to the majority of people. I wish she'd stick to the mainstream issues.




Funnily enough I used to think the same thing but apparently every government employee has this agenda high on their moral voting compass


----------



## SirRumpole (22 June 2016)

noco said:


> .Shorten and Bowen last year stated they wanted to reduce the tax for small business to 25%...They are out and out hypocrites.




As far as I know Bowen and Shorten still support a tax cut for small business, their argument is what the definition of small business should be.

If the aim is to keep money circulating in the economy, there is no point giving tax cuts to overseas shareholders.


----------



## noco (22 June 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Tanya is on TV droning on about gay rights.
> 
> Bloody hell this subject does not matter to the majority of people. I wish she'd stick to the mainstream issues.




Diversion...diversion..diversion.

That is Labor's way of taking voters mind off the real issues like the economic mess LABOR LEFT BEHIND 2013 and the debacle Labor find themselves in with the Medicare privatization lie and the disunity Labor finds themselves in with border protection.....Some 50 Labor MPs are going against their fearless leader who says he leads the Labor Party...I think the Labor Party are leading Bill and his disunited Labor Party closely followed by the Greens.

The Labor Party are in turmoil ATM and are becoming very desperate.


----------



## noco (22 June 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> As far as I know Bowen and Shorten still support a tax cut for small business, their argument is what the definition of small business should be.
> 
> If the aim is to keep money circulating in the economy, there is no point giving tax cuts to overseas shareholders.




You just don't get it do you......The tax cuts to large corporations or as you say tax cuts to overseas shareholders will not come into effect for nearly 10 years in which time there may be a different party governing.

There are 2 categories of small business.

a) up to $2million turnover

b) $2 to 10 million turnover.

I am not sure about the timing without checking but they will be a a year or so apart.

So please stop using the usual Labor scare tactic about large corporations getting the $50 billion.....It just another Labor Party lie to deceive voters.....WHAT EVER IT TAKES TO WIN.


----------



## Tisme (22 June 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Tanya is on TV droning on about gay rights.
> 
> Bloody hell this subject does not matter to the majority of people. I wish she'd stick to the mainstream issues.




Primadonna ... where's Eddie Mac when you need him.


----------



## Tisme (22 June 2016)




----------



## moXJO (22 June 2016)

funny how the unions screamed that "no tradie would vote liberal". Just about every tradie I know dislikes the unions and won't vote labor unless there is a good reason.  After they found out he was a tradie, all of a sudden they switched it too " Oh he must be a boss".  And that sums up the relationship between self employed tradies and unions. The unions did their best to screw us in the late 90s early 2000's. Most don't support unions at all.


----------



## trainspotter (22 June 2016)

It would seem to me it is about who can be more NEGATIVE than the other. Or blame each other or outspend each other or promise more or kiss babies  ... NO WAIT ... it's like that every election year.



LIBERAL



LABOR


----------



## noco (23 June 2016)

Bill Shorten has blown all credibility he ever had which was very little......His scare on the Medicare privatization has back fired on him.....Desperate men do desperate things......WHAT EVER IT TAKES TO GIAN POWER..

This grub does not give a dam about the National interest.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...t/news-story/1b6d3989db9244677f67215df9b16f7b

*Paul Kelly’s piece (“Labor overdoses on Medicare scare”, 22/6) skewers the Labor Party on multiple levels simultaneously. Labor’s campaign on Medicare is based on a comprehensive falsehood. The ALP wishes to hoodwink the electorate on a lie and conceal the fact it has little else to campaign on during the finals days until July 2.

Talk about desperate tactics by a once highly respected political organisation. Labor’s national secretary George Wright has his fingers all over this, and in a few days time we will know if he has pressed the right buttons or not. Wright is a formidable campaigner but the Medicare fraud does him and his leader no credit whatever.

John Simpson, Melbourne, Vic

The first casualty of Labor’s scare campaign was the truth. The second casualty was good government, as the Coalition backed off the plan to take a sensible look at making efficiencies in the payments system for Medicare, a need with which both parties were in agreement, but one that Labor distorted to turn it into a secret plan to privatise the whole structure.

Politics triumphed over necessary reform because the Coalition was forced to counter Labor’s lies that some in the electorate may have been persuaded to believe.

Michael Wills, Armadale, Vic

Janet Albrechtsen is right to deplore the Coalition’s hesitation to call out Labor’s lies on Medicare and business tax relief (“Shorten not a patch on Hawke or Keating”, 22/6).

The Labor lie about Medicare has spooked Malcolm Turnbull into retreating from a modest reform of the rebate delivery system. Even the ABC has recognised Labor’s claims as misrepresenting Coalition policy.

John Morrissey, Hawthorn, Vic

Rather than rely on others to discredit Bill Shorten’s Medicare scaremongering, Malcolm Turnbull should dispense with his verbal prevarication that has him referring to the lie rather than the perpetrators of that lie.

John Lewis, Port Macquarie, NSW

As this election becomes more and more like a reality TV show, it is refreshing to read the musings of Paul Kelly. The Medicare scare campaign takes the biscuit. Bill Shorten seems on the one hand to want to keep us in a time warp where no improvement can be made because it leads to privatisation, and on the other holds it up as a gold standard that will take us well into the future if simply left as it is. I doubt that anything is safe if left to stagnate, be it under either party.

Glenda Ellis, Red Hill, Qld

Please excuse me if I join the club that accuses Bill Shorten of falsehoods about Medicare, the effect of the company tax cuts that he endorsed not long ago, his claim that Labor will not be a big spending government, that he will protect our borders as effectively as the government, that the billions Labor has promised to throw at schools and hospitals will improve the standard of education and health, and that the plebiscite on gay marriage will result in homophobia and violence. To give him credit, he is being honest when he says he will run the country like a union.

Donald Stallman, Colinton, Qld

Labor’s false accusations as to Coalition policies are commonplace, but its latest regarding Coalition intentions with regard to Medicare privatisation is so contrived, dishonest and immoral it beggars belief.

It is another example of Labor’s philosophy of win at any cost, even if it means throwing credibility and integrity out of the window. While it might not bother Labor supporters, it won’t wash with swinging voters.*


----------



## Tisme (23 June 2016)

noco said:


> Bill Shorten has blown all credibility he ever had which was very little......His scare on the Medicare privatization has back fired on him.....Desperate men do desperate things......WHAT EVER IT TAKES TO GIAN POWER..
> 
> This grub does not give a dam about the National interest.




You keep providing the invective, but his popularity is rising Noco. He's hitting the nerves of constituents and opponents alike, with the same method Abbott used to scare the voters at the last election. 

And lets face facts, it's a fairly safe bet that promises will always be broken by politics, even "core" promises. Personally I don't believe Malcolm on many fronts and I doubt he has the ear of the party when he guarantees no  privatisation of part or all of Medicare

There is no such thing as an electoral "mandate" so there is no foul.


----------



## noco (23 June 2016)

Tisme said:


> You keep providing the invective, but his popularity is rising Noco. He's hitting the nerves of constituents and opponents alike, with the same method Abbott used to scare the voters at the last election.
> 
> And lets face facts, it's a fairly safe bet that promises will always be broken by politics, even "core" promises. Personally I don't believe Malcolm on many fronts and I doubt he has the ear of the party when he guarantees no  privatisation of part or all of Medicare
> 
> There is no such thing as an electoral "mandate" so there is no foul.




Shorten is hitting the nerves on constituents based on lies and the majority are awake to his grubby tactics.

Do you really believe Shorten will do a better job than Turnbull?

You have the choice between man who wants to run the country as a union leader who is inexperienced in economics or a man who has a wealth of knowledge in being able to manage our financial affairs.....

Turnbull has given an iron clad guarantee Medicare will never be sold off...What more does Labor need?....Any way who would want to buy it when is recovers $10 billion and forks out $24 billion....Even a 5th grade kid at school could tell it would not be viable so why is Shorten telling lies about Medicare being sold off.?

THINK...THINK...THINK MAN.!!!!!!!!


----------



## trainspotter (23 June 2016)

Coalition promises = 5 billion
Labor promises = 16 billion

Bill Shorten - "We will not be a big-spending government" 

:bonk:


----------



## dutchie (23 June 2016)

trainspotter said:


> Coalition promises = 5 billion
> Labor promises = 16 billion
> 
> Bill Shorten - "We will not be a big-spending government"
> ...




At least Labor is consistent.


----------



## Tisme (23 June 2016)

noco said:


> Shorten is hitting the nerves on constituents based on lies and the majority are awake to his grubby tactics.
> 
> Do you really believe Shorten will do a better job than Turnbull?
> 
> ...




No I don't think Shorten will do the job I think a Prime Minister should be doing. MY personal feeling aren't the issue, it's what is cutting through to the electorate that is in play.

Turnbull can't guarantee anything, especially with the merry go round of leaders that now occurs every couple of years. The Liberal plank has always been to oppose social care by govt and put it in the hands of supposed wealth generators... that Australia does not have the population nor resources for real competition in markets seems lost on them.... and I can't see a loner like Mal, who is suspected of being a Labor mole by many, having any influence over core doctrine of "progressive liberalism" as shallow as that is.


----------



## drsmith (23 June 2016)

LDP NSW senator David Leyonhjelm crawls into bed with Labor in order to save his senate seat,



> Emails obtained by The Australian show that LDP NSW senator David Leyonhjelm and key colleagues negotiated with a Labor “preference whisperer” last month to line up the deal, in which the minor party helps Labor in the lower house in exchange for similar help in the Senate.




http://blogs.news.com.au/dailyteleg...raph/comments/lnp_pays_back_turnbull_in_kind/

Sportsbet's odds have changed slightly in favour of Labor and is now at $1.15/$5.50. This is after some union commissioned polls indicate a trend towards Labor in some NSW marginals.

https://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/2016/06/23/another-electorate-polling-round/

Mediscare seems to have worked well for Bill Shorten thus far but it's hard to see that being maintained through to the election as it's so see through.


----------



## qldfrog (23 June 2016)

Tisme said:


> No I don't think Shorten will do the job I think a Prime Minister should be doing. MY personal feeling aren't the issue, it's what is cutting through to the electorate that is in play.
> 
> Turnbull can't guarantee anything, especially with the merry go round of leaders that now occurs every couple of years. The Liberal plank has always been to oppose social care by govt and put it in the hands of supposed wealth generators... that Australia does not have the population nor resources for real competition in markets seems lost on them.... and I can't see a loner like Mal, who is suspected of being a Labor mole by many, having any influence over core doctrine of "progressive liberalism" as shallow as that is.



You have a point in that last point, and as a result of talks TA could be back and the fact my local LNP MP is a judah and quite dumb,initially, i did not want to vote for either and was ready to void my vote, but the never ending crap campaign of labour about privatising medicare (as if..do not need much brain to see the problem there) will make me vote LNP at the end.
not with joy, but honestly, no real choice


----------



## drsmith (23 June 2016)

If he keeps this up, he'll become known as Slippery Shorty.



> Shorten refuses to repeat claims government will privatise Medicare
> 
> Opposition Leader Bill Shorten is continuing to warn the government plans to privatise of Medicare, but he’s refused to directly repeat the claim in an interview with 730.
> 
> ...




http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-06-23/election-live-june-23/7535364


----------



## SirRumpole (23 June 2016)

drsmith said:


> If he keeps this up, he'll become known as Slippery Shorty.
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-06-23/election-live-june-23/7535364




The Coalition may not privatise the whole of Medicare like Fraser did, but they will sell it off bit by bit. They already sold Medibank private and they are putting various "databases" up for auction.

Salami tactics will see a large proportion of Medicare in private hands.


----------



## drsmith (23 June 2016)

Or perhaps Scary Shorten.


----------



## Tisme (24 June 2016)

Any predictions on a Tampa moment and are they keeping their powder dry for a last minute gotcha?


----------



## trainspotter (24 June 2016)

Tisme said:


> Any predictions on a Tampa moment and are they keeping their powder dry for a last minute gotcha?




Are you suggesting that Malcolm Turn theboatsback Bull has that Vietnamese refugee boat moored up on Christmas Island for nothing?


----------



## trainspotter (24 June 2016)

Litmus test for Bill youlater Shorten ...



> The CFA has rejected a new enterprise agreement, which delivers pay rises for professional firefighters, because of fears it will marginalise volunteers.
> 
> Mr Turnbull's visit appeared to have the desired effect.
> 
> ...




Read more: http://www.afr.com/news/politics/el...-unions-pm-says-20160623-gpq86i#ixzz4CS1VedPI


----------



## Tisme (24 June 2016)

trainspotter said:


> Are you suggesting that Malcolm Turn theboatsback Bull has that Vietnamese refugee boat moored up on Christmas Island for nothing?




 I forgot about that


----------



## moXJO (24 June 2016)

Tisme said:


> Any predictions on a Tampa moment and are they keeping their powder dry for a last minute gotcha?




I heard there's this thing called "Brexit" happening


----------



## overhang (24 June 2016)

Today was a great example how the great Liberal party handles the economy, the supposed more adept economic managers.
Turnbull on the same sex marriage plebiscite


> On Friday, Turnbull confirmed that regardless of how the Australian people vote on same-sex marriage, no Coalition MP will be bound by the result of the plebiscite.
> 
> “The tradition in the Liberal Party is that on matters of this kind it is a free vote,” Turnbull said.




So they are willing to waste up to half a billion of tax payers dollars to carry out a poll that is non-binding, what is the bloody point   And what a crock that it's the tradition of the Liberal party to allow a free vote when the whole time they haven't allowed a conscious vote on the issue.  It's this complete incompetence that busts the myth that Liberals are better economic managers.


----------



## SirRumpole (24 June 2016)

overhang said:


> Today was a great example how the great Liberal party handles the economy, the supposed more adept economic managers.
> Turnbull on the same sex marriage plebiscite
> 
> 
> So they are willing to waste up to half a billion of tax payers dollars to carry out a poll that is non-binding, what is the bloody point   And what a crock that it's the tradition of the Liberal party to allow a free vote when the whole time they haven't allowed a conscious vote on the issue.  It's this complete incompetence that busts the myth that Liberals are better economic managers.




Or a conscience vote either. 

A great demonstration of how stuffed up Turnbull is by his deal with the right.


----------



## Knobby22 (24 June 2016)

That's why you want a plebiscite. 
If you get the people's will there will be no argument as occurred in Ireland.
If it is done by polly's then there will be bitter infractions and the likelihood of it being reversed.

A plebiscite showing the people's will is the best way to go. True democracy.


----------



## overhang (24 June 2016)

Knobby22 said:


> That's why you want a plebiscite.
> If you get the people's will there will be no argument as occurred in Ireland.
> If it is done by polly's then there will be bitter infractions and the likelihood of it being reversed.
> 
> A plebiscite showing the people's will is the best way to go. True democracy.




A plebiscite is completely pointless if it's non-binding which Turnbull has said will be the case.  If you aren't going to listen to the people then don't waste 500 million to just to have a conscious vote anyway.  The right faction have far too much control of the Liberal party.


----------



## SirRumpole (24 June 2016)

overhang said:


> A plebiscite is completely pointless if it's non-binding which Turnbull has said will be the case.  If you aren't going to listen to the people then don't waste 500 million to just to have a conscious vote anyway.  The right faction have far too much control of the Liberal party.




If the Libs vote against the will of the people, and the same with Labor, then they risk the wrath of the electorate.

That is if gay marriage is a big deal to the majority of people which I doubt.


----------



## Knobby22 (24 June 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> If the Libs vote against the will of the people, and the same with Labor, then they risk the wrath of the electorate.
> 
> That is if gay marriage is a big deal to the majority of people which I doubt.




True. Anyway it's well known there are polies within both Labor and Liberal who will never vote yes but they are far in the minority. A vote with the plebiscite behind it would easily go through.
It's not a big deal at all to me.


----------



## Logique (24 June 2016)

Brexit = will happen:

- Pollsters = wrong
- Bookies = wrong
- UK 'Chattering Class' = wrong

- mendicant states = wanted the status quo = Orkneys, Scotland, Gibraltar, parts of Wales. (Tasmania and SA, if they had the chance!)

- English Labour constituencies, regular folks in the North and the Midlands = carried the Brexit vote

The Aussie bookies say = Coalition will win on 2 July. Must be right, because bookies are never wrong...


----------



## trainspotter (24 June 2016)

Logique your logic is sound


----------



## SirRumpole (24 June 2016)

And now for something completely different.

https://youtu.be/rCDGMbPqNb4


----------



## dutchie (25 June 2016)

Billiar continues to deceive the electorate.


----------



## Tisme (27 June 2016)

Usual pattern appearing in the final week: Newscorp polls show increase in LNP support over Labs in the five days blitz to convince Newscrap readers and Sky watchers to get onboard with the winning team.... it works quite well it seems. 

I also see QANDA are doing their usual best to scuttle Labor's chances by having Tanya on the show tonight. Let's hope Tony puts her through the grinder like he did Gillard for fawning over the USA instead of looking after her own,such as Julian Assange. Shame Scott Morrison isn't there too so he could get a smack around the ear for his spiteful school boy antics.


----------



## Tisme (27 June 2016)

dutchie said:


> Billiar continues to deceive the electorate.




It's a tradition of Canberra:


----------



## SirRumpole (27 June 2016)

Tisme said:


> Usual pattern appearing in the final week: Newscorp polls show increase in LNP support over Labs in the five days blitz to convince Newscrap readers and Sky watchers to get onboard with the winning team.... it works quite well it seems.
> 
> I also see QANDA are doing their usual best to scuttle Labor's chances by having Tanya on the show tonight. Let's hope Tony puts her through the grinder like he did Gillard for fawning over the USA instead of looking after her own,such as Julian Assange. Shame Scott Morrison isn't there too so he could get a smack around the ear for his spiteful school boy antics.




I'm not a great fan of whiney Tanya, but I thought she gave a very good interview on Insiders on Sunday.

She was very precise and on message, not rambling like Shorten often does. I wouldn't like to see her as PM, but if she performs as well on Q&A she'll be an asset to Labor.


----------



## Tisme (27 June 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> I'm not a great fan of whiney Tanya, but I thought she gave a very good interview on Insiders on Sunday.
> 
> She was very precise and on message, not rambling like Shorten often does. I wouldn't like to see her as PM,* but if she performs as well on Q&A she'll be an asset to Labor.*




She won't. When she's in front of a live audience, the crowd becomes her students and she becomes the  apparent contemptuous, eye rolling school ma'am.

Mind you when you compare apples for apples !!!! Next to Kelly anyone looks .......

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ls1TTgTqRJU


----------



## SirRumpole (27 June 2016)

Tisme said:


> She won't. When she's in front of a live audience, the crowd becomes her students and she becomes the  apparent contemptuous, eye rolling school ma'am.
> 
> Mind you when you compare apples for apples !!!! Next to Kelly anyone looks .......
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ls1TTgTqRJU




Yep, Kelly isn't the brightest spark in the engine, and given her perilous position she may well self destruct tonight.


----------



## Tisme (27 June 2016)

Everyone likes a cat fight  

(I'ts only going to get more common as the remnants of the once manly male culture succumb to the effects of the all pervasive oestrogen producing nonylphenols that are used to deliver our drinking water.)


----------



## pixel (27 June 2016)

dutchie said:


> Billiar continues to deceive the electorate.




Your keyboard needs rewiring. The correct spelling is  "M A L C O L M"


----------



## Tisme (27 June 2016)

pixel said:


> Your keyboard needs rewiring. The correct spelling is  "M A L C O L M"




MalCon ?


----------



## pixel (27 June 2016)

Tisme said:


> MalCon ?




Good one, Tisme 
That's an alternative spelling for the current caretaker-figurehead of the Abbott Government :1zhelp:


----------



## Tisme (27 June 2016)

pixel said:


> Good one, Tisme
> That's an alternative spelling for the current caretaker-figurehead of the Abbott Government :1zhelp:




It's not mine...been used on Twatter and Farcebook for some time.

If he gets beat, he will probably be sent packing by the lads.


----------



## pixel (27 June 2016)

Tisme said:


> If he gets beat, he will probably be sent packing by the lads.




Can't wait 
Although "Past Performance is not always a reliable indicator of future performance", he has displayed a strong trend towards "Con". Makes it damn hard to believe any one of his new promises and sound bytes. They appear designed to just get the Lib-Nat Reactionaries over the line. Afterwards, he would most likely continue to follow his Masters' orders.


----------



## CanOz (27 June 2016)

I could never figure how one could be Pro-stocks and yet still a labor voter...The two are diametrically opposed on so many levels....So hows that work? You are against big business but you like the dividends?


----------



## Tisme (27 June 2016)

pixel said:


> Can't wait
> Although "Past Performance is not always a reliable indicator of future performance", he has displayed a strong trend towards "Con". Makes it damn hard to believe any one of his new promises and sound bytes. They appear designed to just get the Lib-Nat Reactionaries over the line. Afterwards, he would most likely continue to follow his Masters' orders.




I think he means well, but he has prevaricated for a long time in his Communications portfolio while waiting for some skin in the game,so he likely to comfortable waiting out his party hostiles so he can get on with whatever the hell he stands for ...coz I don't know what he champions for the people except right wing dogma of anti ALP  venom.

Of course people who can't do always try to blame and inflict fear of others for their own lack of talent, that's why we feel uncomfortable watching it play out.

Donkey Vote Keating


----------



## dutchie (27 June 2016)

CanOz said:


> I could never figure how one could be Pro-stocks and yet still a labor voter...The two are diametrically opposed on so many levels....So hows that work? You are against big business but you like the dividends?




Typical Labor hypocrisy.


----------



## pixel (27 June 2016)

CanOz said:


> I could never figure how one could be Pro-stocks and yet still a labor voter...The two are diametrically opposed on so many levels....So hows that work? You are against big business but you like the dividends?




Methinks your confusion exists only when your vision is limited to Black and White (or Blue and Red).
Even in Black and White, you can have far more than 50 shades of Grey. Add colour, and the possibilities become endless.
Why does someone have to be "still a labor voter" when he disagrees with right-wing bias? At least in my case, it's definitely a non-sequitur. (btw, I also consider young Sarah Hansen full of green fluff.)
Why can't someone accept dividends from some companies he considers "ethical" (for want of a better word), yet oppose exploitation and unfairness practiced by other "Big Ones"?
And it's even possible to be in favour of a well-funded Health and Education system, yet at the same time oppose unwarranted handouts.


----------



## CanOz (27 June 2016)

pixel said:


> And it's even possible to be in favour of a well-funded Health and Education system, yet at the same time oppose unwarranted handouts.





Yeah i get that, i agree with paying taxes so we ALL can get access to great healthcare and education .I even don't mind paying for a few bludgers if that means allot of really needy people get help. 

I just don't believe that many fundamental value investors that vote labor are filtering their investments like you say you might be.

If its good value they're in...


----------



## overhang (27 June 2016)

CanOz said:


> I could never figure how one could be Pro-stocks and yet still a labor voter...The two are diametrically opposed on so many levels....So hows that work? You are against big business but you like the dividends?




