# Would Peter Costello make a good PM?



## The Mint Man (23 May 2006)

Do you think Peter Costello would make a good PM?   

feel free to vote on the poll. 
This thread is about peter costello being PM not who you vote for so either way you can still participate.

NOTE: you can pick more then one if you so desire.

cheers

MintMan 
:swear:


----------



## warney (23 May 2006)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*

i think he would be good so im not fussed if john howard stepped down. my biggest concern would be if julia gillard got in somewhere down the line, i feel you cant know things that are unconditional until you have kids.your way of thinking changes. it scares me that she is not married and doesnt have kids but has support in her party. sorry to stray


----------



## macca (23 May 2006)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*

Yes the lack of life experiences really causes problems.

An excellent example of this is Bob Carr, no kids, no car, never even had a licence and used to walk to work so never rode public transport.

What a mess poor Morris got handed, talk about rats deserting a sinking ship


----------



## BSD (23 May 2006)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*

I cannot stand Gillard (Kath and Kim); but I fail to see how being a breeder puts you in the running for the PM job?

What sh!te.

First you get tax breaks, now you get a leg up into parliament!

What is the minimum number of tinlids you need?

One?
Four?

Do you actually have to spend time with them? Not many career pollies would see much of their kids. 

As for being married - does a sham marriage count? The two previous PMs have been divorced. Does a second marriage leave you in the running?

I wish we would stop worrying about unimportant lifestyle cr@p and identify pollies worth on their policies.

Remember those?

Costello is a gutless lawyer who isn't worthy to wipe an economist's bum and after 10 years still hasnt got the numbers. 

If it is to be the Libs - GO TURNBULL


----------



## bvbfan (23 May 2006)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*

Only Liberal I could actually consider voting for!

At least he's being credible (as much as a politician can be) but is more trust worthy than Jack Boot Johnny. Don't think Labour was wise in saying that he would step in when Johnny left. I'd much prefer his views than that 1930's Howards.


Economy wise Libs got it on a platter with good luck and good timing.
If Asian Crisis had spread here then they probably would have been out back in 2001. And playing on the Tampa.


----------



## justjohn (23 May 2006)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*

firstly does he want the job,he seems pretty content just sitting back leaving it up to Howard to make hard yards .When it does happen i hope its not as messy as Hawke V keating then again his EGO might not be as massive as Keatings but then again he is a politician :badass:


----------



## visual (23 May 2006)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*

You all realise Julia Gillard is a lesbian,right  
not that theres anything wrong with that,and for the guy who thinks we are breeders,get a life,but at any rate did you enjoy the breeding or will you enjoy the breeding,lol
wonder what you will think then she resorts to IVF in order to become a breeder,and as taxpayers you will be paying along with the rest of us.
And no dont particularly like Costello rather like Johnny,and best of all he doesnt cry,a la bobby hawkey(?)


----------



## warney (24 May 2006)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*

im am not in any way religious but i do believe it takes two to tango,the point i was trying to make is that being a parent changes your way of thinking and there is no way you can try to explain that to someone that isnt a parent. as for "a leg up in to parliment" i just dont want a single parentless person in there making decisions for me. 
in reply to visual "for the guy who thinks we are breeders,get a life" is there any other choice? 
hmmm.... ivf and lesbians....thats as scary as the pub running out of beer.


----------



## visual (24 May 2006)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*



			
				warney said:
			
		

> in reply to visual "for the guy who thinks we are breeders,get a life" is there any other choice?
> hmmm.... ivf and lesbians....thats as scary as the pub running out of beer.




to getting a life or becoming breeders?

And why should sexual orientation mean that Julia Gillard could`nt do a good job.Mark Latham is a parent look at the moron he turned out to be.
Being a parent is a personal choice it doesnt enhance your ability to do anything,yes ,I`m sure lots of people will disagree, at the end of the day either you are competent  or you are not.


----------



## warney (24 May 2006)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*



			
				visual said:
			
		

> to getting a life or becoming breeders?
> 
> And why should sexual orientation mean that Julia Gillard could`nt do a good job.Mark Latham is a parent look at the moron he turned out to be.
> Being a parent is a personal choice it doesnt enhance your ability to do anything,yes ,I`m sure lots of people will disagree, at the end of the day either you are competent  or you are not.



becoming breeders,its not as if any one apart from females can breed.
just imagine the shambles we would be in if lathem was our leader,totally agree with you there. maybe julia is competant? but not in my opinion.


----------



## visual (24 May 2006)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*



			
				warney said:
			
		

> i just dont want a single parentless person in there making decisions for me.




Warney just picked that up,so your problem is that you dont want an orphan
making decisions for you.Just joking


----------



## MalteseBull (24 May 2006)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*

i was satisfied with the tax brackets increases on the budget..

Liberal will always be my first prefrence! As John Howard said he wants to maximise the achievements of individuals in australia


----------



## warney (24 May 2006)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*



			
				visual said:
			
		

> Warney just picked that up,so your problem is that you dont want an orphan
> making decisions for you.Just joking



dont get me started on orphans! lol


----------



## Smurf1976 (24 May 2006)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*

On the subject of life experiences, I would add that they ought to have worked in some job involving _hands on_ productive work where problems occur and solutions MUST be found TODAY even if it is theoretically impossible. 