Some people put society as a whole first before their own personal greed.  Personally I'm happy to take a reduced dividend if it means keeping low income workers being paid above the poverty line.  No it's not as black and white as that but either is suggesting that Labor are so opposed to investment as you seem to believe.


----------



## drsmith (27 June 2016)

A shift in the Sportsbet betting odds today in favour of the Coalition. It's now $1.10/$7.00.

The numbers in Labor's budget costings yesterday was another and perhaps the final nail in its coffin.


----------



## overhang (27 June 2016)

drsmith said:


> A shift in the Sportsbet betting odds today in favour of the Coalition. It's now $1.10/$7.00.
> 
> The numbers in Labor's budget costings yesterday was another and perhaps the final nail in its coffin.




They will need a Brexit like upset to pull off a win. 
$3.50 odds on hung parliament which equates to about a 30% chance of occurring, is still a possibility.


----------



## CanOz (27 June 2016)

drsmith said:


> A shift in the Sportsbet betting odds today in favour of the Coalition. It's now $1.10/$7.00.
> 
> The numbers in Labor's budget costings yesterday was another and perhaps the final nail in its coffin.




I might put 100 bucks on that...


----------



## drsmith (27 June 2016)

overhang said:


> $3.50 odds on hung parliament which equates to about a 30% chance of occurring, is still a possibility.



That's an interesting disparity.

In thinking who would support the government in the event of a hung parliament, I could only see Bob Katter as a likelihood.

Nick Xenophon's group is probably next should they get any lower house seats in SA but that's really hard to guess. Asylum policy may be a critical difference between the Libs and Nick here.

Rob Oakeshott says his first offer would be give Malcolm Turnbull first look but I don't have much trust as to which way he would go.

Tony Windsor and the Greens would support Labor. Cathy McGowan probably Labor as well given she ran against a high profile Lib candidate although in saying that, I haven't studied her policy positions.

In short, if the Coalition fall short by more than one seat, the likelihood increasingly favours Labor forming government in a hung parliament. Labor, despite what it says, would crawl back into bed with the Greens to form government if it had to but the signing ceremony would probably be conducted in private.

What's very debatable for the Coalition at the moment is whether it will get the combined numbers in both houses to pass their DD bills. This is what the Coalition will be aiming and need to get in my view.

EDIT:

I forgot Mr Pokies in Tasmania.

He'd probably support Labor again.


----------



## CanOz (27 June 2016)

CanOz said:


> I might put 100 bucks on that...




i put $40 bucks on Labor to win...something to help the depression in case it comes true...


----------



## Knobby22 (27 June 2016)

drsmith said:


> That's an interesting disparity.
> 
> In thinking who would support the government in the event of a hung parliament, I could only see Bob Katter as a likelihood.
> 
> ...




Cathy McGowen would be committing political suicide if she supported the Libs but she might given a decent carrot (i.e. hospital upgrade). I can't really see it happening though.

Xenaphon will win a few seats and may become powerbrokers. I think he would rather not be in the situation.

We all know the others will support Labor except Bob Katter who might not even make it.
If we end up with a rag tag of Independants, Greens and Labor again then God help us. I could stomach some Independents and Labor but the Greens are just too divisive. They will demand blood from Labor. Labor knows they are out to get them.

In fact it would be in Labor's interest to force another election in the near term to get them off their backs.


----------



## Tisme (27 June 2016)

CanOz said:


> i put $40 bucks on Labor to win...something to help the depression in case it comes true...




Might be a tidy pickup for you


----------



## dutchie (27 June 2016)

Tisme said:


> Might be a tidy pickup for you




$40 + winnings, won't help much if Labor get in.


----------



## Tisme (28 June 2016)

I was reading this article http://tinyurl.com/jl9oaam and I don't know if  I agree or not. I have had boomer friends from far and wide, with traditionally intractable political allegiance to Labs or Libs, calling me to discuss the dilemma of conscience they are battling by intending to vote outside their comfort zone.

Of course I'm an old hand at voting for whoever I feel best serves the national, state or local interests so I have become somewhat a magnet to those friends taking their baby steps into new territory.


----------



## SirRumpole (28 June 2016)

Tisme said:


> I was reading this article http://tinyurl.com/jl9oaam and I don't know if  I agree or not. I have had boomer friends from far and wide, with traditionally intractable political allegiance to Labs or Libs, calling me to discuss the dilemma of conscience they are battling by intending to vote outside their comfort zone.
> 
> Of course I'm an old hand at voting for whoever I feel best serves the national, state or local interests so I have become somewhat a magnet to those friends taking their baby steps into new territory.




With a generally aging society you would expect that traditionalism and Conservatism would generally prevail in politics.

This has been seen with the referendum vote and the usual trend towards Liberal governments eg 27 years of Menzies , 11 years of Howard, Bjelke Petersen's long dalliance in Qld, Askin et al in NSW.

Reds under the Bed have always been the staple diet that the Libs fed to the masses, and some still do, but that's wearing very thin these days, although it has forced a move to the right from Labor which is far less Whitlamesque these days.

The two major parties are a blob to the voters with few clear boundaries between them, no matter how hard they try to emphasis differences. It's no wonder that the electorate is confused, with about 30% expected to vote for neither major party.

Personally I think that's a good thing. I'm in a safe seat and I don't plan on helping to make it safer. Politicians ignore safe seats and take us for granted. Well stuff them I say.


----------



## Logique (28 June 2016)

drsmith said:


> That's an interesting disparity.
> 
> In thinking who would support the government in the event of a hung parliament, I could only see Bob Katter as a likelihood.
> 
> ...



Not a bad analysis Doc. 

The Member for Indi knows on which side her bread is buttered. It would take a lot to make her side with the Coalition. As for Mr 17 Minutes...who knows?

The Senate outcome will be fascinating. I see governmental inertia as a likely outcome. Plenty of voters will vote the opposite way in the upper house.


----------



## basilio (28 June 2016)

Well we certainly know we are in election fever.!!  It's raining mud out there.

1) The Nationals have come out with an exquisitely crafted ad showing two women talking about Tony Windsor as if he was a previous unfaithful lover.  Absolutely pitch perfect in terms of crafting him as a unfaithful chancer. 
*Of course* the ad had nothing to do with Tony 's personal behaviours but was purely about politics.....

2) News Ltd has managed to find someone to trash Tony Windsor as a schoolyard bully back in the 1960's.  
*Front Page *news.  Full bells and whistles. 

How much truth  is there here ?  Is it actually relevant in any way ?  Does anyone care as long as the mud is sticky enough and somehow, somehow Tony can be blasted out of this election.


----------



## drsmith (28 June 2016)

What the government needs to win in order to secure a majority for a joint sitting,



> ABC election analyst Antony Green predicts the coalition will win 32 of the 76 Senate seats on July 2, meaning the coalition will need to win at least 82 seats in House of Representatives to assure at least 114 votes in a joint sitting.
> 
> The coalition currently holds 90 seats in the 150-seat Lower House.




https://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/wa/a/31932042/howard-sets-turnbull-double-goal/#stop

That equates to a buffer of 8 seats the government can lose in the Reps on Saturday.


----------



## dutchie (28 June 2016)

You would think with today's technology that the reporters questions, at a live media conference, could be heard. Most of the time they can't.

(dumb a*ses)


----------



## SirRumpole (28 June 2016)

Political attack ads don't work study finds.


http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-06-...-campaign-ads-are-driving-voters-away/7551216


----------



## explod (28 June 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Political attack ads don't work study finds.
> 
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-06-...-campaign-ads-are-driving-voters-away/7551216




Deliberate so that answer can be made to suit that of the questioned. 

Yes having the opposite effect.   Result Saturday could shock. 

But we'll see.


----------



## Tisme (28 June 2016)

Gina looking after her bestboy:

https://www.buzzfeed.com/ginarushto...puty-pm-scor?utm_term=.ck1ZkZNWqa#.vkpYKYLWlb


----------



## pixel (29 June 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Political attack ads don't work study finds.
> 
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-06-...-campaign-ads-are-driving-voters-away/7551216




I feel put-off the most by the one commercial, "authorised by x.Nutt" that claims any vote for Labor, Greens, or Minor parties is wasted because it leads to the chaos of a hung parliament. Channel Nine has been showing it to nauseating saturation, and it drives me Nutts. *What arrogance!* 

Likewise MalCon's claims that only the Libs are fit to govern.

I find those statements utterly condescending, and thus riling.

Good to read that it's apparently not my fault or particular bad taste.


----------



## Tisme (29 June 2016)

Courier Mail push polling on its front cover today .....  hard to take a trashy paper seriously.


----------



## qldfrog (29 June 2016)

explod said:


> Deliberate so that answer can be made to suit that of the questioned.
> 
> Yes having the opposite effect.   Result Saturday could shock.
> 
> But we'll see.



I genuinely would not have voted for the local LNP candidate, until i got really fed up with the BS in relentless labour ads about the "Medicare privatisation".But with mandatory voting in Oz, it is better to target the dumb and dumbers with stupid slogans/scare campaign than formulate proper policies


----------



## Tisme (29 June 2016)

qldfrog said:


> I genuinely would not have voted for the local LNP candidate, until i got really fed up with the BS in relentless labour ads about the "Medicare privatisation".But with mandatory voting in Oz, it is better to target the dumb and dumbers with stupid slogans/scare campaign than formulate proper policies




It's mood of the people stuff qldfrog. 50% of the people do believe the LNP will sell of Medicare in one way or another and there will be a lot more than that when the those that are undecided and those rusted on to LNP propaganda are factored in. 

I for one don't believe a leopard can change his spots and the LNP never supported govt underpinned universal health care, although prior some states did their best with hospital cover through lotteries, etc.


----------



## Tisme (29 June 2016)

Very disappointed in Julie Bishop reverting back to Labor smearing in her interview with Emma last night. She ramshackled herself after putting on a veneer of maturity for a short while, only to gravitate down to the kindergarten mess of spit and snot.... bet she doesn't bad mouth foreign diplomats like that.

Is anyone going to stand up and put forward a case of why for rather than balancing it with a case of why not? If a salesman persisted in talking down the competition, a consumer would invariably seek to find out why the other is such a menace of strength.


----------



## SirRumpole (29 June 2016)

Tisme said:


> I for one don't believe a leopard can change his spots and the LNP never supported govt underpinned universal health care, although prior some states did their best with hospital cover through lotteries, etc.




Indeed. Socialised medicine is a Labor invention and it's in the Liberal's DNA to tear it down rather than admit it's a good idea.

If it was Turnbull himself I think Medicare would be safe, but how long will he last ?

He is part of the government that proposed the co payment and increased charges for diagnostics, so I don't completely trust him either.


----------



## pixel (29 June 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Indeed. Socialised medicine is a Labor invention and it's in the Liberal's DNA to tear it down rather than admit it's a good idea.
> 
> If it was Turnbull himself I think Medicare would be safe, but how long will he last ?
> 
> He is part of the government that proposed the co payment and increased charges for diagnostics, so I don't completely trust him either.




It's not only diagnostics. The LNP barstuds have also dismantled the NDSS, a nation-wide support scheme for Diabetics which ensured that people suffering from Diabetes could test their blood sugar levels regularly. Some patients have to do that before and after each meal in order to adjust the dose of their medication.


----------



## trainspotter (29 June 2016)

Tisme said:


> If a salesman persisted in talking down the competition, a consumer would invariably seek to find out why the other is such a menace of strength.




Salesmanship 101:- "Never put your competitor down to make your product look good"

Politicking 101:- "Slander every one on the other side of the bench like a 2 year old having a fit in a crowded supermarket"


----------



## Tisme (29 June 2016)

trainspotter said:


> Salesmanship 101:- "Never put your competitor down to make your product look good"
> 
> Politicking 101:- "Slander every one on the other side of the bench like a 2 year old having a fit in a crowded supermarket"





 Love it


----------



## CanOz (29 June 2016)

pixel said:


> It's not only diagnostics. The LNP barstuds have also dismantled the NDSS, a nation-wide support scheme for Diabetics which ensured that people suffering from Diabetes could test their blood sugar levels regularly. Some patients have to do that before and after each meal in order to adjust the dose of their medication.




How bloody difficult is that to do? ITs like $100 pocket calculator and some strips?? Why does that need to be subsidized?


----------



## overhang (29 June 2016)

CanOz said:


> How bloody difficult is that to do? ITs like $100 pocket calculator and some strips?? Why does that need to be subsidized?




Is it really going to save money or are we just going to have more diabetics in ED with insulin shock and further burden the system?


----------



## overhang (29 June 2016)

drsmith said:


> That's an interesting disparity.
> 
> In thinking who would support the government in the event of a hung parliament, I could only see Bob Katter as a likelihood.
> 
> ...




Pretty good analysis, in a parallel universe somewhere I'd love this to occur to see how it plays out, especially Xenophon and Oakeshott but for the sake of our country I really hope we don't end up with a hung parliament again.  I hope whoever wins can govern in their own right.


----------



## SirRumpole (29 June 2016)

overhang said:


> Pretty good analysis, in a parallel universe somewhere I'd love this to occur to see how it plays out, especially Xenophon and Oakeshott but for the sake of our country I really hope we don't end up with a hung parliament again.  I hope whoever wins can govern in their own right.




A government can only govern in its own right if it controls the Senate as well as the Reps.

I can't see that happening can you ?


----------



## overhang (29 June 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> A government can only govern in its own right if it controls the Senate as well as the Reps.
> 
> I can't see that happening can you ?




It's out of reach for Labor but certainly a possibility for the coalition all though I don't think it will happen.


----------



## overhang (29 June 2016)

It just boggles my mind that the coalition are so comfortable wasting several hundred million on a plebiscite only to have a conscious vote anyway.  Why the hell don't they save a few hundred million and just have the conscious vote?  It is the prefect example that the right wing nutters like Bernardi have far too much influence over the party room that they choose ideology over fiscal responsibility.


----------



## pixel (29 June 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> A government can only govern in its own right if it controls the Senate as well as the Reps.
> 
> I can't see that happening can you ?




For those of us old enough to have been taught a modicum of History: It happened in Germany in 1933. That election was preceded by a wave of partisan propaganda, vilifying the opposition and demanding safe borders and "Lebensraum".

Considering the possibility of "that happening" here and now scares the metabolic waste out of me. :1zhelp:


----------



## pixel (29 June 2016)

CanOz said:


> How bloody difficult is that to do? ITs like $100 pocket calculator and some strips?? Why does that need to be subsidized?




Wrong!
They give you the pocket calculator for free, but charge 60c for a strip. 
Ever done the sums and figured $3.60/day as a percentage of a Centrtelink pension?


----------



## Knobby22 (29 June 2016)

overhang said:


> It just boggles my mind that the coalition are so comfortable wasting several hundred million on a plebiscite only to have a conscious vote anyway.  Why the hell don't they save a few hundred million and just have the conscious vote?  It is the prefect example that the right wing nutters like Bernardi have far too much influence over the party room that they choose ideology over fiscal responsibility.




If we don't have a plebiscite, we will have instead political arguments. If it gets through then the arguments will continue and we will have politicians on both sides causing trouble. if we have a plebiscite, like Ireland did, it ends the issue. 

From SBS http://www.sbs.com.au/topics/sexuality/article/2016/01/28/comment-case-marriage-plebiscite

_Over recent years the same-sex marriage movement in Australia has focused its energy on lobbying politicians. Just last year Australian Marriage Equality released its ‘new’ strategy, focusing its energies on shifting the eight votes needed to pass a bill in Parliament. These strategies continue to fail, largely because our focus sits in the wrong place. Instead of focusing on backroom lobbying we should be looking to our local communities.

This is the potential power of a plebiscite. A plebiscite puts marriage onto the national agenda and makes it one we have to deal with street-by-street. It means we can put our energy into championing queer campaigners and allies in local communities, empowering people to be local advocates for change. It means we can organise to tackle homophobia and transphobia as it exists at a local level ”” whether it is young kids facing discrimination in schools or trans people facing the threat of violence on the streets.

Most importantly it means that we can embarrass the government by showing them that our community does support our rights ”” and it does so with a huge margin. This will cut short the attacks of those such as Abetz and Bernardi, which will be quite important as we move forward with our agenda. I understand people’s concerns about the anti-gay hate that may come, but change is difficult and often painful. _


----------



## overhang (29 June 2016)

Knobby22 said:


> If we don't have a plebiscite, we will have instead political arguments. If it gets through then the arguments will continue and we will have politicians on both sides causing trouble. if we have a plebiscite, like Ireland did, it ends the issue.




We're going to have political arguments even if we go ahead with the plebiscite, it is going to get very personal and turn elements of society against each other.  And then if it wins to a lesser degree it will happen again in parliament leading up to the free vote.  The numbers suggest that it already has the numbers if the coalition allow a free vote.  The plebiscite will just waste tax payer dollars and cause the ugly side of society to rear it's head all to reach the same result as allowing a free vote now.


----------



## Knobby22 (29 June 2016)

overhang said:


> We're going to have political arguments even if we go ahead with the plebiscite, it is going to get very personal and turn elements of society against each other.  And then if it wins to a lesser degree it will happen again in parliament leading up to the free vote.  The numbers suggest that it already has the numbers if the coalition allow a free vote.  The plebiscite will just waste tax payer dollars and cause the ugly side of society to rear it's head all to reach the same result as allowing a free vote now.




If the result is conclusive, the result will carry in parliament. Politicians generally agree with Democracy. Sure we have a few retrobates like Bernardi holding firm but what is, say 5 votes out the total. It will be game over rather than lets keep whinging about it for another 10 years.


----------



## SirRumpole (29 June 2016)

overhang said:


> We're going to have political arguments even if we go ahead with the plebiscite, it is going to get very personal and turn elements of society against each other.  And then if it wins to a lesser degree it will happen again in parliament leading up to the free vote.  The numbers suggest that it already has the numbers if the coalition allow a free vote.  The plebiscite will just waste tax payer dollars and cause the ugly side of society to rear it's head all to reach the same result as allowing a free vote now.




A plebiscite should be held ASAP. It could and should have been held at this election.

There are no great matters of law to consider, most people have already made up their minds and talking about it for months won't do any good.

Just get it over with, I'm sick of hearing about SSM, it's not an issue for most people.


----------



## noco (29 June 2016)

overhang said:


> It just boggles my mind that the coalition are so comfortable wasting several hundred million on a plebiscite only to have a conscious vote anyway.  Why the hell don't they save a few hundred million and just have the conscious vote?  It is the prefect example that the right wing nutters like Bernardi have far too much influence over the party room that they choose ideology over fiscal responsibility.




Bill Shorten was keen on a plebiscite in 2013 but has back flipped in 2016.....Not surprising really......Shorten does a back flip every time he changes his under pants.


----------



## noco (29 June 2016)

Tisme said:


> It's mood of the people stuff qldfrog. 50% of the people do believe the LNP will sell of Medicare in one way or another and there will be a lot more than that when the those that are undecided and those rusted on to LNP propaganda are factored in.
> 
> I for one don't believe a leopard can change his spots and the LNP never supported govt underpinned universal health care, although prior some states did their best with hospital cover through lotteries, etc.





On the Bolt Report on Sky News last night Michael Krogan offered a $10,000 bet with Stephen Conroy that if the Liberals sold of Medicare, Krogan would donate the $10,000 to a charity nominated by Conroy.......When Conroy was asked to match it, Conroy chickened out.....So how confident is Conroy...What a coward!!!!

I don't know where you got your 50% from......Maybe 50% of voters in Shortens electorate.

When Labor leader Beattie came into power in Queensland, he sold off the goose that laid the golden egg to maintain our hospitals.....Yes he sold the Golden Casket for $599,000


----------



## overhang (29 June 2016)

Knobby22 said:


> If the result is conclusive, the result will carry in parliament. Politicians generally agree with Democracy. Sure we have a few retrobates like Bernardi holding firm but what is, say 5 votes out the total. It will be game over rather than lets keep whinging about it for another 10 years.




I agree it will but the point is the numbers suggest that a free vote now will allow it to be passed so why waste in excess of 160 million to achieve the same outcome?  And it's not a good look to allow politicians to see what democracy wants and then allow them to vote against democracy.


----------



## CanOz (29 June 2016)

pixel said:


> Wrong!
> They give you the pocket calculator for free, but charge 60c for a strip.
> Ever done the sums and figured $3.60/day as a percentage of a Centrtelink pension?




Ok, i'm all for paying for that for someone on Centerlink. I'm not for paying for that for someone like me, or anyone else that can afford it. Why should i have to subsidize someone else's medical supplies, if they can afford it? 

Why isn't this stuff not means tested? To me its simple, if you're on a pension, you should get as much support as you need. 

The PBS is a great scheme, i would vote to keep that. I'm happy to pay for my pathology, radiology etc., but i do appreciate a helping hand with it.


----------



## Tisme (29 June 2016)

noco said:


> I don't know where you got your 50% from......




Not keeping up with the various polls this morning Noco?


----------



## Tisme (29 June 2016)

noco said:


> On the Bolt Report on Sky News last night Michael Krogan offered a $10,000 bet with Stephen Conroy that if the Liberals sold of Medicare, Krogan would donate the $10,000 to a charity nominated by Conroy.......




Why would Krogan even consider a charity receiving his pocket change if there wasn't a possibility of a wrinkle? Insufficient confidence interval right there.

Conroy should have broadened the scope to the Libs dismantling Medicare, not selling it but merely making it disappear.

I personally do not gamble and wouldn't take the bet on those grounds.


----------



## noco (29 June 2016)

Tisme said:


> Why would Krogan even consider a charity receiving his pocket change if there wasn't a possibility of a wrinkle? Insufficient confidence interval right there.
> 
> Conroy should have broadened the scope to the Libs dismantling Medicare, not selling it but merely making it disappear.
> 
> I personally do not gamble and wouldn't take the bet on those grounds.




I guess we will just have to wait and see who right and who is wrong.


----------



## Tisme (29 June 2016)

noco said:


> I guess we will just have to wait and see who right and who is wrong.




I'd rather we all made sure it was a lock for any party to leave it alone, party loyalties aside. That way we would be spared the issue next time around.


----------



## noco (29 June 2016)

Tisme said:


> I'd rather we all made sure it was a lock for any party to leave it alone, party loyalties aside. That way we would be spared the issue next time around.




Have you gone to sleep at the wheel?

Turnbull has given an iron clad guarantee......It will never be sold...Anyway who would want to buy a business that is running at a loss?.....Medicare hands out $24 billion yearly and recoups $10 billion,,

What should be happening is the levy should be increased to keep up with medical cost just as the private health fund does.

I wish you and the Green/Labor coalition would get over it.


----------



## Tisme (29 June 2016)

noco said:


> Have you gone to sleep at the wheel?
> 
> Turnbull has given an iron clad guarantee......It will never be sold...Anyway who would want to buy a business that is running at a loss?.....Medicare hands out $24 billion yearly and recoups $10 billion,,
> 
> ...





I don't believe Malcolm talks for the future....nor does at least half the population. It's not his call to make policy in perpetuity. Perhaps Malcolm would put his entire fortune up for that bet, just like Kroger should have....perhaps you are willing to put everything you have up for a wager...I'm sure someone here has enough to cover it.


----------



## Tisme (29 June 2016)

So Pauline is ranting on Farcebook about the dams (Lake Tinaroo and the Burdekin Dam) in QLD being put up for sale to the Chinese and Bill Shorten should be doing something about it instead of trapping Malcolm into retention of Medicare.

Any thoughts about paying the Chinese for water? The water in Brisbane is/was owned by a Swiss/Austrian mob after Jim Soorley sold it off and metering was installed (previously water was free).


----------



## Smurf1976 (29 June 2016)

noco said:


> Turnbull has given an iron clad guarantee......It will never be sold...




Just as previous governments guaranteed that all sorts of things wouldn't happen until they inevitably did.

Arguments for or against the underlying issue aside, I never take "guarantees" from politicians to be worth anything at all. They're just a means to get the required support at the time and are quickly forgotten after the deal is done.


----------



## drsmith (29 June 2016)

Sportsbet odds have blown further in the government's favour with sworn in government now at $1.08/$8.00. Hung parliament is at $1.15/$5.00. The latter was $1.27/$3.50 (or thereabouts) yesterday.

William Bowe (Poll Bludger) today updated the graph of the betting market implied probability of a Coalition win,





https://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/2016/06/29/bludgertrack-50-9-49-1-coalition/


----------



## drsmith (29 June 2016)

NT News,



> Burt the psychic crocodile picks Turnbull Coalition to win federal election.




http://www.ntnews.com.au/news/north...n/news-story/17d6edba6884f007e4d027b844ced2e4

Disclaimer:
THE brain of a 5m Territory saltie is about the size of a walnut.


----------



## sptrawler (29 June 2016)

drsmith said:


> Sportsbet odds have blown further in the government's favour with sworn in government now at $1.08/$8.00. Hung parliament is at $1.15/$5.00. The latter was $1.27/$3.50 (or thereabouts) yesterday.
> 
> William Bowe (Poll Bludger) today updated the graph of the betting market implied probability of a Coalition win,
> 
> ...




Yes I'm detecting a bit of panic and hysteria, in some posts.


----------



## Tisme (30 June 2016)

Time to work out my Senate Voting sheet:

https://www.finder.com.au/senate-voting-card-creator


----------



## qldfrog (30 June 2016)

Tisme said:


> Time to work out my Senate Voting sheet:
> 
> https://www.finder.com.au/senate-voting-card-creator




great thanks


----------



## dutchie (30 June 2016)

Vote for Labor or the Coalition.

Make sure that the winner has a majority in both houses.


----------



## Tisme (30 June 2016)

dutchie said:


> Vote for Labor or the Coalition.
> 
> Make sure that the winner has a majority in both houses.




That would be a novelty for me...I haven't done that for decades ...although there was this one time when the Liberal candidate had a really hot wife ..........:casanova:


----------



## SirRumpole (30 June 2016)

Tisme said:


> Time to work out my Senate Voting sheet:
> 
> https://www.finder.com.au/senate-voting-card-creator




I tried that and it showed me something completely different to what I chose.

It must be a Liberal Party invention.


----------



## Tisme (30 June 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> I tried that and it showed me something completely different to what I chose.
> 
> It must be a Liberal Party invention.




Was it he Health Australia Party that is really a sham anti inoculation group of whackos?


----------



## SirRumpole (30 June 2016)

Tisme said:


> Was it he Health Australia Party that is really a sham anti inoculation group of whackos?




They seem to support "natural medicine" but don't appear anti vaccination per se.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-06-28/health-australia-party-raises-ire-of-ama/7550684


----------



## drsmith (30 June 2016)

Fairfax piece on the betting odds,



> "We've had three times the number of punters betting on Labor," Mr Bulmer says. "But the big money's coming for the Coalition. Three, four, five figure bets are coming in for the Coalition on a regular basis."




http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...s-odds-blow-out--but-why-20160629-gpv45x.html


----------



## pixel (30 June 2016)

drsmith said:


> Fairfax piece on the betting odds,
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...s-odds-blow-out--but-why-20160629-gpv45x.html




Punters are always right, aren't they?
Just think of the poor misguided St Kilda supporters who put a few Dollars on their team beating Sydney. Can't remember what odds were offered, but 99% of the money was behind Sydney. Who turned out losers. :


----------



## Tisme (30 June 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> I tried that and it showed me something completely different to what I chose.
> 
> It must be a Liberal Party invention.




Mine worked. I couldn't figure out why I only selected 6 and was over 12 already, until I put my glasses on and saw the number of candidates per party


----------



## SirRumpole (30 June 2016)

pixel said:


> Punters are always right, aren't they?
> Just think of the poor misguided St Kilda supporters who put a few Dollars on their team beating Sydney. Can't remember what odds were offered, but 99% of the money was behind Sydney. Who turned out losers. :




As a Swans supporter I take umbrage at that.

Saints actually beat Geelong 93-90.


----------



## pixel (30 June 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> As a Swans supporter I take umbrage at that.
> 
> Saints actually beat Geelong 93-90.




oops!  You're right, Sir. Geelong it was indeed. However, I got the rest right.


----------



## GalaxyNexus (30 June 2016)

It seems that Labor is getting desperate with a couple of days to go. In the past day or so I've been getting lots of YouTube ads including the mediscare (quite blatantly lying kind too) and fake tradies. Not that Turnbull have much of a plan, but I can't see Labor having any plans either, other than the scare campaigning.


----------



## pixel (30 June 2016)

GalaxyNexus said:


> It seems that Labor is getting desperate with a couple of days to go. In the past day or so I've been getting lots of YouTube ads including the mediscare (quite blatantly lying kind too) and fake tradies. Not that Turnbull have much of a plan, but I can't see Labor having any plans either, other than the scare campaigning.




You can always vote for a PUP :1zhelp:


----------



## Tisme (1 July 2016)

Bit of relief:

http://iview.abc.net.au/programs/sammy-js-playground-politics/LE1525V001S00


----------



## pixel (1 July 2016)

Tisme said:


> Bit of relief:
> 
> http://iview.abc.net.au/programs/sammy-js-playground-politics/LE1525V001S00




*Happy New Year to all.*

May the old FY leave you happy, healthy, and prosperous.
May the New FY make you even happier, healthier, and prosperouser!

And regarding tomorrow's Election: Do the right thing! It's the only option left to us voters.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RISC30NdrJ8


----------



## Logique (1 July 2016)

Thank you Pixel.

I'm still reeling from this announcement from a Fairfax masthead this morning.



> *Malcolm Turnbull-led Coalition offers economic and social reform* - July 1, 2016
> 
> The Coalition has done enough to be trusted on jobs and growth.
> SMH: http://www.smh.com.au/comment/smh-e...ial-reform-20160629-gpv218.html#ixzz4D6m7JaAh
> ...


----------



## SirRumpole (1 July 2016)

What social reform would that be ?

Any ideas, anyone ?

These announcements by papers often have the opposite effect to what is intended, people don't like being told how to vote and often just say "stuff you Murdoch, Fairfax, ABC whoever. I'll vote the way I want".

I believe an Ipsos poll had Labor ahead 51-49.

Whatever the result, Shorten has done a great job to get that close. Maybe he deserves to go all the way.


----------



## wayneL (1 July 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> What social reform would that be ?
> 
> Any ideas, anyone ?
> 
> .




Dismantling the Orwellian nanny state?


----------



## pixel (1 July 2016)

wayneL said:


> Dismantling the Orwellian nanny state?




Careful! Big Brother will keep your meta data on file and may jail you if he doesn't like your attitude.


----------



## Knobby22 (1 July 2016)

Logique said:


> Thank you Pixel.
> 
> I'm still reeling from this announcement from a Fairfax masthead this morning.




A well written correct judgement. Newscorp will hate that. How dare Fairfax show they are independent!


----------



## CanOz (1 July 2016)

Sums it up in a sentence....



> A Coalition led by the socially progressive economic reformer Mr Turnbull, and a Shorten-led Labor party backed by reform-resistant unions.....
> 
> Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/comment/smh-e...ial-reform-20160629-gpv218.html#ixzz4D74G5GvO
> Follow us: @smh on Twitter | sydneymorningherald on Facebook


----------



## overhang (1 July 2016)

wayneL said:


> Dismantling the Orwellian nanny state?




The coalition government has entrenched us further into an Orwellian state.  Meta data retention, secrecy behind their immigration program, banning journalists from visiting Manus island detention facilities, preventing which gender consenting adults can and can't marry, appointing the policy director from the right wing IPA as the Human rights Commissioner, appointing the "children overboard" Phillip Ruddock as the special envoy to the UN Human Rights Commission.  

Luckily most this occurred under the dictatorship of Abbott and frankly I don't see Turnbull subjecting us to his ideology like Abbott did.


----------



## overhang (1 July 2016)

Most daily papers backing Turnbull government for another term.  Of course the biased Murdoch is no surprise but most the Fairfax tabloids too back Turnbull, The Guardian haven't backed either party believing that their readers can think for themselves.


----------



## Knobby22 (1 July 2016)

overhang said:


> , The Guardian haven't backed either party believing that their readers can think for themselves.




They did, they chose -the Greens/Labor.

....in our view the Coalition’s offerings are thin, Labor’s go a long way towards a progressive program, and false threats of looming “chaos” should not deter voters from choosing the Greens, or other candidates with a plausible, fair agenda.

Sure a bit vague but clear enough.


----------



## drsmith (1 July 2016)

drsmith said:


> Sportsbet odds have blown further in the government's favour with sworn in government now at $1.08/$8.00. Hung parliament is at $1.15/$5.00. The latter was $1.27/$3.50 (or thereabouts) yesterday.



Latest polls are between 50/50 and 51/49 in favour of the Coalition. No change in Sportsbet's sworn in government odds above but hung parliament has narrowed slightly to $1.22/$4.00. 2PP betting has also narrowed slightly from a result just above 51/49 to one just below 51/49. That's in favour of the Coalition.


----------



## overhang (1 July 2016)

Knobby22 said:


> They did, they chose -the Greens/Labor.
> 
> ....in our view the Coalition’s offerings are thin, Labor’s go a long way towards a progressive program, and false threats of looming “chaos” should not deter voters from choosing the Greens, or other candidates with a plausible, fair agenda.
> 
> Sure a bit vague but clear enough.



You left out the key part of the quote


> Guardian Australia readers are able to reach their own conclusions. But in our view.....




I wouldn't call it endorsement, clearly it leans that way though.


----------



## overhang (1 July 2016)

drsmith said:


> Latest polls are between 50/50 and 51/49 in favour of the Coalition. No change in Sportsbet's sworn in government odds above but hung parliament has narrowed slightly to $1.22/$4.00. 2PP betting has also narrowed slightly from a result just above 51/49 to one just below 51/49. That's in favour of the Coalition.




I feel there is good value on Labor at 8-1, I don't think they'll win but for punters they're a better chance than 8-1 which presents value.  The LNP were a $1.01 in last years shock loss in Queensland so upsets certainly can happen in Australian politics.


----------



## drsmith (1 July 2016)

A symptom of an 8-week campaign ?

It's exciting stuff on the ABC's live election blog.



> The PM crosses the road in Burwood
> 
> 10:20 AM - 1 Jul 2016 .


----------



## Tisme (1 July 2016)

Well another of my mates who ran as recently as 10ish years ago for the ALP is broadcasting his intent to boycott the majors. 

That's a fair few I know protest voting (if they don't whimp out) and suggests to me there could be some upsets which should provide a little entertainment throughout tomorrow evening.


----------



## CanOz (1 July 2016)

Knobby22 said:


> They did, they chose -the Greens/Labor.
> 
> ....in our view the Coalition’s offerings are thin, Labor’s go a long way towards a progressive program, and false threats of looming “chaos” should not deter voters from choosing the Greens, or other candidates with a plausible, fair agenda.
> 
> Sure a bit vague but clear enough.




overhang sounds like Bill Shorten....lol Lies, Lies Lies...need the ABC fact checker on overhang!


----------



## overhang (1 July 2016)

CanOz said:


> overhang sounds like Bill Shorten....lol Lies, Lies Lies...need the ABC fact checker on overhang!



Not sure how I lied, at no point do The Guardian actually endorse a party or independent but state what they believe the options are.  If you paid more attention to ABC fact check though you may learn a thing or two about the coalition which you speak so highly of.


----------



## Knobby22 (1 July 2016)

overhang said:


> I feel there is good value on Labor at 8-1, I don't think they'll win but for punters they're a better chance than 8-1 which presents value.  The LNP were a $1.01 in last years shock loss in Queensland so upsets certainly can happen in Australian politics.




I agree.
Polling is not as accurate as it once was. Some people don't have house phones, less people vote, etc.


----------



## SirRumpole (1 July 2016)

Knobby22 said:


> I agree.
> Polling is not as accurate as it once was. Some people don't have house phones, less people vote, etc.




And a lot of people don't make up their mind untill they are in the booth.

I have a feeling that maybe some of those surveyed may give false answers because they are sick of it all or don't like being bothered by phone pollers.


----------



## So_Cynical (1 July 2016)

For the first time ever im a swing voter - or at least very much undecided...still don't know.


----------



## trainspotter (1 July 2016)

30% will vote for minorities as the people in the Gulag are sick of both Labs and Libs and we will end up with a (hamstrung) hung parliament kowtowing to the tin foil hat brigade


----------



## pixel (1 July 2016)

Knobby22 said:


> I agree.
> Polling is not as accurate as it once was. Some people don't have house phones, less people vote, etc.




hmm that's a good point, Knobby.
The young progressive crowd are ditching landlines altogether. Those that still stick with copper could, on average, be considered more conservative, especially if the haven't put a "Do Not Call" block on their number. There is also less mobile coverage in the backwoods, giving the dyed-in-the-wool National voters no choice but to stick with the old steam phone.

All of that could indeed combine to shift the bias towards one side of the spectrum.


----------



## CanOz (1 July 2016)

overhang said:


> Not sure how I lied, at no point do The Guardian actually endorse a party or independent but state what they believe the options are.  If you paid more attention to ABC fact check though you may learn a thing or two about the coalition which you speak so highly of.




The LNP was slightly better than the LABs, Labs are a little better at lying...


----------



## SirRumpole (1 July 2016)

CanOz said:


> The LNP was slightly better than the LABs, Labs are a little better at lying...




I think Tony Abbott has proven that statement incorrect.


----------



## CanOz (1 July 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> I think Tony Abbott has proven that statement incorrect.




Tony who? He's not a leader anymore...obviously a good reason.


----------



## SirRumpole (1 July 2016)

CanOz said:


> Tony who? He's not a leader anymore...obviously a good reason.




It's not what they say before an election that counts, it's what they do after it.

Both sides have bad form in that area.


----------



## CanOz (1 July 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> It's not what they say before an election that counts, it's what they do after it.
> 
> Both sides have bad form in that area.




Of course, its politics. Telling the truth, executing the over-promises, is not in the job description Yet somehow we're still surprised when our elected officials let us down. It seems its even worse across the globe now than its ever been...


----------



## noco (1 July 2016)

I watched David Spears on Sky News interviewing some 12 undecided voters.

I could not believe how naive and out of touch they were with politics on the eve of an election after 8 weeks of hammering through the media.

Spears held up photos of various politicians one at a time.

A photo of Di Natalie was exhibited and it was the 9th person out of 12 asked who eventually recognized who he was.

A photo of Chris Bowen was shown and one woman said "Oh he looks a nice man...I would probably vote for him"...Doesn't matter what he stands for. 

Turnbull was classed as arrogant......Shorten was classed as fluffy and untruthful.

But the one who received the most accolades was Tony Abbott.....All thought the same in that he had been badly treated and should still be Prime Minister......Regarded  as a straight shooter.

There was really only one 60 year old man who was able confer on the policies of the major parties.

It was an eye opener as to how people think.


----------



## CanOz (1 July 2016)

noco said:


> I watched David Spears on Sky News interviewing some 12 undecided voters.
> 
> I could not believe how naive and out of touch they were with politics on the eve of an election after 8 weeks of hammering through the media.
> 
> ...




Great post Noco and so true in this day. I was brought up with politics in the family discussion so i generally always listened and read the news regarding politics. I'm no boomer, more x gen and honestly i think the parties are reaping what they sow....indecision, partisanship, status quo...milk it for everything you can. All around the globe, people are sick and tired of no change, but the change they thirst for leads to nationalism and fear.


----------



## noco (1 July 2016)

This also worth a read.

https://everaldcompton.com/2016/07/01/the-political-disconnect/

*On election eve, I have belatedly come to the reluctant conclusion that politicians and voters actually live in totally different worlds which are light years apart.

In reality, the gap between people and the political establishment is huge, so much so that few will disagree with me when I say that politicians appear to be dwelling on a remote planet that has no affinity to the rest of us.

Even more glaringly obvious is the fact that, despite a seemingly endless campaign, neither Turnbull nor Shorten has hit the trigger that switches on voters. Indeed, they have actually switched us off with their childish fear tactics and patronising policies that are designed to buy our loyalty.*
Read more.


----------



## SirRumpole (1 July 2016)

noco said:


> It was an eye opener as to how people think.




Or don't think more like it.

The incredible ignorance/stupidity of some people is mind boggling, but not surprising. Judging by "man in the street" interviews by current affairs programs a lot of people just don't have a clue about the parties or issues. Amazing.


----------



## CanOz (1 July 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Or don't think more like it.
> 
> The incredible ignorance/stupidity of some people is mind boggling, but not surprising. Judging by "man in the street" interviews by current affairs programs a lot of people just don't have a clue about the parties or issues. Amazing.




yup, now there's something we both agree on...


----------



## Knobby22 (2 July 2016)

Happy voting everyone.
I take comfort in that Australian Voting has a good history and we have generally got it right. The Australian public deserves credit and I disagree with the media push that we are ignorant. The truth is that it is the media that is out of touch.

We are lucky to live in a country where democracy is so effective. It is true that the radicals on the right and left are trying to extend their influence but the Australian people are not letting them.


----------



## SirRumpole (2 July 2016)

Onya Knobby ! You have a good "electoral experience" yourself.


----------



## SmokeyGhost (2 July 2016)

Well, my view after attending the polling booth is that the Egg and Bacon sandwich wasn't really up to scratch compared with other venues although the coffee was darn good.


----------



## drsmith (2 July 2016)

Well, the big day has finally arrived and I'm presently listening to Bill shorten ranting on ABC24. 

Sportsbet sworn in government has narrowed slightly from $1.08/$8 to $1.09/$7.50. It was $1.10/$7 a little earlier today. Hung parliament is $1.25/$4.

Latest polls average around 50.5%/49.5% in favour of the government and MT while having lost a lot of gloss since taking the prime-ministership has maintained a preferred PM lead over Bill Shorten. I now think the final result will be 51%/49% in favour of the Coalition after counting pre-polls and postal votes. 

Mu guess for the outcome is a net coalitions loss of 9 seats to Labor and a net loss of one to independents and retain 80. Given large pre-poll and that tending to favour the Coalition, the outcome may not be known tonight. There might be some interest in the West tonight. If the government loses 1 in in the senate to 32, they'll be 2 short of a majority for a joint sitting.

Sportsbet sworn in government now $1.11/$6.50.


----------



## trainspotter (2 July 2016)

If Bill Shorten eats a "Sausage Sizzle" like that imagine what he will do with the country !!!


----------



## dutchie (2 July 2016)

trainspotter said:


> If Bill Shorten eats a "Sausage Sizzle" like that imagine what he will do with the country !!!
> 
> View attachment 67311




Billiar has not got a clue about a lot of things.


----------



## SirRumpole (2 July 2016)

dutchie said:


> Billiar has not got a clue about a lot of things.




He's got more of a clue about what most people need than Mr Habourside Mansion (thanks Peta).


----------



## drsmith (2 July 2016)

It's all a bit desperate for Bill if the headline on the SMH's live election day page is an accurate quote,



> PM a 'mugger who's taken your wallet'




Sportsbet odds though have shortened to $1.14/$5.75.


----------



## drsmith (2 July 2016)

The ultimate polling booth selection guide,

http://www.electionsausagesizzle.com.au/


----------



## noco (2 July 2016)

I have been on and off Sky News today and the whole day has been dedicated to the election.

Interview after interview of various politicians continuing to plug their propaganda...Each party critical of the other.

I thought advertising was supposed to cease at midnight on Thursday and yet here we virtually have wall to wall free advertising all day even on the day of election.

I am sure there are a lot of voters out there who share the same opinion as I do....The bloody media are in control of politics in this country and are becoming the ruination of us all....The media have the power to sway and persuade undecided voters which ever way they like.

There has to be a revolution and some changes made in the way politics and the media conduct themselves.


----------



## wayneL (2 July 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> He's got more of a clue about what most people need than Mr Habourside Mansion (thanks Peta).




I doubt that


----------



## drsmith (2 July 2016)

I'm off to a sausage sizzle and to vote.

I have other commitments over the remainder of the day and will only be able to follow the election result intermittently.

I'll be back tomorrow, either happy or not as happy.

For those following this election, have fun and enjoy the entertainment. Either way, the sun will still rise tomorrow.

Last piece of partisan hackery from me prior to tonight's count, I promise,

*Go Libs.*


----------



## noco (2 July 2016)

drsmith said:


> I'm off to a sausage sizzle and to vote.
> 
> I have other commitments over the remainder of the day and will only be able to follow the election result intermittently.
> 
> ...




Doc you can start popping the Champagne corks.


----------



## Macquack (2 July 2016)

noco said:


> Doc you can start popping the Champagne corks.




I have a coupla bottles of "sprewmante" at the ready.


----------



## Smurf1976 (2 July 2016)

noco said:


> Even more glaringly obvious is the fact that, despite a seemingly endless campaign, neither Turnbull nor Shorten has hit the trigger that switches on voters.




I think the view of a union (specifically the CEPU - Communications, Electrical & Plumbing Union) sums it up somewhat well.

You'd think a union would be encouraging its members to vote Labor, right?

Well of the 5 Tasmanian electorates their officially stated view is:

Bass - None of the candidates are any good and that includes Labor candidates.

Braddon - Labor

Denison - Independent (Andrew Wilkie)

Franklin - Labor

Lyons - Minor Party / Labor (two candidates supported)

Senate - Two minor party candidates and three Labor.

So this union at least isn't as aligned with Labor as one might expect. Some support that way as you might expect, but it doesn't seem to be a case of blind loyalty that's for sure. 

For what it's worth, very strongly agreed about Andrew Wilkie. He's one of the better people in politics, largely because he's not compromised in the way that so many others are.


----------



## banco (2 July 2016)

Sophie Mirabella can crawl back into her hole.


----------



## So_Cynical (2 July 2016)

ABC has em neck and neck 55 / 55 

Seems to be a bit of a swing to the ALP on, Tassie a big move and urban NSW.


----------



## poverty (2 July 2016)

So_Cynical said:


> ABC has em neck and neck 55 / 55
> 
> Seems to be a bit of a swing to the ALP on, Tassie a big move and urban NSW.




ABC coverage is absolute rubbish this time around.  They called half the seats with 1% of votes counted.  Not how it's done.


----------



## So_Cynical (2 July 2016)

If WA swings ALP its gonna be close, very close...going to bed.


----------



## nioka (2 July 2016)

drsmith said:


> Go Libs.[/B]  [/SIZE]




"Go Libs"?  Where would you like them to go to.?" 

Going, going, GONE. :1zhelp:


----------



## CanOz (2 July 2016)

poverty said:


> ABC coverage is absolute rubbish this time around.  They called half the seats with 1% of votes counted.  Not how it's done.





You think abc is bad...7 is hilarious!


----------



## Tisme (3 July 2016)

I guessing the cocky LIbs aren't so cocky anymore  

The sad part for me is that Albo won't be the leader of the ALP for some time to come and the LIbs don't have anyone who has the ear of the people nor political nous as it turns out.

To Rumpole ......I told you so years ago when you thought Malcolm was a messianic middle man who could lead our nation that he was a hollow man.

To Noco ..... I feel for you mate; as a true believer it has to hurt knowing your preferred brand isn't so popular as you thought.

The good news is my radar was good enough to pick all 4 independents ....with a lot of help from my similarly ambivalent circle of friends.

I knew the fix was in after I took my 81 year old neighbour to the polling booth and she literally spent over half an hour filling out the vote. Cheekily I asked her how she picked (a very successful business woman and closet socialist in her time) ..... she produly announced to the crowd : "Sex Party and Weed Party"


----------



## SirRumpole (3 July 2016)

Morning Tisme,

Malcolm's gigantic ego has taken a gigantic blow but he may yet still pull it off.

Where he blew it was caving in to the Right wing. He should have held off more, waited for them to come begging and made no deals, but his ambition got in the way.

If Labor don't get in, the leadership positions are spilled but I think Shorten will get back. Maybe he deserves to, but like you I don't think he is the best PM material in the ALP. Neither is Tanya. Maybe someone like Mark Butler. There are a lot of faceless men and women in the ALP now who we don't know much about. Contrast that with a lot of dills in the LNP who we do know something about. 

Anyway, another few weeks of waiting to see what the actual situation is. Time to catch up on some sleep.


----------



## dutchie (3 July 2016)

Australia has undecided


----------



## noco (3 July 2016)

Tisme said:


> I guessing the cocky LIbs aren't so cocky anymore
> 
> The sad part for me is that Albo won't be the leader of the ALP for some time to come and the LIbs don't have anyone who has the ear of the people nor political nous as it turns out.
> 
> ...




As a true sporting man all my life right up to this day, I have always adopted  the philosophy, you don't boast when you win and you don't make excuses when you lose, unlike some people on this forum.....There will be plenty of gloating if Shorten falls over the line on a campaign of lies.

This is a democratic country and if people here want to live under socialism, so be it.....Frankly at my age in life I may never see another Federal election so I could not really give a damn but I do fear for my children, grand children and great grand children who will suffer under socialism.


----------



## moXJO (3 July 2016)

I called it over a month ago. Just need to see if labor get over the line.

A lot of the results can come down to Tbull being an ineffective campaigner.  There is a reason you put simple 3 word slogans. When it comes to politics, the general population don't have a clue. The message needs to be clear and simple. And Tbull left it way too late. It was evident from day one.

Labors results were more from preference deals with the minor parties rather then a vote for labor.
It's a shame because we really needed a clear direction. Gillard suffered the same fate and it didn’t work out well.
Hopefully the Libs reject leading a hung parliament by doing deals.

 What a mess.... and libs have no one to blame but themselves.
They ousted Tony.
They didn't rally behind Tbull when he was installed.
They ran a lackluster campaign.
And had a dodgy track record when it came to leading. 
You can't put the blame on a single person for the dismal results. But having a party divided sure helps you to the exit.


----------



## noco (3 July 2016)

I believe Peter Van Olsen sums up the election for what it is.....An election based on lies.

I also believe it is time for some revolution in the way election campaigns are conducted.

When an election is called, all parties should be given 3 weeks to outline there precise polices in writing in a contractual arrangement for all to see on hard copies and on the internet.....This will eliminate back flips during the campaign and the necessity for lies....Having outlined their polices and win a mandate accordingly, then it will be up to the senate to maintain the integrity of those contractual policies and ensure the incoming Government is kept honest...It should not be the role of the senate to obstruct key economic savings or to push their own political agenda which is contrary to the governments mandate. 


http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...a/news-story/0163a1eafb5dfa29d44009b4ed30c69b

*But the pearl of wisdom from Seinfeld that most appropriately applies to this campaign — specifically to the way Bill Shorten has conducted himself in his bid to *become prime minister — was *advice George Costanza offered Jerry Seinfeld when he was about to take a polygraph test: “Jerry, just remember, it’s not a lie if you *believe it.”

That’s how you can mislead people and not collapse into a *hollow log of self-loathing. Shorten must be a Seinfeld fan.

Most politicians lie (or omit details) of what they plan to do after an election. We saw this most *obviously three years ago when Tony Abbott ruled out all manner of cuts, only to backflip and *attempt to legislate many of them in his first budget. Julia Gillard *arguably did the same with her pledge not to introduce a carbon tax, only to legislate a fixed price on carbon, albeit one that morphed into a floating price via an emissions trading scheme.

No doubt whoever becomes PM today will be called out for similar U-turns or rhetorical misleading in the years ahead. But Shorten has gone a step further — he has thrown truth out altogether with a most deceitful campaign.

Yet he seems not to see it, having adopted the Costanza mantra that “it’s not a lie if you believe it”.

The Opposition Leader doesn’t only attack the government on its track record — much of which is eminently attackable. He downright makes things up, creating a straw man to fit his purposes.

Shorten has convinced himself the government wants to privatise Medicare, which it does not. He’s hoping to mislead voters into believing the Coalition will sell it off, which is absurd and impractical.*

Here is a comment from reader.

Rob
17 hours ago

Regardless of whether Shorten wins or loses, there ought to be some comeback against him for his overtly fraudulent attempts to throw the election.

Apart from that, I think it's time we made a simple and powerful change to election rules. It should be illegal for any candidate for the lower house or senate or any member of either house to speak of any politicians other than themselves during a campaign. And I mean themselves personally, not their parties.


----------



## Logique (3 July 2016)

Whichever major party forms government, good luck getting anything through the Senate. 

The Coalition seems to have cleared out most of the troublesome pre-existing independent group, only to inherit Pauline and more Xylophites, and an even bigger crossbench. 



> Australian federal election 2016: *Nick Xenophon and Pauline Hanson set to be dominant voices* on Senate crossbench - Date -July 2, 2016
> SMH: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...crossbench-20160702-gpx5tx.html#ixzz4DIeHzH9i
> 
> ...In Tasmania, the outspoken independent, Jacqui Lambie, appeared set to retain her Senate spot.
> ...


----------



## SirRumpole (3 July 2016)

noco said:


> Apart from that, I think it's time we made a simple and powerful change to election rules. It should be illegal for any candidate for the lower house or senate or any member of either house to speak of any politicians other than themselves during a campaign. And I mean themselves personally, not their parties.




You know that the Liberal Party would privatise Medicare if they could. They regard it as a socialist monster that needs to be killed. Fraser actually did privatise it (Medibank as it was at the time) and Hawke had to get it back. The Libs have been gradually trying to make Medicare user pays, which is a fattening up process for selling it off. They sold Medicare private, so there are enough facts there to create a scare campaign from.

It's no different to the lie that Labor would open the borders to asylum seekers. All scare campaigns, and I think you are complaining because your scare campaign didn't work, and Labor's did.


----------



## drsmith (3 July 2016)

moXJO said:


> What a mess.... and libs have no one to blame but themselves.
> They ousted Tony.
> They didn't rally behind Tbull when he was installed.
> They ran a lackluster campaign.
> ...



The sun it up but it's hard to disagree with 4 of the above 5 conclusions given the result. Another, adding to point 4 is that regardless of the underlying merit of Labor's message, Labor and Bill shorten campaigned hard right to the end.

On Tony Abbott, he would have lead the Coalition to a worse result in my view due to too many missteps as PM. It would have been best had he stepped aside for both the sake of the party.

Sportsbet odds are still in favour of the Coalition forming government to the tune of $1.20/$4.20 after some wild swings during the count. That presumably would be in the form of a minority government as to me, it's hard to see the Coalition getting more than 75 seats and possibly less.

A mess indeed. We now wait till Tuesday for the resumption of counting.


----------



## McLovin (3 July 2016)

I saw an exit poll on Sky about 5pm last night and thought the Libs were f**ked. Biggest issues for voters were health and Medicare, and education. Super, negative gearing, unions, company tax cuts were minor issues.

The swing away from the Libs in Western Sydney was intense. It didn't all go to the ALP though and the Christian Dems picked up a bit, no doubt a few disgruntled hard right Lib voters. Ultimately, the Libs needed to win the centre and they didn't. Mike Baird has been throwing money at Western Sydney and none of it seemed to stick in the face of Medicare.

Who seriously goes to an election with a company tax cut as your big platform?


----------



## wayneL (3 July 2016)

Mediscare was effective imo, even if total BS.


----------



## Smurf1976 (3 July 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> There are a lot of faceless men and women in the ALP now who we don't know much about.




Same with Liberal and Labor.

If there's one political comment I've heard more than anything else in recent times it's about "faceless men of the Liberal Party".

I suspect that's more a state issue in Tas than a national one but has probably spilled over to how people down here voted in the federal election to some extent. Whenever there's a serious state issue it seems that the state premier is nowhere to be seen unless there really is no choice. Even then someone else does the talking. Reverse that if it's a good news story in which case he's everywhere.

The self-proclaimed "three amigos" certainly haven't helped the Liberals down here either. More faceless men doing, well, we're not sure really. Gone now.

Regardless of who ends up forming government, I'm very happy to see Andrew Wilkie firmly re-elected with very strong support. An actual independent candidate who's no fool. We need more like that.


----------



## Smurf1976 (3 July 2016)

noco said:


> It should be illegal for any candidate for the lower house or senate or any member of either house to speak of any politicians other than themselves during a campaign. And I mean themselves personally, not their parties.




I see the point but that would in practice have pretty much killed the entire campaign for Labor, Liberal and Greens alike.

Could be a good thing in some ways though since it would likely result in more independents being elected. People who actually represent their electorate and not the party. How that would work in terms of forming government is a hard question to answer, but I do think the masses are fed up with the two party system and lack of major difference between them.


----------



## SirRumpole (3 July 2016)

> Who seriously goes to an election with a company tax cut as your big platform?




Someone who is arrogant enough to think he had the election wrapped up, and therefore no need to do any work on policies, no need to make yourself a target (although he did anyway), and take the electorate for granted.

His attitude seemed to be "we may lose a bit of skin, but we'll get back in". Fairly typical of a born to rule Tory.



> Regardless of who ends up forming government, I'm very happy to see Andrew Wilkie firmly re-elected with very strong support. An actual independent candidate who's no fool. We need more like that.




Agreed. I saw an interview with him this morning. Very forthright and pragmatic.


----------



## trainspotter (3 July 2016)

trainspotter said:


> 30% will vote for minorities as the people in the Gulag are sick of both Labs and Libs and we will end up with a (hamstrung) hung parliament kowtowing to the tin foil hat brigade




And the winner is .....


----------



## pixel (3 July 2016)

McLovin said:


> Who seriously goes to an election with a company tax cut as your big platform?




Methinks you hit the nail squarely on the head, McLovin.
The assertion that companies will hire more staff and pay them better if they save a few tax Dollars goes totally against voters' life experience. In a recent podium discussion, a small business owner summed it up quite succinctly: Even if a business made a Million Dollars taxable profit, the tax cut would amount to $191 a week. That is nowhere near a new position, even at minimum wage.

Another perception the Liberals cannot deny: Few if any of the dominant corporations pay their fair amount of tax. Labor's request for a public investigation gave them a great deal of traction. While conceding that corrupt unions warrant an investigation, the Libs' refusal to consider corruption and tax fraud among *their *backers is seen as double standard.


----------



## drsmith (3 July 2016)

McLovin said:


> I saw an exit poll on Sky about 5pm last night and thought the Libs were f**ked. Biggest issues for voters were health and Medicare, and education. Super, negative gearing, unions, company tax cuts were minor issues.
> 
> The swing away from the Libs in Western Sydney was intense. It didn't all go to the ALP though and the Christian Dems picked up a bit, no doubt a few disgruntled hard right Lib voters. Ultimately, the Libs needed to win the centre and they didn't. Mike Baird has been throwing money at Western Sydney and none of it seemed to stick in the face of Medicare.
> 
> Who seriously goes to an election with a company tax cut as your big platform?



At the time it was announced, my thoughts were that they should have only gone as far as the cuts outlined over the 4-year budget estimates rather than the full 10 years and left the rest for next term to the extent economic circumstances warrant.

In Insiders today, Scott Morrison copped a bit of stick over his campaign as treasurer with comparisons drawn as to how Paul Keating would have responded to the financial platform as presently proposed by Labor. To me, Labor wasn't prosecuted hard enough on it's financial settings with a glaring omission being the failure to prosecute over spending longer term revenue measures in the shorter term. A mining tax comparison come to mind here.

Looking to some extent in the rear view mirror, there are some other areas of the 2016 budget that should have been reconsidered as follows,

1) The backpacker tax should have been put aside in the absence of a workable policy.
2) The $500k undeducted super contribution limit may have been better with a later start date than 2007 in the context of practicality requirements upon implementation. 
3) The $1.6bn capital tax free super limit might have been better set at $2m given the present lower interest rate environment.

The above would obviously have an impact on the overall budget and one obvious saving that comes to mind would be to only allow companies to distribute imputation credits on a per share basis. This would prevent companies structuring capital returns to favour the distribution of imputation credits to low income shareholders and thus would act as corporate tax integrity measure. Another would have been to remove the CGT discount on super effectively lifting the rate from 10% to 15%. This IIRC was raised some months ago.



wayneL said:


> Mediscare was effective imo, even if total BS.



It will be interesting to see how extending the indexation freeze in GP rebates will be seen as providing the fuel for Labor's Mediscare. An alternative would have been to lift the freeze during the next term rather than extending it beyond the next election. Retaining it for another year and lifting it from July 2017 may have been the most practical political option.

The above I think would have given the government an improved economic and social narrative during the campaign.


----------



## drsmith (3 July 2016)

The count



> •Sunday: Absent, interstate, postal and other declaration votes will be reconciled, sorted and packaged ready for dispatch to the home division from Monday. Any counting today will be limited to the small numbers of votes collected by AEC mobile teams.
> •Monday: Officials will continue the process of verifying more than one million postal votes already returned to the AEC.
> •Tuesday: Counting of lower house votes continues.




http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-07-...ontines-with-hung-parliament-possible/7564918


----------



## noco (3 July 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> You know that the Liberal Party would privatise Medicare if they could. They regard it as a socialist monster that needs to be killed. Fraser actually did privatise it (Medibank as it was at the time) and Hawke had to get it back. The Libs have been gradually trying to make Medicare user pays, which is a fattening up process for selling it off. They sold Medicare private, so there are enough facts there to create a scare campaign from.
> 
> It's no different to the lie that Labor would open the borders to asylum seekers. All scare campaigns, and I think you are complaining because your scare campaign didn't work, and Labor's did.




Firstly, Turnbull said he would not privatize Medicare and the Labor Party should get over it......If Turnbull does form Government and Medicare is left in place during his term, what do you think it will do to the credibility of the Labor Party and Bill Shorten?...Do you think they would be trusted again?

Who would want to buy Medicare when it forks out $24 billion and recoups $10 billion?...Who pays for the balance?

What is wrong with increasing the Medicare levee by .5% to everybody?

Labor's policy is, have what you want and don't worry about the cost.

Medicare Private is a different kettle of fish where there is plenty of competition from other health funds, so your argument there has no comparison....Health funds can vary from one to the other and it is your choice to fill your needs as to how much you are desirous of paying......In some cases the cost has become prohibited for some people and they have opted out and now rely upon public hospitals for their care....So you have a choice. 

There was no lie from the Liberals over border protection when you have 50 Labor MPs and all the Greens against the boat turn back.....Shorten would be forced into relenting to the Greens.....If Shorten does form government, it will be interesting to see how that plays out.


----------



## Logique (3 July 2016)

This post isn't necessarily an endorsement, nor was the SMH article.

Senator Pauline Hanson says, read it and weep Lefties..!



> Election 2016: *Pauline Hanson's big Senate win, and what she plans to do with it* - July 3, 2016
> SMH: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...-she-plans-to-do-with-it-20160703-gpxc2n.html
> 
> Far-right One Nation leader Pauline Hanson is pushing for a royal commission into climate science and Islam and wants to abolish the Family Law Court, in an extreme policy agenda set to frustrate a future government trying to pass laws through the Senate......


----------



## basilio (3 July 2016)

Yep Logique we certainly live in exciting times. 

The really exciting part of that article was the suggestion One Nation could get 4 Senators in the new Parliament


> Ms Hanson has said her party will likely collect a second Queensland Senate position, and AAP reports there is speculation she is also in the running for a seat each in NSW and Western Australia




Voila We have our own  homegrown Trumpette !!


----------



## Knobby22 (3 July 2016)

If the Coalition fall a couple of seats short, they are going to rue the day they let Sophie Mirabella re-contest her seat.


----------



## pixel (3 July 2016)

noco said:


> What is wrong with increasing the Medicare levee by .5% to everybody?




Nothing! Treat the Medicare Levy as a basic insurance premium as is done in many other countries, and if the premium doesn't cover the basic needs, raise it so it does. *But leave the administration in Government control!* If the Libs are as good with money as they keep claiming they are, surely they can negotiate fair rates for PBS prescriptions and GP rates?

Before Labor froze the Bulk Billing tariffs *for a limited time*, they negotiated with the AMA and obtained consensus. MalCon's mistake was his failure to communicate plans and listen to people's suggestions and concerns. The DD decision is a case in point: "If you guys won't do what I want, you're fired!" That simply had to backfire because it's the worst way to run a Show, and Abbott's disastrous "Captain's Calls" ought to have contained sufficient lessons.


----------



## basilio (3 July 2016)

Just having a think about Pauline Hansons determination to have a Royal Commission/Inquiry into Islam and CC.

I reckon the first step will be to totally reform the Judiciary and Legal system.  For a start I just can't conceive of anyone ( Judge or lawyer ) in the current legal system who would accept being on either Commission/Inquiry. So clearly we will need some eminent Australians, not necessarily already in the legal system, to run these auspicious courts.

Perhaps this is the golden opportunity for Senator George Brandis to step down from the Liberal Party to head and inform both these inquiries?


----------



## IFocus (3 July 2016)

wayneL said:


> Mediscare was effective imo, even if total BS.





Given the Coalition has been chipping away at Medicare for years gave Labor an in BTW its not total BS but I do agree its well on the way of being BS.

Tax cuts to corporations = stupid cannot believe they didn't aggressively target small business with tax cuts instead.


----------



## orr (3 July 2016)

basilio said:


> Just having a think about Pauline Hansons




'The women who mistook her sandwich for a hat'???... apologies to Oliver Sachs.

Good to see you in again Focus.....


----------



## drsmith (3 July 2016)

In terms of misrepresentation and scare campaign, Labor's on Medicare far out weighed the Coalition's on border security. For a start, Labor has its track record with the latter in relatively recent history whereas I don't recall the Coalition presenting a policy to privatise Medicare since it's inception by the Hawke government.

Mediscare was effective in my view more because of the government's health policy mix in my view (GP rebate freeze in particular as outlined above) more than anything else. The electorate broadly I'd suggest cared less that Bill Shorten was talking crap.



Logique said:


> This post isn't necessarily an endorsement, nor was the SMH article.
> 
> Senator Pauline Hanson says, read it and weep Lefties.!



With the Reps, Andrew Wilkie in an interview commented today that he would do no deals and that he would no deals with a major party and would judge each bill before him on individual merit, including motions of no confidence. He's still burnt from his experience over pokies reform under the Gillard government I'd suggest.

He'd have to compromise on no-confidence I'd suggest for the GG to have any confidence of offering government to a particular party if his vote was critical.

The more I think about yesterday's outcome, the worse I feel it is. The coalition whether in minority or majority government will struggle to get anything of substance through the Senate and Labor in the same situation will be beholden to the Greens. 

Both major parties need a good swift kick up the clacker for allowing voter disenchantment with them to get to current levels followed by a second.


----------



## SirRumpole (3 July 2016)

drsmith said:


> In terms of misrepresentation and scare campaign, Labor's on Medicare far out weighed the Coalition's on border security. For a start, Labor has its track record with the latter in relatively recent history whereas I don't recall the Coalition presenting a policy to privatise Medicare since it's inception by the Hawke government.




Fraser privatised Medibank, created by Whitlam. Hawke brought it back as Medicare.

The LNP would be crazy to try and completely privatise Medicare, but it's unarguable that they are chipping away at it to turn it into a user pays system.

After Shorten got dragged through a biased Royal Commission for nothing, I don't think he's in any mood to go easy on the Coalition, but apart from Mediscare I think he's been quite positive and restrained throughout the campaign.


----------



## basilio (3 July 2016)

I agree you you Dr Smith.  This Parliament will be an absolute dogs breakfast.

I think Turnball is just shot. I cannot see him having any authority over his party or Parliament. If there is a return of the true conservatives I can't see Parliament or public opinion offering any sort of support.

Labour Party as a minority government? Barely possible but a Hanson dominated Senate and a newly feral Liberal Party under Tony Abbott again would make this short term and ugly.

If I had to look for a possible solution I would like to see Julie Bishop as PM.

I would like to see the Labour Party and the Liberals come to cross party agreement on some key issues just to establish an effective government and some confidence that our system could work. In a sense it would be a short term National Unity government. Perhaps sort out a unified position on

1) Long term CC policy
2) Dealing with asylum seekers
3) Establishing long term tax and super policies
4)  Others ?

Yeh. It's totally fanciful. But the alternatives are so, so ugly. Surely Australia and it's citizens are worth more ?


----------



## Smurf1976 (3 July 2016)

basilio said:


> Labour Party as a minority government? Barely possible but a Hanson dominated Senate and a newly feral Liberal Party under Tony Abbott again would make this short term and ugly.




I suspect it applies both ways really. Someone will form government in minority this time and then end up virtually wiped out at the next election.

That's how I see it playing out.


----------



## drsmith (3 July 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> The LNP would be crazy to try and completely privatise Medicare, but it's unarguable that they are chipping away at it to turn it into a user pays system.



With regard to the Frazer government, you'll note my comment on time frame above. That was many governments ago.

Privatisation and user pays are two different things. With the latter, it's ultimately unsustainable for the health budge to grow out of proportion with the economy as it is with other government services. I'm open to suggestion but patient co-payment is a cost management option that's already a part of government support in some areas of health.


----------



## banco (3 July 2016)

basilio said:


> If I had to look for a possible solution I would like to see Julie Bishop as PM.




A childless woman who doesn't wear anything that costs less than 4 figures? She'll really appeal to middle Australia.


----------



## drsmith (3 July 2016)

banco said:


> A childless woman who..............



I'm trying to imagine the reaction if that came from someone on the conservative side of politics.


----------



## basilio (3 July 2016)

banco said:


> A childless woman who doesn't wear anything that costs less than 4 figures? She'll really appeal to middle Australia.




WOW !  What can one say  ?  Serious ? Cleverly, lightly sarcastic ? 

I'm not a supporter of the Liberal Party by any stretch. But nonetheless I think Julie Bishop is well respected across party lines and I think the broader community.  I was just brain storming how, somehow, the Liberal Party could get out of this awful mess. Sort of like a circuit breaker.

I think that all significant political parties should be concerned at how broken politics is at the moment. In my view it is in all parties interest to demonstrate that constructive political dialogue is possible in the broader interest.

The alternative is Pauline Hansen, Clive Palmer, Derryn Hinch and Donald Trump.


----------



## Tisme (3 July 2016)

noco said:


> As a true sporting man all my life right up to this day, I have always adopted  the philosophy, you don't boast when you win and you don't make excuses when you lose, unlike some people on this forum.....There will be plenty of gloating if Shorten falls over the line on a campaign of lies.
> 
> This is a democratic country and if people here want to live under socialism, so be it.....Frankly at my age in life I may never see another Federal election so I could not really give a damn but I do fear for my children, grand children and great grand children who will suffer under socialism.




I'm impressed by your sense of fairness Noco... very gracious. 

Most tragics would make a list of reasons why the ill informed community of knuckleheads who have been hood winked by "lies" and deceptions have voted like Mt Stupids....an arrogance that many rusted ons carry like a cancer. Of course they, themselves look like halfwits when they wheel out that simpleton trolley.

We will survive Noco and we will continue to be prosperous because we have a liberal attitude to freedom of expression no matter what political dunderheads are in charge IMO.


----------



## Tisme (3 July 2016)

banco said:


> A childless woman who doesn't wear anything that costs less than 4 figures? She'll really appeal to middle Australia.




Reminiscent of the Abbott attack on Julia Gillard ... poor form then and poor form now....although I must admit I didn't see Julie defending Gillard (and women in general) back in the day.

She has matured a little since taking the foreign affairs role, but she lost me during the election when she couldn't answer anything without denigrating the ghost of yesterday and today ALP..... just the same tell tale tit Abbott style of juvenile politics.


----------



## banco (4 July 2016)

Tisme said:


> Reminiscent of the Abbott attack on Julia Gillard ... poor form then and poor form now....although I must admit I didn't see Julie defending Gillard (and women in general) back in the day.




..........and that line of attack would work against her too. At least Gillard was obviously from middle Australia. Bishop would have to do a lot of women's weekly covers to soften her image.


----------



## SirRumpole (4 July 2016)

drsmith said:


> Privatisation and user pays are two different things. With the latter, it's ultimately unsustainable for the health budge to grow out of proportion with the economy as it is with other government services. I'm open to suggestion but patient co-payment is a cost management option that's already a part of government support in some areas of health.




The better option would be to raise the Medicare levy. People can't help getting sick and so user pays hits the lower income earners harder. 

Other options are things like a sugar/salt/fat tax that are now being introduced in other countries. Both parties are raising tobacco taxes and alcohol taxes should be on the list as well.


----------



## noco (4 July 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> The better option would be to raise the Medicare levy. People can't help getting sick and so user pays hits the lower income earners harder.
> 
> Other options are things like a sugar/salt/fat tax that are now being introduced in other countries. Both parties are raising tobacco taxes and alcohol taxes should be on the list as well.




How about taxing the corrupt union's  income......They have evaded millions.....


----------



## SirRumpole (4 July 2016)

noco said:


> How about taxing the corrupt union's  income......They have evaded millions.....




As have corrupt businesses.


----------



## noco (4 July 2016)

When Malcolm Turnbull made the remark that Pauline Hanson was not welcome in parliament, I would say he gave her thousands of sympathy votes........I am happy to see Pauline elected into the senate but it was a bad mistake on Turnbull's part and that did show  his arrogance


https://au.news.yahoo.com/qld/a/31972460/hanson-confident-of-return-to-parliament/#page1


----------



## Tisme (4 July 2016)

Pauline Vs Halal

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...-offer-to-pauline-hanson-20160702-gpx9b6.html


----------



## qldfrog (4 July 2016)

Arrogance and complete detachment from real life on both sides:I share the main idea of this article:
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/federal-politics/federal-election-2016/election-result-reveals-both-parties-have-lost-themselves-in-an-allconsuming-narcissism-20160703-gpxbd3.html
To see Shorten gloating when not even able to get 40% of votes.People do not want you either. It is high time both major parties wake up and start proposing something decent to the electorate instead of scare campaigns.
Just surprised the BS about medicare worked so well but seeing the hardly disguised joy of the pro Abbotts who probably still believe TA would have done better   stupidity is not one sided
Very happy with Pauline and Katter scores: if this is not enough for a wake up call after Brexit and Trump, the west deserves its next dictators.
Sadly, I had no Andrew Wilkie to vote for in my area.


----------



## SirRumpole (4 July 2016)

qldfrog said:


> Arrogance and complete detachment from real life on both sides:I share the main idea of this article:
> http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/federal-politics/federal-election-2016/election-result-reveals-both-parties-have-lost-themselves-in-an-allconsuming-narcissism-20160703-gpxbd3.html
> To see Shorten gloating when not even able to get 40% of votes.People do not want you either. It is high time both major parties wake up and start proposing something decent to the electorate instead of scare campaigns.
> Just surprised the BS about medicare worked so well but seeing the hardly disguised joy of the pro Abbotts who probably still believe TA would have done better   stupidity is not one sided
> ...




Turn bull ran the most arrogant campaign. He thought he had it won with his big majority. He under rated Shorten, took the electorate for granted, did no work on policy and had nothing to offer except a pathetic corporate tax cut.

No one knows what he stands for these days and he's now just a Party apparachik.

He got what he deserved.


----------



## moXJO (4 July 2016)

Smurf1976 said:


> I suspect it applies both ways really. Someone will form government in minority this time and then end up virtually wiped out at the next election.
> 
> That's how I see it playing out.




This is what I suspect will happen as well. 






qldfrog said:


> To see Shorten gloating when not even able to get 40% of votes.



The only thing that saved labor was preferences. People rejected both parties. Neither should be gloating.

I wonder if old Tbull tried to clear out some deadwood righties in the liberal party. And that's why he didn't campaign that hard. He may have been praying to get rid of Abbott and Co. 
But he doesn't exactly have rat cunning. More likely just his ego telling him he was widely loved.


----------



## overhang (4 July 2016)

A hung parliament is the worst result for our country, I hope both governments don't make a deal and send us back to the polls to try again if it turns out the way it's looking.  If this were the case I would expect Turnbull to win as the Mediscare campaign must be running out of legs by now.  Politics isn't in a good state.  Abbott was elected running an extremely negative election campaign both in 2010 and and 2013 and Shorten replicated that  Their mediscare campaign was a low point imo, sending text messages out with the sender appearing to be from medicare is blatantly misleading but handing out their flyers styled like a medicare card was marketing genius.

The right of the Liberal party need to get a grip though, there is no way Abbott would or could have won this election.  It's one thing to win elections running a negative election campaign but when in government you need a strong policy platform and this is where he struggled.


----------



## Tink (4 July 2016)

Not just text messages, also recorded phone messages, harassing the public.


----------



## Knobby22 (4 July 2016)

overhang said:


> The right of the Liberal party need to get a grip though, there is no way Abbott would or could have won this election.  It's one thing to win elections running a negative election campaign but when in government you need a strong policy platform and this is where he struggled.




Look at Eric Abetz -
Oooh I lost all the seats in Tasmania with huge swings but its all everyone else's fault.
Nothing to do with me bagging Turnbull every chance I could get and choosing no hoper right wing radicals for the seats.


----------



## Tisme (4 July 2016)

Tink said:


> Not just text messages, also recorded phone messages, harassing the public.




You are all being too sensitive. I was bombarded with push polling from all quarters with warnings of dire circumstances couched in "are you still beating your wife" style questions.

The Medicare warning might have upset Malcolm and his cronies in the AMA, but the truth unfolded when the actual medicos got on board and warned that gap payments are destined to become huge on some services as the payments freeze continues. 

I had one MD I know who verified pregnant women can look forward to a $1000 out of pocket for various treatments, after my Liberal voting daughter heard chatter about it in the Active Wear groups in her trendy "professional"  suburb.

I still believe that the Libs will never sell off Medicare, but they will dismantle it progressively and hive it off to Liberal party management nurseries like e.g. Telstra. It's just smells too much like a Labor invention to be left alone.


----------



## Tisme (4 July 2016)

Knobby22 said:


> Look at Eric Abetz -
> Oooh I lost all the seats in Tasmania with huge swings but its all everyone else's fault.
> Nothing to do with me bagging Turnbull every chance I could get and choosing no hoper right wing radicals for the seats.





There are so many movies that portray the sterotypical snivelling, back stabbing, mealy mouthed 4rse4ole you'd think that people like Abeitz, that Belgian dude and Brandis would reinvent themselves to something palpable and engaging, instead of behaving like spoiled brats out to spread invective and vitriol.

Thank goodness Sophie got hers at the hands of Cathy ... don't have to see her bad lipstick mush claiming victory from the devil's spawn.


----------



## Tisme (4 July 2016)

overhang said:


> A hung parliament is the worst result for our country,




And that sentiment goes to the core of the concern of the public .... they do not have faith in party politicians to co operate for the benefit of the majority nation. It's a perceived disease of an archaic institution that has disconnected with the community and national pride.

The problem is not a hung parliament, even the founders of the constitution didn't cement the Tory Vs Whig tradition, they opted for one man one vote, individuals voting for individuals, etc., because they wanted vision and men with a social responsibility to build the fricken place not play pick me pick me like children in a classroom.

The bad result is:

 1)the calibre of the elected people who cannot get over their own pride and try to think without guile and cunning.
2) the vast majority of insipid and obsequious electors who won't betray their own galvanised bias towards the respective parties that seem to have a spiritual hold over them ... and yet we mock Islam


----------



## drsmith (4 July 2016)

Sportsbet odds this morning,

Sworn in government: Coalition $1.22, Labor $4.00.

Hung parliament: $1.35.
Not hung parliament: $3.00

Coalition majority: $2.75.
Coalition minority: $2.10.
Labor minority: $5.00.
Labor majority: $16.00.
Another election in 2016: $9.00.

Another election in 2016 was $16.00 yesterday IIRC.


----------



## trainspotter (4 July 2016)

I have a vague recollection of something or someone saying that Pauline Hanson would not have the balance of power in the Senate ....

Having Pauline Hanson in the Senate means that whoever forms a majority government will have to negotiate with her and her fellow One Nation Senator to buy their support to get legislation through the Senate. She will have 2 votes in the Senate which is a powerful position to be in.



> WHOEVER gains government will have to negotiate around the demands of the new force of angry men, led by that angriest of angry women Pauline Hanson.
> Those demands include the abolition of the Family Court and a better custody deal for fathers, issues associated with men who believe they have been deprived of rights in family break-ups.
> Pauline Hanson’s One Nation is a male-dominated outfit.




http://www.news.com.au/national/fed...n/news-story/d23c6a63859bd957ac95c57e3a984f33


----------



## qldfrog (4 July 2016)

trainspotter said:


> I have a vague recollection of something or someone saying that Pauline Hanson would not have the balance of power in the Senate ....
> 
> Having Pauline Hanson in the Senate means that whoever forms a majority government will have to negotiate with her and her fellow One Nation Senator to buy their support to get legislation through the Senate. She will have 2 votes in the Senate which is a powerful position to be in.
> 
> ...



This is going to be the end of the world:Truth might be told, realities faced or at least discussed...No more nice sweat deal in the duopoly, I even suggest that the next pay rise for our Senators and MPs could be in danger


----------



## CanOz (4 July 2016)

qldfrog said:


> This is going to be the end of the world......





ROTFLMAO


----------



## tech/a (4 July 2016)

> This is going to be the end of the world




Hanson----Bring back Clive!!!

Derryn Hinch ----Nick X

That does it The Ducks running next election anyone can get a look in.


----------



## pixel (4 July 2016)

qldfrog said:


> This is going to be the end of the world:Truth might be told, realities faced or at least discussed...No more nice sweat deal in the duopoly, I even suggest that the next pay rise for our Senators and MPs could be in danger




They certainly breed 'em tough in Queensland.
If Malcon can't get it over the line, maybe Tony can  teaming up with Pauline. She would definitely be a Ranga more to his liking.


----------



## pixel (4 July 2016)

tech/a said:


> Hanson----Bring back Clive!!!
> 
> Derryn Hinch ----Nick X
> 
> That does it The Ducks running next election anyone can get a look in.




Don't forget the Mad Hatter Katter 

PS: You may have to hurry and *nominate quackly*: The next election may only be a few months away. But if you do, I'm definitely returning a Duck vote. Beats a Donkey vote anytime


----------



## SirRumpole (4 July 2016)

Maybe Labor and the LNP could actually form a Coalition.

Their actual policies aren't really all that different.

The crossbenchers would be irrelevant and something might get done.

Just a thought.


----------



## pixel (4 July 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Maybe Labor and the LNP could actually form a Coalition.
> 
> Their actual policies aren't really all that different.
> 
> ...




The Germans gave it a try in the late 1960's. It created a strong Opposition movement outside of Parliament, the so-called APO featuring terror plots by Baader and Meinhoff's merry band.

But you're right: With a parliamentary majority of 95%, they got things done.


----------



## drsmith (4 July 2016)

If the two major parties formed a coalition, that would be a coalition across a very broad political spectrum. When that the political spectrum within each individual party is sufficient to cause conflict within at times, the above could only work with a narrowing of the political spectrum such a coalition would create. That in itself would leave space at the margins for other political forces to grow and we would ultimately finish back where we started. 

A useful starting point for the majors would be, after they lose office, not to oppose measures they previously supported when in government.


----------



## SirRumpole (4 July 2016)

drsmith said:


> If the two major parties formed a coalition, that would be a coalition across a very broad political spectrum. When that the political spectrum within each individual party is sufficient to cause conflict within at times, the above could only work with a narrowing of the political spectrum such a coalition would create. That in itself would leave space at the margins for other political forces to grow and we would ultimately finish back where we started.
> 
> A useful starting point for the majors would be, after they lose office, not to oppose measures they previously supported when in government.




As Ronald Reagan once said words to the effect "the world has it's differences, but these would be resolved very quickly if we were invaded by aliens, and isn't an alien force already with us ?" 

Yes, and her name is Pauline.


----------



## noco (4 July 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> As Ronald Reagan once said words to the effect "the world has it's differences, but these would be resolved very quickly if we were invaded by aliens, and isn't an alien force already with us ?"
> 
> Yes, and her name is Pauline.




What we might see in the next 12 months is a fresh election of the lower house with two new leaders of the major parties with Pauline Hanson playing a key role......She has no time for both Shorten and Turnbull.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...s/news-story/bdbb0dbfde43f4d263acf579ee4557dd

*BILL Shorten thinks Malcolm Turnbull’s time is up.

“Quite frankly I think he should quit,” Shorten said at a press conference to thank those who voted Labor.

“He has taken this nation to an election on the basis of stability. He has delivered instability. His own party knows he is not up to the job, the Australian people know he is out of touch.

“Senators think the bloke is not up to the job.”

Shorten also blamed Turnbull for why after 18 years One Nation is back in the Senate.

“This guy is not up to his day job.”

“He doesn’t know what he is doing, he has lost the confidence of his party.”

Latest analysis of available figures give the Coalition 71 seats, Labor 67, Greens 1 and independents 4. Seven seats remain in doubt.
Should Malcolm Turnbull stand down *

Quite frankly speaking, they should both should stand down.....Turnbull for his poor performance and Shorten for his dirty tricks on Medicare.

I believe both major leaders have moved away from the true principles of their party platform.


----------



## overhang (4 July 2016)

drsmith said:


> A useful starting point for the majors would be, after they lose office, not to oppose measures they previously supported when in government.





This would be ideal but I don't think it would quite be that simple.  For example Labor claim (most likely probably political) that they blocked 5 billion of their own budget measures because the revenue they were saving was going to the Plan for Australian jobs package and the Gonski reforms which the coalition didn't fund.  They blocked the tax cuts associated with the carbon tax because the coalition proposal was permanent whilst Labors was deferred until 2018-19.

I could see the coalition doing the same thing if Labor somehow formed office, I wouldn't be surprised if they wouldn't pass their own superannuation changes claiming the money was to offset the loss of revenue from the company tax cuts.  Politicians are just going to claim that those measures come with strings attached and unless you also implement the policy they're supposedly in conjunction with then they won't pass what was an unrelated policy they supported.  Whilst the two parties may support the same budget measures how the two use that revenue is fundamentally different and I doubt could ever be agreed on.


----------



## dutchie (4 July 2016)

Election result has no affect on market.


----------



## noco (4 July 2016)

dutchie said:


> Election result has no affect on market.




I think the market is up on the prospects of a Coalition win.

Posiden is up 27.5% today.


----------



## explod (4 July 2016)

noco said:


> I think the market is up on the prospects of a Coalition win.
> 
> Posiden is up 27.5% today.




They don't know their history too well.   Apart from postals the remaing uncounted votes come from the larger more congested booths (where they cannot get through them all on the night) and they usually flow to the left (ALP),  high density populations. 

Gold and silver rising enormously which indicates fear of global financials.   

The political crapola has little influence in this case in my view.


----------



## basilio (4 July 2016)

> Labour Party as a minority government? Barely possible but a Hanson dominated Senate and a newly feral Liberal Party under Tony Abbott again would make this short term and ugly.
> 
> If I had to look for a possible solution I would like to see Julie Bishop as PM.
> 
> ...




I ran this idea up earlier on. I don't think it could be full fledged coalition but I think that in the interests of a functioning Parliamentary democracy and the country as a whole it would be in all major parties interest to develop a common broad view on critical long term issues. 

As other people have noted the party positions are not poles apart. All parties and us as a whole would gain from coming to agreed long term positions on CC, asylum seekers and long term tax/super policies.

At this stage I think only the Labour party could form a minority government. I just can't see the Liberals being able to pull The Greens and Xenaphon and Pauline Hansen together.  Labour on the other hand only needs the Greens and Xenaphon to be onside to pass legislation.  Far more realistic.

Otherwise we all go back to the polls for another DD* and  almost certainly *an even more splintered Senate. 

To go back to my first point -

*It would be in both major parties interest to establish quality, long term, cross party policies on key issues. *


----------



## explod (4 July 2016)

Under the constitution they cannot put senate back to polls for two years.


----------



## Tisme (4 July 2016)

Statistically it is highly improbable Malcolm will get 76 seats, maybe 74 at a pinch


----------



## orr (4 July 2016)

9% swing against Abbott in his seat....not all his own fault, Mike Baird becomes more rancid by the day
And the Luna right in denial as to the cause of their predicament...
If only the new Parliament could put through the changes to Negative gearing and Superannuation excess's and only then start the cat fight.
And the hot news is that Hanson wants to add Royal Commissions into Daylight Saving, the Easter Bunny and the colour purple, god bless.


----------



## CanOz (4 July 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Turn bull ran the most arrogant campaign. He thought he had it won with his big majority. He under rated Shorten, took the electorate for granted, did no work on policy and had nothing to offer except a pathetic corporate tax cut.
> 
> No one knows what he stands for these days and he's now just a Party apparachik.
> 
> He got what he deserved.




Probably never imagined Billiar would stoop to such a low....


----------



## noco (4 July 2016)

CanOz said:


> Probably never imagined Billiar would stoop to such a low....




You can blame Wayne Swan's daughter for the ruthless advertising on the Medicare lie....Shorten is not smart enough to have come up with such an audacious  event.


----------



## IFocus (4 July 2016)

drsmith said:


> In terms of misrepresentation and scare campaign, Labor's on Medicare far out weighed the Coalition's on border security. For a start, Labor has its track record with the latter in relatively recent history whereas I don't recall the Coalition presenting a policy to privatise Medicare since it's inception by the Hawke government.




Read this some where

The Turnbull government has already made $650m in cuts to Medicare coverage and they earmarked another billion in the last budget, and they backed in $54 billion in Abbott-era cuts which will devastate local hospitals.


----------



## IFocus (4 July 2016)

orr said:


> 'The women who mistook her sandwich for a hat'???... apologies to Oliver Sachs.
> 
> Good to see you in again Focus.....





Cheers mate been busy


----------



## drsmith (4 July 2016)

IFocus said:


> Read this some where
> 
> The Turnbull government has already made $650m in cuts to Medicare coverage and they earmarked another billion in the last budget, and they backed in $54 billion in Abbott-era cuts which will devastate local hospitals.



I'll leave you to also read the following,

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-04-08/has-the-federal-government-cut-health-funding/7284138

It'll bring back memories about Labor's commitments.


----------



## SirRumpole (4 July 2016)

We are going to miss Fact Check.

One of the best things the ABC has done, quoted by pollies on both sides.

A bit too close for comfort obviously.


----------



## sptrawler (5 July 2016)

Obviously, jobs and growth, wasn't what people wanted to hear.

More of the same, was the call of the day, why spoil the party.

Anyone for an Ouzo.


----------



## Tisme (5 July 2016)

I'm rather impressed how the Lib pollies (even though they have major failed)  are sticking to their hachneyed conversations that always include a swipe at the Labor lads ... as if to say "sure we are s41te, but Labor is worse".

At least Cory has twigged what is going on, although he could have just read ASF to get a heads up.


----------



## explod (5 July 2016)

sptrawler said:


> Obviously, jobs and growth, wasn't what people wanted to hear.
> 
> More of the same, was the call of the day, why spoil the party.
> 
> Anyone for an Ouzo.




"jobs and growth"in itself is ok,  but there was just no content, (and I have repeated that rant many times).  People needed to know the detail of how that was to be achieved,  when and who,  substance that people could evaluate.


----------



## sptrawler (5 July 2016)

explod said:


> "jobs and growth"in itself is ok,  but there was just no content, (and I have repeated that rant many times).  People needed to know the detail of how that was to be achieved,  when and who,  substance that people could evaluate.




That is a hard one, manufacturing shutting down, processing going offshore to NZ, mining becoming less labour intensive, technology replacing all sorts of fields of employment.

Australians are used to the 'good life'.  
Over here in the West, we still have full coffee shops, pubs and take away shops. 
The party is still on, just need to find someone to keep funding it.

You, probably the same as me, know the jobs will only come from hard work a good work ethic and a lot of praying.

It would be good to just wave a magic wand, and provide a rosy future, I think the magic wands batteries are flat.


----------



## ggkfc (5 July 2016)

Cuts for business means more jobs and growth

When has trickle down economics ever favoured the worker?
Always just lining the porkies wallets

Cuts to medicare and hospitals- sensationalized?
Maybe if you have a chronic health problem and need to see docs and get tests done, you can have a look at the bill when its private and see how that feels!


----------



## CanOz (5 July 2016)

sptrawler said:


> That is a hard one, manufacturing shutting down, processing going offshore to NZ, mining becoming less labour intensive, technology replacing all sorts of fields of employment.
> 
> Australians are used to the 'good life'.
> Over here in the West, we still have full coffee shops, pubs and take away shops.
> ...




Actually manufacturing in Australia had a pretty good run lately with manufacturing PMI...


----------



## sptrawler (5 July 2016)

CanOz said:


> Actually manufacturing in Australia had a pretty good run lately with manufacturing PMI...





Manufacturing fly screens to supply a housing boom, doesn't in itself create an export industry.

Is the right hand column the number of new start ups?

Now if we can get the $Aus down to 40 cents U.S, then we might see some manufacturing heading home.


----------



## noco (5 July 2016)

Is it possible to amalgamate with New Zealand and have John Keys as our Prime Minister?

It seems New Zealand is doing well and running rings around Australia economically.....If there is a John Keys here in Australia, will he please stand up....We need you right now....Maybe Pauline is our rising star.


----------



## CanOz (5 July 2016)

sptrawler said:


> Manufacturing fly screens to supply a housing boom, doesn't in itself create an export industry.
> 
> Is the right hand column the number of new start ups?
> 
> Now if we can get the $Aus down to 40 cents U.S, then we might see some manufacturing heading home.




You want to manufacture and export? I don't think Australia would be competitive unless it is high tech or highly automated. When you pay a chap 100+k a year to swing a lollipop...lol


----------



## sptrawler (5 July 2016)

CanOz said:


> You want to manufacture and export? I don't think Australia would be competitive unless it is high tech or highly automated. When you pay a chap 100+k a year to swing a lollipop...lol




My point exactly.

It will be interesting, to see who pays the bill, when we are all on welfare.lol


----------



## noco (5 July 2016)

CanOz said:


> You want to manufacture and export? I don't think Australia would be competitive unless it is high tech or highly automated. When you pay a chap 100+k a year to swing a lollipop...lol




Didn't you know that is a dangerous job and that is the reason they get paid big money.....That also includes bored money......standing in the Sun all day,,,,,,have a smoke when you need one.....Gawd it must be a long day for those poor buggers........No wonder the country is going broke.


----------



## sptrawler (5 July 2016)

noco said:


> Is it possible to amalgamate with New Zealand and have John Keys as our Prime Minister?
> 
> It seems New Zealand is doing well and running rings around Australia economically.....If there is a John Keys here in Australia, will he please stand up....We need you right now....Maybe Pauline is our rising star.




IMO Parliament is full of people, who just want to keep their heads down and score the highest pension their incompetence allows, sad really. Hopefully Pauline tells it as it is and she isn't gagged.


----------



## SirRumpole (5 July 2016)

sptrawler said:


> IMO Parliament is full of people, who just want to keep their heads down and score the highest pension their incompetence allows, sad really. Hopefully Pauline tells it as it is and she isn't gagged.




C'mon, why is Pauline in Parliament ? For the perks of course like everyone else. She doesn't want to actually work for a living.


----------



## drsmith (5 July 2016)

drsmith said:


> Sportsbet odds this morning,
> 
> Sworn in government: Coalition $1.22, Labor $4.00.
> 
> ...




Sportsbet odds this morning,

Sworn in government: Coalition/Labor $1.17/$4.50.

Hung parliament Y/N: $1.35/$3.00.

Coalition majority/minority: $3.00/$2.25.
Labor majority/minority: S16.00/$5.00.

Another election in 2016: $6.00.


----------



## basilio (5 July 2016)

John Hewson has weighed into the hung Parliament discussion with his thoughts on how Liberal and Labour need to unite to create a positive outcome.




> *The LNP And ALP Must Form A Coalition Of A Different Kind*
> We haven't seen good government for some 10-12 years.
> 
> .....We now have the prospect of what will be very messy, and probably ephemeral, "deals" with the minor parties and independents having to be done for any semblance of government to proceed.
> ...




http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/jo...lp-must-form-a-coalition-of-a-different-kind/

John is clearly getting his research from ASF and my earlier posts !!


----------



## SirRumpole (5 July 2016)

basilio said:


> John Hewson has weighed into the hung Parliament discussion with his thoughts on how Liberal and Labour need to unite to create a positive outcome.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




More than just your opinion I'd suggest.


----------



## Tisme (5 July 2016)

basilio said:


> John is clearly getting his research from ASF and my earlier posts !!




Well done basilio


----------



## Tisme (5 July 2016)

Tally room:

ALP 71 seats
Coalition 67 seats
Undecided 6 seats

http://vtr.aec.gov.au/HouseDefault-20499.htm


----------



## dutchie (5 July 2016)

Billiar still at it.

Claims Turnbull is going to go for another election. When pressed for proof of this, Billiar has nothing.

What a grub.


----------



## drsmith (5 July 2016)

dutchie said:


> Claims Turnbull is going to go for another election.



With that and the comment about suggesting Malcolm work with him to make the 45th parliament work, I get the impression he's given up (or not interested ?) on forming government in the immediate aftermath this election.

If that's the case, he'd be the one who wants another election and perhaps explains why he's egging it.

EDIT:
Listening to the start of Bill Shorten's presser (now posted on the ABC), it's clear he's not expecting Labor to form government.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-07-05/election-live-blog-july-5-counting-resumes/7568594


----------



## CanOz (5 July 2016)

dutchie said:


> Billiar still at it.
> 
> Claims Turnbull is going to go for another election. When pressed for proof of this, Billiar has nothing.
> 
> What a grub.




I think he's just a media WH***....power trip. 

THE VOTE IS OVER BILL, YOU CAN'T INFLUENCE THE UNCOUNTED VOTES NOW!


----------



## CanOz (5 July 2016)

Wow, still close as...


----------



## McLovin (5 July 2016)

drsmith said:


> In terms of misrepresentation and scare campaign, Labor's on Medicare far out weighed the Coalition's on border security. For a start, Labor has its track record with the latter in relatively recent history whereas I don't recall the Coalition presenting a policy to privatise Medicare since it's inception by the Hawke government.




There is no intention to privatise Medicare. The Libs don't have a base that would accept that. I know plenty of dyed in the wool rich (I'm talking >$25m in assets) conservatives who find the idea of Labor running the country totally anachronistic to good government and not one of them has ever even considered that Medicare should be scaled back in any wholesale way. So where exactly would the Libs find support for this policy?

It was the ALP in 1990 that introduced the pensioner co-payment ($2.50), and the sky didn't fall in. In fact it saved the system a lot of money. It's a shame the co-payment for doctors visits was so poorly sold.

Sign of the times really. Everything is binary. You either support <insert policy> or you don't. Most people vote because they dislike something, rather than in support of something. That's why negative campaigning works.


----------



## banco (5 July 2016)

basilio said:


> John Hewson has weighed into the hung Parliament discussion with his thoughts on how Liberal and Labour need to unite to create a positive outcome.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Government by technocrats has always been Hewson's idea of heaven.


----------



## Smurf1976 (5 July 2016)

sptrawler said:


> Obviously, jobs and growth, wasn't what people wanted to hear.




I think there's a similarity with the Australian election result, Brexit, Trump and so on.

People are fine with the idea of growth and jobs indeed that's one of the things they want. The masses can however clearly see the cracks, or should I say gaping holes, in the economic paradigm pursued over the past 40 or so years.

Some are getting rich but the middle class is slowly but surely being wiped out. We're becoming a society of haves and have not's far more than was once the case.

Neither of the major parties seems to have the answer. One is aligned with unions and a model that won't work in a globalised economy. The other is simply acting for a portion of the haves (certainly not all of them). Neither has a solution and that naturally focuses attention on anyone presenting an alternative view.

Keep going down this track and the odds of either Labor or the Coalition gaining a majority at future elections seems increasingly slim to me. Neither has the answers.


----------



## Tisme (5 July 2016)

Smurf1976 said:


> I think there's a similarity with the Australian election result, Brexit, Trump and so on.
> 
> People are fine with the idea of growth and jobs indeed that's one of the things they want. The masses can however clearly see the cracks, or should I say gaping holes, in the economic paradigm pursued over the past 40 or so years.
> 
> ...




If we are incapable of a value add industry or commodity sales, we should probably just move to mercantile and the service industry that attaches to it.


----------



## sptrawler (5 July 2016)

Tisme said:


> If we are incapable of a value add industry or commodity sales, we should probably just move to mercantile and the service industry that attaches to it.




Pray tell us what commerce facility we can exploit, that isn't covered by Singapore, Hong Kong, Japan, in the Asia Pacific?

With regard service industries, who is going to make money in W.A, S.A or the N.T? Huge land masses with minimal population.


----------



## trainspotter (5 July 2016)

CanOz said:


> Wow, still close as...







It would appear we have a juxtaposition of extraordinary proportions on our hands. 

Chisolm and Hindmarsh to fall to Labor, Forde too close to call 50/50 and Gilmore and Dunkley to remain Liberal so therefore we have a HUNG parliament and Pauline pants down has 4 ears for listening and 2 mouths to feed.


----------



## trainspotter (5 July 2016)

sptrawler said:


> Pray tell us what commerce facility we can exploit, that isn't covered by Singapore, Hong Kong, Japan, in the Asia Pacific?
> 
> With regard service industries, who is going to make money in W.A, S.A or the N.T? Huge land masses with minimal population.




Wind farms and SKA listening devices


----------



## sptrawler (5 July 2016)

trainspotter said:


> Wind farms and SKA listening devices




We could install a zillion wind farms in Geraldton, the windiest bloody place on earth.


----------



## sptrawler (5 July 2016)

My personal thoughts are, The LNP would have been better off staying with Abbott. 
Abbott may well have lost the election but the choices would have been obvious, not the choice of two beige options.
Do you pick mister stand for nothing LNP, or mister stand for nothing ALP, dumb politics.
Play to the masses, who don't want anything to happen.

If Abbott was there and was creamed, labor would be under the pump to perform.
If Abbott had won, his policies would have been tested.

Now we have f all but more of the same and a worsening of the fiscal situation, se le ve.

Peta Credlin got it right, when she said the LNP capitulated to a lot of bed wetters.lol


----------



## Smurf1976 (5 July 2016)

Tisme said:


> If we are incapable of a value add industry or commodity sales, we should probably just move to mercantile and the service industry that attaches to it.




Trouble is that's not creating the sort of jobs that pay well. Adds to the divide between the haves and have not's.

Someone works in a manufacturing industry and loses their job. Ends up getting a job in a retail store paying $45K a year. They've moved from doing fairly well to struggling to pay the bills and won't be happy with that outcome.

I think that what's in the mind of the masses is that we _should_ be able to compete and that part of that is that we shouldn't be needing to compete with countries paying workers $2 an hour in the first place. Compete with the USA or Western Europe = fair enough. Compete with China etc = no chance we'll win, we shouldn't be trying and we shouldn't need to.

At some point in the future I'm pretty sure we'll see a return to protectionism. The two major parties will have no choice unless they can come up with some other way that enables Australian business paying reasonable wages to actually compete with those paying a tenth or less of that amount. 

As a friend of mine put it - "Unions have completely stuffed Australia but the Liberals are just looking after the rich". Sums it up pretty well I think, neither has a real solution for the average person. For what it's worth, he's retired, previously a blue collar worker in manufacturing. He's doing OK, own house and reasonable cars etc but like many he's worried about where we're headed long term.


----------



## wayneL (6 July 2016)

We're stuffed politically and economically for two reasons IMO.

1/ People vote with narrow self interest and not in the national interest. Therefore, politicians gear their electioneering/policies strategically towards narrow self interests.

2/ It is obvious the elecotrate is only able to discern negativity. Labor's disgusting Mediscare campaign was a winner. dammit even the low life scum handing out Labor how to vote pamphlets repeated the "save Medicare" mantra. The Liberals (notwithstanding ludicrous and out of touch policy mistakes) lost out big time through failing to sling mud.

This is why we can't have good **** folks.


----------



## Tisme (6 July 2016)

I thought last night's Lateline summed it up very well with Emma hosting Matthew Canavan and Linda Burney. 

Both of them learned their lessons, actually Linda is a newb, so Matthew learned the lesson the electorate sent via the ballot.... then jumped in with the same ol' same ol' of Labor being pond scum, he being the the loud voiced beacon of virtue. The indoctrination of politicians into party propaganda must be so powerful they just can't breakout of the infantile ...read INFANTILE name calling, blame games and hurt feelings.

Personally I hope Malcolm calls a snap election, because I reckon the result will be even more representative of an electorate tired of excuses for why we have poor governance and having kiddies in charge of the house. 

I'm sure the voters are fairly insulted to be hearing their intelligence is so low they were compelled to switch to Labor because of a Captain Obvious campaign by Labor about our sacred cow Medicare. The impudence of the all seeing eyes going about trying to insinuate that any voter who votes differently to their own inculcation is a simpleton indicates to me we still have people lacking mental gymnastics warming their bums in Parliament.


----------



## Tisme (6 July 2016)

sptrawler said:


> .
> 
> Peta Credlin got it right, when she said the LNP capitulated to a lot of bed wetters.lol




I think we are seeing a dynamic where the guys are being overtaken by the women as the hard nuts of politics. 

Traditionally parliamentary men saw problems, pulled out virtual spears and solved them, popular or not with the rest of the tribe; apologised if someone lost an eye, got back on the pony and went looking for more exciting things to do.... like building a young country without the baggage of the old world can't do handcuffs.

Now those same men want to discuss the feelings of the tribe, explore the soft options, solve the anxiety rather than the root cause, calm the negative emotions, respect and empathise with the insecurities and anguishes of the individuals, take personal criticisms as a wake up calls.....sound familiar ladies?


----------



## Tisme (6 July 2016)

Tisme said:


> Tally room:
> 
> ALP 71 seats
> Coalition 67 seats
> ...




Currently:

ALP 71 seats
Coalition 70 seats
Undecided 4 seats


----------



## Tink (6 July 2016)

It looks like Chisholm and Dunkley will go to the Liberals in Vic.

It was only a 1% swing in Vic to Labor, Daniel Andrews was a good deterrent.

*Libs ahead in key Victorian seats*

_According to data released by Finity Consulting the seat of Dunkley will go to Liberal Chris Crewther, who is expected to win by 2, 200 early votes, up from his current lead of 438 votes ahead of Labor candidate Peta Murphy.

In Chisholm, Liberal candidate Julia Banks is ahead by just 66 votes which is expected to widen to 1400, snatching the win from Labor’s Stefanie Perri who is replacing outgoing retiring MP Anna Burke._


----------



## Tisme (6 July 2016)

Tink said:


> It looks like Chisholm and Dunkley will go to the Liberals in Vic.
> 
> It was only a 1% swing in Vic to Labor, Daniel Andrews was a good deterrent.
> 
> ...




AEC is showing 362 votes ahead for Julia and 421 ahead for Chris.



Close seats:

http://vtr.aec.gov.au/HouseCloseSeats-20499.htm


----------



## explod (6 July 2016)

Tisme said:


> Currently:
> 
> ALP 71 seats
> Coalition 70 seats
> Undecided 4 seats




ABC 24 have Libs 3 to 4 seats ahead of your count from "tallyroom"  

Interested in why the anomaly.


----------



## tech/a (6 July 2016)

explod said:


> ABC 24 have Libs 3 to 4 seats ahead of your count from "tallyroom"
> 
> Interested in why the anomaly.




Wondered myself


----------



## Tisme (6 July 2016)

explod said:


> ABC 24 have Libs 3 to 4 seats ahead of your count from "tallyroom"
> 
> Interested in why the anomaly.




You seen the meme with the Antony Green putting an axe through the AEC door out of frustration with his prediction modelling?



> The feud between Antony Green and members of the Australian Electoral Council has stepped up this morning with reports suggesting the ABC’s leading pollster has stormed the offices of the AEC and declared that he will finish the count all by himself.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## explod (6 July 2016)

Tisme said:


> You seen the meme with the Antony Green putting an axe through the AEC door out of frustration with his prediction modelling?




Yep,  felt something going on to do with bias.  Thanks 

Just up ABC 70 L/N 67 ALP 1 GRN


----------



## Logique (6 July 2016)

wayneL said:


> We're stuffed politically and economically for two reasons IMO.
> 1/ People vote with narrow self interest and not in the national interest. Therefore, politicians gear their electioneering/policies strategically towards narrow self interests.
> 2/ It is obvious the elecotrate is only able to discern negativity. Labor's disgusting *Mediscare* campaign was a winner. dammit even the low life scum handing out Labor how to vote pamphlets repeated the "save Medicare" mantra. The Liberals (notwithstanding ludicrous and out of touch policy mistakes) lost out big time through failing to sling mud.
> This is why we can't have good **** folks.



The Libs can easily disprove Labor's so-called scare campaign on Medicare:

1. Repudiate their former intention to charge a $7 co payment
2. Unwind their indexation freeze on doctor bulk billing contributions
3. Unwind their part withdrawal of incentives to reduce bulk billing on pathology incl. radiology tests

We would soon see if they're fair dinkum about Medicare, or just clutching at election excuses.  Hint: don't hold your breath!

You can listen to what they say, or watch what they do.


----------



## explod (6 July 2016)

wayneL said:


> We're stuffed politically and economically for two reasons IMO.
> 
> 1/ People vote with narrow self interest and not in the national interest. Therefore, politicians gear their electioneering/policies strategically towards narrow self interests.
> 
> ...




A "low life scum bag..."  ffs you are speaking of a fellow countryman.  

 It is such attitudes of high folutin bias that is one of the prime problems within society.


----------



## SirRumpole (6 July 2016)

wayneL said:


> We're stuffed politically and economically for two reasons IMO.
> 
> 1/ People vote with narrow self interest and not in the national interest. Therefore, politicians gear their electioneering/policies strategically towards narrow self interests.
> 
> ...




No doubt you have forgotten the lies about $100 roasts due to the carbon tax, and the promises Abbott made before the 2013 election which he then reneged on.

So, they both do it. Privatisation of Medicare was an exaggeration by Labor, but the Libs would do it if they could, as Fraser did, and that's all Labor needed to mount the scare campaign.


----------



## Knobby22 (6 July 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> No doubt you have forgotten the lies about $100 roasts due to the carbon tax, and the promises Abbott made before the 2013 election which he then reneged on.
> 
> So, they both do it, Privatisation of Medicare was an exaggeration by Labor, but the Libs would do it if they could, as Fraser did, and that's all Labor needed to mount the scare campaign.




As Turnbull said, Sir Rumpole, even though he denied he was going to privatise Medicare, over 70% of Labor voters (and even 25% of Coalition voters) believed it. 
This showed the damage from Abbott and other previous examples has resulted in that the public will believe the worst. 
Unfortunately the success of the lie means that we can expect further examples next election.

And I disagree with you Wayne about narrow self interest. The rise of Xenophon is an example of the opposite of this. The problem is narrow interest groups pushing sometimes doubtful agendas affecting the politicians, whether they be unions or Industry groups. Is it any wonder that the people decide to vote for someone else?


----------



## CanOz (6 July 2016)

I've been watching politics from three different countries, the US, Canada and Australia for 30 years. I've not seen a scare campaign anything like what Labor had done just days before and election and the way they did it. Stretching a few facts is the normal in politics. Coming out and using a scare tactic they way they have is a new low. This tendancy seems a habit for Bill, as evidenced by the 'snap election' claim. Seriously, WTF is this nut job capable of?


----------



## noco (6 July 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> No doubt you have forgotten the lies about $100 roasts due to the carbon tax, and the promises Abbott made before the 2013 election which he then reneged on.
> 
> So, they both do it. Privatisation of Medicare was an exaggeration by Labor, but the Libs would do it if they could, as Fraser did, and that's all Labor needed to mount the scare campaign.




I noticed the price on a whole fillet steak on my local super market had a price tag of $98...4.4 kg and we don't have a carbon tax anymore.


----------



## noco (6 July 2016)

Does and one know how the the half senate election will be conducted in 2019?

How will it be determined which 38 only get 3 years and the other 38 get 6 years?

Would it be based on the best quota obtained in the 2016 election?


----------



## wayneL (6 July 2016)

explod said:


> A "low life scum bag..."  ffs you are speaking of a fellow countryman.
> 
> It is such attitudes of high folutin bias that is one of the prime problems within society.



The labor pond scum tried to scare me (and everyone else) into voting labor.

The others didn't. Even the greens guy was super pleasant. Had a nice chat for a few minutes.

Ipso facto the truth of my words is self evident, countryman or not.

And bias? I dont think I voted how you think I voted.


----------



## Ves (6 July 2016)

noco said:


> Does and one know how the the half senate election will be conducted in 2019?
> 
> How will it be determined which 38 only get 3 years and the other 38 get 6 years?
> 
> Would it be based on the best quota obtained in the 2016 election?



It depends.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-07-05/election-2016new-senate-terms-explained/7571406


----------



## drsmith (6 July 2016)

drsmith said:


> Sportsbet odds this morning,
> 
> Sworn in government: Coalition/Labor $1.17/$4.50.
> 
> ...



Sportsbet odds this morning,

Sworn in government: Coalition/Labor $1.08/$7.00.

Hung parliament Y/N: $1.70/$2.05.

Coalition majority/minority: $2.15/$1.90.
Labor majority/minority: S34.00/$7.00.

Another election in 2016: $7.00

Postal votes thus far are flowing in favour of the Libs.


----------



## noco (6 July 2016)

Ves said:


> It depends.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-07-05/election-2016new-senate-terms-explained/7571406




Thanks for the info Ves....That explained it quite well.


----------



## trainspotter (6 July 2016)

Spoke with local Liberal MLA this morning - He is claiming second election to FIX the mess


----------



## CanOz (6 July 2016)

trainspotter said:


> Spoke with local Liberal MLA this morning - He is claiming second election to FIX the mess




How would that fix anything? Thats been tried in Europe a few times and ended up the same...as i recall.


----------



## dutchie (6 July 2016)

By the time the AEC gets the result out, we could have had another election.


----------



## dutchie (6 July 2016)

Election 2016: Antony Green gives Coalition 73 seats, says 76 and majority a possibility


----------



## SirRumpole (6 July 2016)

When are we going to get E- voting ?

We would know the result on the night.


----------



## CanOz (6 July 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> When are we going to get E- voting ?
> 
> We would know the result on the night.




I wondered about this as well. E-Voting, they say, is not yet secure enough. Are there other democracies using this successfully yet?


----------



## pixel (6 July 2016)

trainspotter said:


> Spoke with local Liberal MLA this morning - He is claiming second election to FIX the mess




That wouldn't fix anything. It would most likely increase the vote of discontent and force whoever wants to form Government to negotiate and compromise. That might even lead to a Labor-Green coalition.


----------



## pixel (6 July 2016)

CanOz said:


> I wondered about this as well. E-Voting, they say, is not yet secure enough. Are there other democracies using this successfully yet?




Estonia set the e-ball rolling in 2005:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_voting_in_Estonia


----------



## AlterEgo (6 July 2016)

CanOz said:


> I wondered about this as well. E-Voting, they say, is not yet secure enough. Are there other democracies using this successfully yet?




Funny how it's secure enough to submit your tax online, but not to vote?!!

And they don't even ask to see any ID at the polling booth anyway, so how secure is that?!


----------



## CanOz (6 July 2016)

AlterEgo said:


> Funny how it's secure enough to submit your tax online, but not to vote?!!
> 
> And they don't even ask to see any ID at the polling booth anyway, so how secure is that?!




Yeah, bizarre. I could walk in and vote in the place of Rumpy


----------



## McLovin (6 July 2016)

CanOz said:


> I wondered about this as well. E-Voting, they say, is not yet secure enough. Are there other democracies using this successfully yet?




New South Wales.

https://www.ivote.nsw.gov.au/


----------



## CanOz (6 July 2016)

McLovin said:


> New South Wales.
> 
> https://www.ivote.nsw.gov.au/




Cool....so its coming.


----------



## SirRumpole (6 July 2016)

McLovin said:


> New South Wales.
> 
> https://www.ivote.nsw.gov.au/




Indeed. I voted this way in the last NSW election.


----------



## noco (6 July 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> When are we going to get E- voting ?
> 
> We would know the result on the night.




Probably a good idea but I would fear the way Labor operate they would find a loop hole in which to rort the system to increase their votes......They like to win at all cost no matter what it takes.


----------



## overhang (6 July 2016)

noco said:


> Probably a good idea but I would fear the way Labor operate they would find a loop hole in which to rort the system to increase their votes......They like to win at all cost no matter what it takes.




It would beat the blatant manipulation by both parties towards postal votes.  Sending out postal vote forms with a prepaid envelope that appears to be sent to the AEC but is instead sent to party headquarters where they take all your personal information and then forward the vote onto the AEC.  They probably rig those votes too.


----------



## noco (6 July 2016)

Maybe I am right and maybe I am wrong for thinking the way I do and could possibly be branded as a bit eccentric...I don't really care what people think...I, like Pauline Hanson, like to speak my mind.

I am beginning to wonder after 9 months in the job as PM and after placing lots of ideas on the table to repair the debt and deficit left by Labor and suffering the  obstruction and humiliation by the media, Labor and the senate, whether it became all too hard for miracle Malcolm and he decided to throw in the towel, lose the election and let Labor paddle in the fiscal mess....But it now looks like Turnbull will still have to carry the baby.

Turnbull has gone too far to the left and has stuffed the Liberal Party well and truly..Now Cory Benardi wants ot quit and form a conservative Party.....What next?

Turnbull was offered the tools by his campaign team to attack Shorten but he refused to use them....So one has to ask why?

Or was it some kind of conspiracy with Labor to ensure we went further down the path of socialism after all Turnbull wanted to join the Labor Party and was refused entry.......One has to ask the question why?...Was this the time he decided to help Labor win?

What did Turnbull have to lose?.......He has $200 million in the bank......He could resign and sit back on his fat tax payer pension......Sit on a few corporate boards...Lucy is CEO of PrIma Biomed.....He may have even been offered some remuneration from Labor.

And Malcolm Fraser said "Life was never meant to be easy".


----------



## dutchie (6 July 2016)

Labor would have won the election if Albanese had replaced Billiar.


----------



## overhang (6 July 2016)

noco said:


> I am beginning to wonder after 9 months in the job as PM and after placing lots of ideas on the table to repair the debt and deficit left by Labor and suffering the  obstruction and humiliation by the media, Labor and the senate, whether it became all too hard for miracle Malcolm and he decided to throw in the towel, lose the election and let Labor paddle in the fiscal mess....But it now looks like Turnbull will still have to carry the baby.
> 
> Turnbull has gone too far to the left and has stuffed the Liberal Party well and truly..Now Cory Benardi wants ot quit and form a conservative Party.....What next?
> 
> Turnbull was offered the tools by his campaign team to attack Shorten but he refused to use them....So one has to ask why?




So much of the right wing media blames the poor result on Turnbull for losing touch with the conservative values of the Liberal party and it may have merit as they have lost a lot of votes to conservative parties.  But I know for many others Turnbull failed to direct the party back to the middle ground and was clearly shackled by the far right of the party.  What progressive policies did they have?  Their super plan certainly hit their core followers and lost them a few votes but super needed to be reformed.  

I have no doubt Turnbull lost votes for not being conservative enough but he also lost votes for not being able to separate himself from the far right of the party that are very out of touch with the average Australian.  Do people actually forget why Abbott was doing so badly in the polls?


----------



## SirRumpole (6 July 2016)

overhang said:


> It would beat the blatant manipulation by both parties towards postal votes.  Sending out postal vote forms with a prepaid envelope that appears to be sent to the AEC but is instead sent to party headquarters where they take all your personal information and then forward the vote onto the AEC.  They probably rig those votes too.




The pros and cons of E voting.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-07-06/case-for-election-electronic-voting-gathering-momentum/7574620


----------



## qldfrog (6 July 2016)

CanOz said:


> Yeah, bizarre. I could walk in and vote in the place of Rumpy



I did it and what can they do about it?
Fine Rumpy?


just kidding of course but I wonder the fragility of the present system in facing a mild rebellion movement?


----------



## qldfrog (6 July 2016)

overhang said:


> I have no doubt Turnbull lost votes for not being conservative enough but he also lost votes for not being able to separate himself from the far right of the party that are very out of touch with the average Australian.  Do people actually forget why Abbott was doing so badly in the polls?



Can not agree more...


----------



## Knobby22 (7 July 2016)

qldfrog said:


> Can not agree more...




Yes, perfectly stated.


----------



## McLovin (7 July 2016)

noco said:


> Now Cory Benardi wants ot quit and form a conservative Party




Don't let the door hit you on the way out, Cory.



			
				overhang said:
			
		

> I have no doubt Turnbull lost votes for not being conservative enough but he also lost votes for not being able to separate himself from the far right of the party that are very out of touch with the average Australian. Do people actually forget why Abbott was doing so badly in the polls?




You bet he did. The fact is that had either side managed to win the centre they would have formed a government with a large majority. I don't know why Bill Shorten is doing a victory lap of the country. The ALP got its second lowest ever primary vote.


----------



## SirRumpole (7 July 2016)

McLovin said:


> Don't let the door hit you on the way out, Cory.




Couldn't agree more. If he said what he really stood for instead of hanging on to the Liberal coattails very few would vote for him.


----------



## wayneL (7 July 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Couldn't agree more. If he said what he really stood for instead of hanging on to the Liberal coattails very few would vote for him.




He could call it the Pharisee Party


----------



## drsmith (7 July 2016)

drsmith said:


> Sportsbet odds this morning,
> 
> Sworn in government: Coalition/Labor $1.08/$7.00.
> 
> ...



Today,

Sworn in government: Coalition/Labor $1.01/$16.00.

Hung parliament Y/N: $1.25/$3.75.

Coalition majority/minority: $1.27/$3.50.
Labor majority/minority: $51.00/$11.00.

Another election in 2016: $16.00.

Bill Shorten's victory lap is looking increasingly premature.

Malcolm Turnbull has thus far clearly been unable to unite the Liberal party after toppling Tony Abbott leading to conflicting policy goals within the party. This perhaps explains why the government since Malcolm Turnbull has take over has lacked a clear policy narrative.


----------



## trainspotter (7 July 2016)

Katter just announced support for Turnbull government.


----------



## drsmith (7 July 2016)

ABC now has Coalition/Labor 73/66 with 5 independent and 6 undecided. Of the undecided, the Coalition are in front in Ford and Labor are in front with the rest (only by 8 now in Hindmarsh).

Forde is likely to go to the Libs and Cowan to Labor making it 74/67. The rest depend on the remaining postal votes to be counted. 74 to 78 is the realistic range now for the Coalition depending on how the remaining postal votes go. 75 or 76 is most likely in my view. 75 is needed to remove the risk of Labor being able to legislate from opposition.


----------



## CanOz (7 July 2016)

S&P doesn't like things at the moment

Must not be paying the right people the right incentives...



> 15:01TradeTheNews.com Asian Mid-session Market Update:* S&P lowers Australia outlook to Negative even as ruling Coalition edges toward election victory; *Samsung Electronics rises on prelim Q2 results***Economic Data***- (JP) JAPAN JUNE OFFICIAL RESERVE ASSETS: $1.27T v $1.25T PRIOR more... (related UPDTE) - Source TradeTheNews.com


----------



## sptrawler (7 July 2016)

drsmith said:


> ABC now has Coalition/Labor 73/66 with 5 independent and 6 undecided. Of the undecided, the Coalition are in front in Ford and Labor are in front with the rest (only by 8 now in Hindmarsh).
> 
> Forde is likely to go to the Libs and Cowan to Labor making it 74/67. The rest depend on the remaining postal votes to be counted. 74 to 78 is the realistic range now for the Coalition depending on how the remaining postal votes go. 75 or 76 is most likely in my view. 75 is needed to remove the risk of Labor being able to legislate from opposition.




Sad result for the LNP and Australia in general,IMO, I would rather have seen an ALP or LNP majority.
Just another 3 years of sliding down the chute.


----------



## drsmith (7 July 2016)

A 76 seat majority is probably more likely than 75 now with the way the postal count is running.


----------



## explod (7 July 2016)

sptrawler said:


> Sad result for the LNP and Australia in general,IMO, I would rather have seen an ALP or LNP majority.
> Just another 3 years of sliding down the chute.




For many years governing has not taken place on the floor of the Parliament.  Decisions are made behind closed doors by the ruling party and is imposed on Parliament because of the greater numbers of sheep over the other smaller numbers of sheep. 

With numbers near equal this time,  matters will need to be aired and sorted on the floor of the house,  hopefully. 

The people have voted/decided,  which is democracy,  and the mix so chosen have a responsibity to follow that decision and govern according to the people's wishes.  So a bit of sorting and new thinking,  hey. 

It was often said by the old timers I knew out of the great depression that, "the hard way is the only way to really learn and that one has to first fall into the gutter to find the real go to stand on ones own feet"   

Our pollies have been spoon fed for too long so lets hope they can rise to the occasion of the hard times ahead.  

In my humble opinion.


----------



## orr (7 July 2016)

The timing of Chilcot Reports release into the Iraq debacle and the obsequious complicity  of howard's ineptitude, to my recollection, has had no mention in the pg's of this thread, and much my failure I cannot give address to the timing necessities of our just past election. But given the line ball margin now involved... consider yourselves very lucky LNP...and I wish many 'craig thomson' moments ahead for you...  
Those turd$ you cannot kleen from your shoes(or jackboot) ....You'll be seeing it more than likely on the right.


----------



## sptrawler (8 July 2016)

explod said:


> For many years governing has not taken place on the floor of the Parliament.  Decisions are made behind closed doors by the ruling party and is imposed on Parliament because of the greater numbers of sheep over the other smaller numbers of sheep.
> 
> With numbers near equal this time,  matters will need to be aired and sorted on the floor of the house,  hopefully.
> 
> ...




I have to agree with that.


----------



## Tisme (8 July 2016)

orr said:


> The timing of Chilcot Reports release into the Iraq debacle and the obsequious complicity  of howard's ineptitude, to my recollection, has had no mention in the pg's of this thread, and much my failure I cannot give address to the timing necessities of our just past election. But given the line ball margin now involved... consider yourselves very lucky LNP...and I wish many 'craig thomson' moments ahead for you...
> Those turd$ you cannot kleen from your shoes(or jackboot) ....You'll be seeing it more than likely on the right.





Cory will be a great irritation, perhaps an Achilles heal, inside or outside the party.

Meanwhile the bigger question is Howard's appearance last night on Lateline:


http://www.news.com.au/entertainmen...n/news-story/720406a07b754b017aeca1470415a57c


----------



## Tisme (8 July 2016)

With Chris Pyne declaring the election as majority won by the Coalescing and the Lab boys celebrating their loss, I'm starting to think of the good old days of the CIA involvement and vote rigging back in the pre Whitlam days.... this time, however, I'm thinking party collusion...... for the good of the country of course.


----------



## drsmith (10 July 2016)

Bill Shorten having performed his national victory tour last week has today conceded the election.

Sportsbet now has Coalition majority/minority government at $1.06/$6.00.

The ABC has now given 74 seats to the Coalition, 66 to Labor, 5 independents with 5 still in doubt. Of the 5 in doubt, the Libs have taken the lead in two and Labor retain the lead in another 3. 

http://www.abc.net.au/news/federal-election-2016/results/list/?selector=indoubt&sort=latest

A 76 or 77 seat majority government to the Coalition now looks like the most likely result.

William Bowe (Poll Bludger),

https://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/2016/07/07/late-counting-progressively-updated/

AEC tally room now has the Coalition in front on 2PP,

http://vtr.aec.gov.au/HouseDefault-20499.htm


----------



## wayneL (10 July 2016)

Thank God, an Australia with Shorten as PM would've been too much to bear.


----------



## SirRumpole (10 July 2016)

wayneL said:


> Thank God, an Australia with Shorten as PM would've been too much to bear.




Shorten would at least have led a reasonably united Party.

Turnbull has every sectional interest in the Liberal and Nat Parties breathing down his neck wanting their pieces of flesh.

He's got to do deals with everyone in the Coalition as well as with the cross benches in the Senate. Basically I think he's stuffed unless his name is really Houdini.


----------



## noco (10 July 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Shorten would at least have led a reasonably united Party.




I see we have done a back flip......."A REASONABLY UNITED LABOR PARTY" now.

A day or two ago the Labor Party was fully united and all the way with BS, that is until I reminded you of the 50 Labor MPs who are in revolt with Shorten on the BOAT TURN BACK.

You don't seem to have a clue what goes on behind closed doors in the Labor Party and the corrupt unions.


----------



## wayneL (10 July 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Shorten would at least have led a reasonably united Party.
> 
> Turnbull has every sectional interest in the Liberal and Nat Parties breathing down his neck wanting their pieces of flesh.
> 
> He's got to do deals with everyone in the Coalition as well as with the cross benches in the Senate. Basically I think he's stuffed unless his name is really Houdini.




Albo or Bowen would be bearable, not Shorten 

....or Plibrwexwkjek


----------



## SirRumpole (10 July 2016)

noco said:


> You don't seem to have a clue what goes on behind closed doors in the Labor Party and the corrupt unions.




Neither would you unless you are a closet Fabian.


----------



## drsmith (10 July 2016)

I know the argument is never settled but it's good for a fleeting moment to think it's been settled for another 3 years.


----------



## trainspotter (10 July 2016)

wayneL said:


> Albo or Bowen would be bearable, not Shorten
> 
> ....or Plibrwexwkjek




Needs more vowels and less consonants .. or is it the other way around


----------



## trainspotter (10 July 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Neither would you unless you are a closet Fabian.




TouchÃ© Horace .. TouchÃ©


----------



## CanOz (10 July 2016)

Thank goodness it's over


----------



## trainspotter (10 July 2016)

CanOz said:


> Thank goodness it's over




“Come, Watson, come!' he cried. 'The game is afoot. Not a word! Into your clothes and come!'

The game has just begun ....:frown:


----------



## noco (10 July 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Neither would you unless you are a closet Fabian.




I made an application to join the Fabians but they refused my entry.......Did you put my weights up?

I even told the that I went to school with Gough Whitlam but that did not make any difference....I even offered them a grand......Grrrrr.


----------



## explod (11 July 2016)

Struth,  the Libs are over the line,  no worries yet the place is like a cemetary. 

Didn't think you right wing fascist freemasons would go down to the pub. 

Aaarrrr well we'll see how they govern now with lovely fish n chips and contempt of court chester in big time standing over in the upper house.


----------



## drsmith (11 July 2016)

Game over now according to the ABC with the Coalition now at 76. They may get to 77 depending on Herbert which could go either way. Cowan and Hindmarsh should go to Labor giving them 68.

It will therefore be 76/69 or 77/68. Now for Malcolm comes the challenge of government with the parliament he's got. 

We live in interesting times.


----------



## SirRumpole (11 July 2016)

explod said:


> Struth,  the Libs are over the line,  no worries yet the place is like a cemetary.
> 
> .




I think the smart ones realise that it's a pyrrhic victory at best and that it's going to be a hard three years trying to get stuff through this Senate.

I predict that Mal & co will just sit on their bums for three years and do as little as possible, meanwhile the deficits will mount up. They just can't afford to take any risks electorally, so they will either leave a mess for the next lot or try to do more if they get a bigger majority next election.


----------



## wayneL (11 July 2016)

Listening to shortun today, still playing Mr Negative.

This was Big Kim's mistake, why was never PM and why Bill never will be either.

Sooooo tedious.


----------



## noco (11 July 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> I think the smart ones realise that it's a pyrrhic victory at best and that it's going to be a hard three years trying to get stuff through this Senate.
> 
> I predict that Mal & co will just sit on their bums for three years and do as little as possible, meanwhile the deficits will mount up. They just can't afford to take any risks electorally, so they will either leave a mess for the next lot or try to do more if they get a bigger majority next election.




And that is exactly what is happening with the Labor Government in Queensland.

Just marking time while the debt gets bigger.

Voters should have listened to Campbell Newman instead of the propaganda from Palachook and the unions.


----------



## sptrawler (11 July 2016)

I see Tony Windsor didn't get the result, he expected, oh dear.


----------



## Tisme (12 July 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> I think the smart ones realise that it's a pyrrhic victory at best and that it's going to be a hard three years trying to get stuff through this Senate.
> 
> .




Do you reckon there was a loss situation for them? No sooner do the results indicate a non Labor victory than we hear about "mandates", Bill Shorten's necessary capitulation to the forces of good (Liberal Party), etc. Instead of the Libs recognising they are lucky to get a guernsy after losing 14 seats they are parading themselves as a Caesar taking Rome.

So another three years of petty blaming Labor for ineffective Coalition governance at OUR cost or are we going to get positive and progressive policy that consolidates our sovereignty and wealth. Do we get motivated to get up in the morning and put in the good fight, or do we just drone around day in day out waiting for the sky to fall in.

The constant pall of bogeyman that is the supposed strangling debt needs to be put in context and the population educated on whether it's worth the doom and gloom that it produces at the hands of low life, bottom feeding politician scum .....

Pauline will fix this, all we have to do is a Pontius Pilate and wash out hands of her when the deeds are done.


----------



## SirRumpole (12 July 2016)

> Do we get motivated to get up in the morning and put in the good fight, or do we just drone around day in day out waiting for the sky to fall in.




I think your personal citation sums it up rather well.


----------



## noco (13 July 2016)

Ewen Jones in the seat of Herbert (Townsville) is now ahead of Labor's Kathy O'toole by 113......The liberals are now set to pick their 77th seat.


----------



## drsmith (13 July 2016)

noco said:


> Ewen Jones in the seat of Herbert (Townsville) is now ahead of Labor's Kathy O'toole by 113......The liberals are now set to pick their 77th seat.



Another batch of postal votes has been added to the count today maintaining the earlier trend. William Bowe (Poll Bludger) as of last night has the LNP winning Herbert by 231. 77 would be a good result considering how it was looking at the conclusion of counting on election night.

Bill Shorten meanwhile is continuing his victory tour in Adelaide. Sportsbet has moved on to the next election with the starting odds in favour of Labor $1.72/$2.00.


----------



## drsmith (13 July 2016)

Correction oF a counting error in Herbert put Labor back in front by 33 for a period this afternoon however additional postal votes have put the LNP back in front by 34. The net result is that it's now closer again than it looked after the LNP hit the lead earlier in the day by 133 but William Bowe still thinks the LNP will most likely retain the seat.



> William Bowe
> Wednesday, July 13, 2016 at 6:42 pm
> 
> Labor stayed competitive in Herbert today because they appeared to turn up an error in the result from Kirwan PPVC, where they now have Labor up 83 and LNP down 65. The overall tide is against them, and I’m projecting them to lose by 145, with maybe 2000 votes to go. Perhaps provisionals will turn something up for them.




https://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollblu...ogressively-updated/comment-page-32/#comments


----------



## drsmith (14 July 2016)

Labor in Herbert has had a further lucky break today in the form of another recount of a pre-poll booth in their favour.

From the above link,



> William Bowe
> Thursday, July 14, 2016 at 4:57 pm
> 
> For the second day in a row, Labor has had a good turn from rechecking at a pre-poll voting centre: Townsville in this case, where the LNP is now down 96 and Labor up 12.




Labor also got a better batch of postal votes late this afternoon. The margin to the LNP is now just 44. There's probably only 1,000 or so votes now to add to the count with only 34 postal votes left. This seat could now go either way with the most likely result a difference under 100 and a recount.


----------



## drsmith (18 July 2016)

Herbert is even tighter now with a margin to the LNP of 12 over the weekend which has been retained this morning with the recommencement of counting of the final several hundred votes.

William Bowe in an update this morning is projecting a margin of 10 to the LNP with the completion of counting of final votes expected today but it could go either way with a recount more likely than ever.

https://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/2016/07/17/late-counting-progressively-updated/


----------



## noco (18 July 2016)

drsmith said:


> Herbert is even tighter now with a margin to the LNP of 12 over the weekend which has been retained this morning with the recommencement of counting of the final several hundred votes.
> 
> William Bowe in an update this morning is projecting a margin of 10 to the LNP with the completion of counting of final votes expected today but it could go either way with a recount more likely than ever.
> 
> https://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/2016/07/17/late-counting-progressively-updated/




At 4.45 pm Labor is ahead by 8 votes in the seat of Herbert with 90.2 % of the vote counted.

Info from at:ab.co/ausvotes


----------



## drsmith (18 July 2016)

It looks like the counting is over and the ABC has counted the seat as a Labor gain with the above margin of 8 votes.

Now comes the recount.


----------



## noco (18 July 2016)

drsmith said:


> It looks like the counting is over and the ABC has counted the seat as a Labor gain with the above margin of 8 votes.
> 
> Now comes the recount.




Doc, I don't think that is right.......

Only 90.4% has been counted as at 5 pm today......The biased ABC would dearly love to see it go to Labor but to the best of my knowledge there are still 1000 votes to be counted.

It could still go either way thanks to Labor's MEDICARE LIE.


----------



## SirRumpole (18 July 2016)

noco said:


> Doc, I don't think that is right.......
> 
> Only 90.4% has been counted as at 5 pm today......The biased ABC would dearly love to see it go to Labor but to the best of my knowledge there are still 1000 votes to be counted.
> 
> It could still go either way thanks to Labor's MEDICARE LIE.




Medicare lie, negative gearing lie, boat people lie it all evens up.


----------



## drsmith (18 July 2016)

William Bowe sums up the remaining 574 envelopes awaiting processing in Herbert on the AEC's site as follows,



> The AEC advises that the “awaiting processing” figures are out of date, and all have been dealt with.




With regard to the turnout of 90.4%, not everyone on the roll votes. The count is over but with a margin this tight, the recount could go either way.


----------



## noco (18 July 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Medicare lie, negative gearing lie, boat people lie it all evens up.




Boat People lie ?????????

With 50 Labor MPs and the Greens revolting against Bill Shortens un-united team against the BOAT TURN BACK, how can that be a lie?

If Labor had won the election the illegal boats would have well and truly been flooding Australia as we speak.

The MEDICARE LIE was well and truly covered but Labor got away with it....Any sane person with a reasonable amount of intelligence would be able to analyze the proposition as to who would but Medicare when it forks out $24 billion and recovers just $10 billion.

Now then Rumpy would you be prepared to buy a business that was running at a massive loss......There are so many people in Australia who are as stupid as Shorten who would believe it that somebody would buy Medicare.


----------



## Tisme (18 July 2016)

Already "recalibrating" superannuation policy after the ironclad guarantee and there's a review of Medicare in the wind.

Weasel words are going to be the order of the day for a while.


----------



## drsmith (18 July 2016)

Herbert or no Herbert, we know who won the war.


----------



## Tisme (18 July 2016)

Those that used their vote to send a message to the majors ... that's who won the war, the silent 'ave a go heroes who truly give a stuff.


----------



## Tisme (18 July 2016)

Malcolm Turnbull just bared faced lied on 7.30 Report:

He stated his party got way more primary votes than the ALP and lowest ALP result since whenever:

facts; 

ALP 34.71% swing +1.33%
Lib 28.62% swing  -3.4%

He's then gone on the attack the ALP again along with unions .... this is the "mature" leader as promised. As usual it's saving the nation from the ALP.


----------



## drsmith (18 July 2016)

Time will pass painfully slowly for those who wish to spend it squawking over the scraps of defeat.


----------



## sptrawler (18 July 2016)

Tisme said:


> Malcolm Turnbull just bared faced lied on 7.30 Report:
> 
> He stated his party got way more primary votes than the ALP and lowest ALP result since whenever:
> 
> ...




Actually maybe the result, is a result, of all the Labor voters calling for Malcolm.lol

Suck it up princess, at the end of the day, they won with a pi$$ poor leader. IMO


----------



## Tisme (18 July 2016)

sptrawler said:


> Actually maybe the result, is a result, of all the Labor voters calling for Malcolm.lol
> 
> Suck it up princess, at the end of the day, they won with a pi$$ poor leader. IMO





Not sure the women on this forum would enjoy your attitude by using the princess card sweetheart, but if we are going to turn a blind eye to leadership lies and deflection then ascribe it to political bias then we are just going to get the same old same old trash governance we've had for a generation.


----------



## trainspotter (18 July 2016)

Tisme said:


> Not sure the women on this forum would enjoy your attitude by using the princess card sweetheart, but if we are going to turn a blind eye to leadership lies and deflection then ascribe it to political bias then we are just going to get the same old same old trash governance we've had for a generation.




Oh  ... you mean these two?


----------



## Tisme (19 July 2016)

trainspotter said:


> Oh  ... you mean these two?
> 
> View attachment 67475




Especially those two !!! , but the poor calibre is not parenthesised around them, they are bookended by a pair of similar moral vacuums with different hats IMO and Malcolm looks like he's no different.


----------



## drsmith (19 July 2016)

drsmith said:


> It looks like the counting is over and the ABC has counted the seat as a Labor gain with the above margin of 8 votes.
> 
> Now comes the recount.



Before we get to the recount, there's a formal distribution of preferences which may in itself change the result.

http://kevinbonham.blogspot.com.au/2016/07/2016-late-postcount-and-expected.html

A recount however still looks inevitable and the possibility of a by-election in Herbert is also discussed in the above due to the closeness of the current result.


----------



## Knobby22 (19 July 2016)

Fascinating read Dr Smith.


----------



## CanOz (19 July 2016)

Seems Bill has the same thuggish mates as always...phew, he was nearly running this show!



> Friends of Bill Shorten arrested for alleged vandalism spree on election morning theage.com.au/federal-politi… via @theage Pathetic childish fools


----------



## McLovin (19 July 2016)

drsmith said:


> Before we get to the recount, there's a formal distribution of preferences which may in itself change the result.
> 
> http://kevinbonham.blogspot.com.au/2016/07/2016-late-postcount-and-expected.html
> 
> A recount however still looks inevitable and the possibility of a by-election in Herbert is also discussed in the above due to the closeness of the current result.




How does this work?


> If after everything we end up with a margin about as close as the current one, then we will have a declared winner.  The declared winner will be seated, but may be challenged in court.  If the margin is extremely slender the AEC might even request the seat to be voided and a by-election held (multiple voting being one thing that could cause this to occur.)  The losing candidate would probably also challenge if there were enough dubious votes for there to be a chance of having the margin, whatever it is, overturned.  Depending on the reasons for a challenge, a successful challenge might result in either a by-election or a new winner being declared.




I would've thought a result is a result.


----------



## drsmith (19 July 2016)

The AEC has decided to bypass the formal distribution of preferences in Herbert and go direct to a recount,

http://www.aec.gov.au/media/media-releases/2016/07-19e.htm

The recount will commence on Thursday and is expected to take approximately two weeks.


----------



## Tisme (20 July 2016)

Senate result to date:

Labor 3.8M
Lib/Nats 2.6M
Liberal 1M
LNP 0.9M
Nats 33k
Greens 1M
*Pauline 0.55M*
Xen 0.4M
Derryn 0.25M


----------



## Knobby22 (20 July 2016)

When is the Senate going to be sorted?
I don't think they have done preferences yet.  So slow.


----------



## noco (20 July 2016)

Knobby22 said:


> When is the Senate going to be sorted?
> I don't think they have done preferences yet.  So slow.




The AEC don't appear to be computer literate yet....I think they are still using pocket calculators.


----------



## qldfrog (20 July 2016)

noco said:


> The AEC don't appear to be computer literate yet....I think they are still using pocket calculators.




it is an absolute scandal, scan the bloody papers and you will have ypur results within a few days at the most. if government wants to PM me, i can do such a software in less than a month....


----------



## noco (22 July 2016)

I was of the understanding there was to be a recount of votes in the electorate of  Herbert but they appear to have continued on from last week...This was the latest at 1.30 pm today.

90.5% Counted. Updated 21 minutes ago
PREFERENCE COUNT
Votes
Swing
Labor
Cathy O'TooleCathy O'Toole
44,202
50.0%
+6.2%
LNP
Ewen JonesEwen Jones
44,189
50.0%
-6.2%

Do you know anything different Dr.Smith?


----------



## drsmith (23 July 2016)

noco said:


> I was of the understanding there was to be a recount of votes in the electorate of  Herbert but they appear to have continued on from last week...This was the latest at 1.30 pm today.



It looks like there was an additional handful of declaration votes counted which favoured Labor to the tune of a further 5 votes.

William Bowe has started a Herbert recount thread on his blog,

https://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/2016/07/22/herbert-recount-thread/


----------



## noco (23 July 2016)

drsmith said:


> It looks like there was an additional handful of declaration votes counted which favoured Labor to the tune of a further 5 votes.
> 
> William Bowe has started a Herbert recount thread on his blog,
> 
> https://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/2016/07/22/herbert-recount-thread/




It is unbelievable the time it is taking.

Yes I noticed the red headed gooly wog is now 13 ahead.


----------



## McLovin (23 July 2016)

qldfrog said:


> it is an absolute scandal, scan the bloody papers and you will have ypur results within a few days at the most. if government wants to PM me, i can do such a software in less than a month....




The senate ballot paper is scanned.


----------



## qldfrog (23 July 2016)

McLovin said:


> The senate ballot paper is scanned.



so how could it take so long, scanning is quasi automatic: feed the papers in, once scan explotation is in ms, and preferences etc quasi immediate, am I alone in thinking the worst with these delays; How could it possibly take this long and not be corrupted/cheated/rearranged???


----------



## McLovin (23 July 2016)

qldfrog said:


> so how could it take so long, scanning is quasi automatic: feed the papers in, once scan explotation is in ms, and preferences etc quasi immediate, am I alone in thinking the worst with these delays; How could it possibly take this long and not be corrupted/cheated/rearranged???




It's not a totally automated process. I guess the scrutineers have some input. You probably are alone in thinking the delay is a corruption issue.


----------



## qldfrog (24 July 2016)

McLovin said:


> It's not a totally automated process. I guess the scrutineers have some input. You probably are alone in thinking the delay is a corruption issue.



Or incompetence? Corruption was maybe strong but honestly this is unbelievable, and as a result people will soon ask an electronic vote which will be open to clear fraud.
Another area where Australia needs a serious change: the voting process, preferences treatments, and a real democratic process


----------



## drsmith (24 July 2016)

In the Herbert recount yesterday, Labor's Cathy O'Toole lead broke out from 13 to 18 votes at one point but finished the day 9 votes in front. 

The LNP's Ewen Jones is presently in front by the narrowest of margins (1 vote). Is that GG's vote ?


----------



## SirRumpole (24 July 2016)

qldfrog said:


> Or incompetence? Corruption was maybe strong but honestly this is unbelievable, and as a result people will soon ask an electronic vote which will be open to clear fraud.
> Another area where Australia needs a serious change: the voting process, preferences treatments, and a real democratic process




I can't see the point of the current preference distribution. I think a simple points system would suffice ie

if there are say 5 candidates, then a 1 vote is worth 5 points , a 2 vote is worth 4 points, etc down to a 5 vote being one point.

The points for all the candidates are added up, and the one with the highest point count wins.

A paper with less than 5 votes marked would still be valid.

Anyone see any problems with this ?


----------



## noco (24 July 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> I can't see the point of the current preference distribution. I think a simple points system would suffice ie
> 
> if there are say 5 candidates, then a 1 vote is worth 5 points , a 2 vote is worth 4 points, etc down to a 5 vote being one point.
> 
> ...




Good idea Rumpy...I have to give you credit for that one.

You have got a brain after all and it sort of works.


----------



## nioka (24 July 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> I can't see the point of the current preference distribution. I think a simple points system would suffice ie
> 
> if there are say 5 candidates, then a 1 vote is worth 5 points , a 2 vote is worth 4 points, etc down to a 5 vote being one point.
> 
> ...




Something as simple as that would lead to mass unemployment. If you make it simple then there will be a lot of public servants made redundant. It would be followed by the mass destruction of red tape in other government departments and a percussive chain reaction of unemployment resulting from such a move.

Then again as enormous sums of money, paid out for redundancy, hit the streets we may have a stimulus the likes of which only Rudd could dream of.


----------



## noco (24 July 2016)

nioka said:


> Something as simple as that would lead to mass unemployment. If you make it simple then there will be a lot of public servants made redundant. It would be followed by the mass destruction of red tape in other government departments and a percussive chain reaction of unemployment resulting from such a move.
> 
> Then again as enormous sums of money, paid out for redundancy, hit the streets we may have a stimulus the likes of which only Rudd could dream of.




Ah yes...those Ruddy dud $900 cheques ....How can we forget?....Most cheques went into the poker machines, over the bar and on white goods made in China.....As I keep saying that was only a loan and now we must pay it back one way or another.


----------



## SirRumpole (24 July 2016)

noco said:


> Good idea Rumpy...I have to give you credit for that one.
> 
> You have got a brain after all and it sort of works.




Gee thanks.


----------



## drsmith (24 July 2016)

drsmith said:


> In the Herbert recount yesterday, Labor's Cathy O'Toole lead broke out from 13 to 18 votes at one point but finished the day 9 votes in front.
> 
> The LNP's Ewen Jones is presently in front by the narrowest of margins (1 vote). Is that GG's vote ?



Ewen Jones has finished the day 1 vote ahead but the recount overall still has some distance to go.


----------



## basilio (24 July 2016)

The election results are still not finalised.  The senate will be a dogs breakfast.  Malcolm Turnball might have a one seat majority..or not.

So what would really help your position as PM ?  


> *
> Dole payments: MP George Christensen wants dole payments cut after six months*
> Renee Viellaris, The Courier-Mail
> July 24, 2016 12:00am
> ...




http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...k=f8a7c272753a1cc394678421480925e3-1469365779


----------



## wayneL (25 July 2016)

basilio said:


> The election results are still not finalised.  The senate will be a dogs breakfast.  Malcolm Turnball might have a one seat majority..or not.
> 
> So what would really help your position as PM ?
> 
> ...




****!!! You might have to get a job basilio!!


----------



## qldfrog (25 July 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> I can't see the point of the current preference distribution. I think a simple points system would suffice ie
> 
> if there are say 5 candidates, then a 1 vote is worth 5 points , a 2 vote is worth 4 points, etc down to a 5 vote being one point.
> 
> ...



perfect


----------



## Logique (31 July 2016)

Labor appears to have won Herbert, Cathy O'Toole, ALP by 37 votes, 

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...ajority-of-just-one-seat-20160731-gqhjy4.html

Libs 76 seats less a Speaker = 75, against Labor and Cross bench 74 seats.


----------



## noco (31 July 2016)

Logique said:


> Labor appears to have won Herbert, Cathy O'Toole, ALP by 37 votes,
> 
> http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...ajority-of-just-one-seat-20160731-gqhjy4.html
> 
> Libs 76 seats less a Speaker = 75, against Labor and Cross bench 74 seats.





It is not over yet.....It could take a court challenge and  bi-election to sort it out.

The challenge will be why weren't 39 hospital patients  and 89 Army personal not given  the opportunity to vote....Something is not right here.

We probably will not know who has won for another 3 months.

I think the voters of Herbert are in for a bumpy ride.


----------



## noco (1 August 2016)

noco said:


> It is not over yet.....It could take a court challenge and  bi-election to sort it out.
> 
> The challenge will be why weren't 39 hospital patients  and 89 Army personal not given  the opportunity to vote....Something is not right here.
> 
> ...




An update I what may happen in the seat of Herbert.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/fed...s/news-story/34e364ed1f35cb86cbb5b4a634cc1392


----------



## Tink (4 August 2016)

Good to see Bob Day has been re-elected to the Senate.


----------



## Bill M (4 August 2016)

Have we got a 100% finalised national result for the senate yet? If we have can someone send me the official link. Thanks.


----------



## Tisme (4 August 2016)

Logique said:


> Labor appears to have won Herbert, Cathy O'Toole, ALP by 37 votes,
> 
> http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...ajority-of-just-one-seat-20160731-gqhjy4.html
> 
> Libs 76 seats less a Speaker = 75, against Labor and Cross bench 74 seats.




I bet Malcolm wishes his 'ol mate before him hadn't been such a prick with Gillard when it came to the traditional gentleman's agreement of pairing.....wot goes around....


----------



## noco (4 August 2016)

Pauline has 2 senators in Queensland and should pick up another 2 in NSW which will be more than Nick Zenophon's team.


----------



## Tisme (4 August 2016)

Finalised:

Pauline 4 seats
Nick 3
LNP 25
Lab 24
Commos 9
etc

So Lab picked up 1 seat and the Libs got squibbed again by a fizzog result.... nice crystal ball gazing by Mal and his rusted ons.


----------



## Logique (4 August 2016)

More on this:



> http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...ers-to-hold-eleven-seats-20160803-gqkn0h.html
> 
> ...The numbers in the new-look Senate are as follows: Coalition 30, Labor 26, Greens 9, One Nation 4, Nick Xenophon Team 3, plus Jacqui Lambie, Derryn Hinch, Mr Leyonhjelm and Family First's Bob Day.
> 
> ...


----------



## pixel (4 August 2016)

from another forum:
"Good luck, Mal"


----------



## trainspotter (4 August 2016)

And that is why they call me Trainspotter ...


----------



## explod (4 August 2016)

trainspotter said:


> And that is why they call me Trainspotter ...
> 
> View attachment 67636




Her mouth indicates that the other parties will unite to close it.


----------



## trainspotter (5 August 2016)

explod said:


> Her mouth indicates that the other parties will unite to close it.




The people of Australia have spoken.


----------



## basilio (5 August 2016)

> The people of Australia have spoken.



  TS

Yep.  Now lets say how we cope with One Nation and an unstoppable Malcolm Roberts


> * One Nation senator-elect Malcolm Roberts wrote bizarre 'sovereign citizen' letter to Julia Gillard*
> Michael Koziol
> 
> One of Australia's new senators, One Nation's Malcolm Roberts, sent a bizarre affidavit to then prime minister Julia Gillard in 2011 demanding to be exempt from the carbon tax and using language consistent with the "sovereign citizen" movement.
> ...




http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...-letter-to-julia-gillard-20160804-gqlesa.html


----------



## trainspotter (5 August 2016)

basilio said:


> TS
> 
> Yep.  Now lets say how we cope with One Nation and an unstoppable Malcolm Roberts
> 
> ...




The television media did a hack job on him last night basilio. He speaks like he is still down the pub with is mates instead of using political speak with a large dollop of Right Wing tin foil hat wearing brigade. Jackie Lambie was cut from the same cloth and she now resembles Kevin Rudds psychobabble when she gets in front of a microphone. 

Oh yeah ... he is an ex coal executive and a confirmed climate denier as well 



> *Malcolm Roberts has earned the respect of informed people around the world for his investigation of claimed global warming and climate change where he analysed the measured data and then exposed the corruption*. His disappointment with Liberal-Labor-Nationals-Greens politicians, unable to listen, refusing to face the facts and lacking care for our country led to his decision to join Pauline Hanson in standing for the Senate.
> Malcolm’s climate investigations led to deep understanding of the foreign control wrecking our country and to clarity on the tax system now choking Australians and destroying initiative and responsibility, while sabotaging our children’s future.




http://www.onenation.com.au/candidates/malcolmroberts 

Interesting times are ahead for sure with this unrepresented swill in parliament !


----------



## Knobby22 (5 August 2016)

I thought it was interesting that he believed that increased CO2 was caused by the earth warming, not the other way around. Funny guy.


----------



## wayneL (5 August 2016)

Knobby22 said:


> I thought it was interesting that he believed that increased CO2 was caused by the earth warming, not the other way around. Funny guy.




 In all probability, neither is deterministically demonstrable.

https://www.newscientist.com/articl...-rises-disproving-the-link-to-global-warming/

Maybe not so funny? Or duelling hilarity perhaps?


----------



## basilio (5 August 2016)

Good analysis of the history of the "sovereign citizen"  movement.  It has a long history, particularly among desperate people looking save their necks.



> *What you need to know about One Nation's Malcolm Roberts and ‘sovereign citizens’
> Jason Wilson*
> 
> One Nation’s Malcolm Roberts says he’s not a sovereign citizen but experts say his tactics bear the hallmarks of the far right movement. Does it matter?
> ...




https://www.theguardian.com/comment...ations-malcolm-roberts-and-sovereign-citizens


----------



## Knobby22 (5 August 2016)

The far left work in similar ways as do religous sects.
I sometimes wonder if the extremist desire is caused by genetics. It  would be an advantage to form tight knit groups in many situations.


----------



## nioka (5 August 2016)

trainspotter said:


> The television media did a hack job on him last night basilio. He speaks like he is still down the pub with is mates instead of using political speak with a large dollop of Right Wing tin foil hat wearing brigade. Jackie Lambie was cut from the same cloth and she now resembles Kevin Rudds psychobabble when she gets in front of a microphone.
> 
> Oh yeah ... he is an ex coal executive and a confirmed climate denier as well
> 
> ...




"with this unrepresented swill in parliament" And here was me thinking that they were voted in with enough representation by voters that had every right to vote as they wish and not the way someone wished they would vote. Democracy at work. 1 person 1 vote. Or are you suggesting that your vote should equal 2 of theirs?.


----------



## trainspotter (6 August 2016)

nioka said:


> "with this unrepresented swill in parliament" And here was me thinking that they were voted in with enough representation by voters that had every right to vote as they wish and not the way someone wished they would vote. Democracy at work. 1 person 1 vote. Or are you suggesting that your vote should equal 2 of theirs?.




Apr 23, 2007 - Former Australian Prime Minister, Paul Keating, once famously described Australia's Senate as “unrepresentative swill.” He was right.


----------



## McLovin (6 August 2016)

Hilarious. The fool gets in on the 841st round of preferences in the senate goes on a bizarre rant that ticks all the right wing nut boxes then claims the Turnbull government has no mandate. 

It is an absolute disgrace that a loon like this gets a senate seat.


----------



## sptrawler (20 September 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> I really think that better education outcomes depend on better teachers. That means higher qualifications and standards for teachers which ultimately leads to higher teacher salaries.
> 
> Maybe something can be done electronically, delivering classes over the internet and therefore making the best teachers available to a wider audience.
> 
> ...




Like I said back then, teaching should be returned to a non university career, it is more about engaging the child than being super clever.
Now a couple of years later, our outcomes are still falling, and no one wants to go back to the future. lol


----------



## SirRumpole (21 September 2018)

sptrawler said:


> Like I said back then, teaching should be returned to a non university career, it is more about engaging the child than being super clever.
> Now a couple of years later, our outcomes are still falling, and no one wants to go back to the future. lol




There used to be a "Teachers College" I believe.

Surely teacher training involves both subject knowledge and student engagement ?

No need for one to suffer because of the other.


----------



## Tisme (21 September 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> There used to be a "Teachers College" I believe.
> 
> Surely teacher training involves both subject knowledge and student engagement ?
> 
> No need for one to suffer because of the other.




Subject knowledge isn't as important as delivery (per the fairly restrictive departmental guidelines). There isn't a whole lot of latitude for teachers to wander off topic and much of the time is reviewing electronic class/home work. Add in the problems of navigating student hurt feelings, parents rocking up demanding satisfaction, peer reviews and principal sanctions, etc and much of the time is spent on non core activities.

Product knowledge is not a high must needs. But then again back in the day many teachers were spinsters  without university training and somehow people came out with adequate knowledge of the three R's, which seems to be suffering these days.


----------



## SirRumpole (21 September 2018)

Tisme said:


> Subject knowledge isn't as important as delivery (per the fairly restrictive departmental guidelines). There isn't a whole lot of latitude for teachers to wander off topic and much of the time is reviewing electronic class/home work. Add in the problems of navigating student hurt feelings, parents rocking up demanding satisfaction, peer reviews and principal sanctions, etc and much of the time is spent on non core activities.
> 
> Product knowledge is not a high must needs. But then again back in the day many teachers were spinsters  without university training and somehow people came out with adequate knowledge of the three R's, which seems to be suffering these days.




I see your point. With so much course material on internet teachers are probably restricted to admin stuff these days.


----------