Eveything seems rather easy sitting in an office. You just call someone, pay them the money and the physical work gets done. Those who actually do productive work know that it's not normally this simple. Those people also know that office types simply do not understand this and never will.

When a problem occurs, those in the office phone x and get them to fix it. That is NOT problem solving - it's simply passing it to someone else. Those doing the work are the ones who have to actually find a way to make it work. That doesn't generally involve using a phone or email and often requires a large amount of on the spot investigation and decision making and an incredible amount of mental and physical endurance. This just doesn't happen sitting in front of a computer.

So one criteria I would look for is to have done some sort of work where the simple can, without warning, turn to disaster and the person doing the work has to devise and implement a solution THEMSELVES and do it NOW - not simply passing it on to someone else or leaving it until the next day.

Personally, I've done office work and I've done hands on physical work and I know which requires the greater degree of problem solving skills - it's NOT being a supervisor / manager or administrative worker.

No offence intended to office workers.   But if I'm going to be paying taxes to fund someone who's supposed to be running the country then I want someone who knows how to deal with unforeseen problems, not someone who calls a consultant or forms a committee.


----------



## BSD (24 May 2006)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*

Great, so far we have picked the next PM as someone who digs holes and can score a r00t! 

Middle class baby boomers are set to rule for another 30 years. Like it or not...



To get back to the original query, just have a look at how Cossie dealt with the recent decision on FMG getting rail access from BHP. 

Cossie was that gutless, he held off making a ruling to avoid public scrutiny of his decision. 

A true p!ssant - not even up to putting forward the reasons for his decision.

Shame this bloke has the potential to rise anywhere in politics.

Party politics aside - Costello is a pretender.


----------



## twojacks28 (25 May 2006)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*



			
				BSD said:
			
		

> Great, so far we have picked the next PM as someone who digs holes and can score a r00t!
> 
> Middle class baby boomers are set to rule for another 30 years. Like it or not...
> 
> ...






pretender ha! he would be great at PM he has the skills and the knowledge to lead this country on into the future. now we just have to wait for johny to step down and pass on the reigns. dont get me wrong howard has been one of the Pm's if not the best we have ever had!


----------



## Sean K (25 May 2006)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*

I vote for a military dictatorship. With Pete Cosgrove at the helm. 

Think of all the jobs they would create to fix all the project cockups.


----------



## The Mint Man (25 May 2006)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*

two jack
:iagree: 
especially when you think of the debt labour left behind. 
Also entrenched in my mind are the tales my dad tells me of having to work ridiculous hours only to come home at night to mind the kids (myself and 2 brothers) while my mum walked out the door to go to work to earn extra money, In other words they hardly seen each other, mabey 1/2 an hour a day! And all of this was because of the *17-18% interest rates* on their mortgage. :swear: 

On top of this I have had run ins with unions over the years (even when I was a member at one stage), these are people that claim to help people, and also are die hard Labour supporters... I belive they only care about themselfs and that they will only act when there are alot of members at steak, if its only one or two they dont seem to care. I am still owed about $1000 from a previous place of work where I was a member, do you think the union helped? Hell no, they just took even more money from me $230 to be exact. so now Im $1230 out of pocket! They even still have the hide to send me bills every now and then, and yes I have resigned.???
I also hate the scare tactics they use either to force their views on their members causing strikes etc. or in order to scare people into joining, of course in the process filling their bank accounts.
Recently they have been going on about workers rights, mainly contracts etc. well I dont know about anyone else but I have recently signed a contract with my employer that I am more then happy with.
I will continue to have these views until the unions change their tune but Im not holding my breath. 
Either way I will never ever join a union again 
  

Mint Man :grinsking


----------



## twojacks28 (25 May 2006)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*



			
				The Mint Man said:
			
		

> two jack
> :iagree:
> especially when you think of the debt labour left behind.
> Also entrenched in my mind are the tales my dad tells me of having to work ridiculous hours only to come home at night to mind the kids (myself and 2 brothers) while my mum walked out the door to go to work to earn extra money, In other words they hardly seen each other, mabey 1/2 an hour a day! And all of this was because of the *17-18% interest rates* on their mortgage. :swear:
> ...



'

could not agree anymore mint man. you reminded me but one thing that gets on my nerves is all those stories on aca and tt about people being sacked. and the excuse which they all used was the industrial relations changes. they all blame the changes even when the changes helped most of them get remployed as they were sacked unfairly!


----------



## The Mint Man (25 May 2006)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*



			
				twojacks28 said:
			
		

> could not agree anymore mint man. you reminded me but one thing that gets on my nerves is all those stories on aca and tt about people being sacked. and the excuse which they all used was the industrial relations changes.




haha, I hear ya


----------



## Julia (25 May 2006)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*

Just a point about the period when interest rates were up around 17% - 18%:
I was living in NZ at the time and paying 22% on second mortgage on an investment property.  Sounds awful, doesn't it?  But the flip side was that rents were also very high and inflation meant a meteoric rise in house prices.
When I sold the property on which I was paying the 22% I had doubled my money in less than two years plus received much more in rent than I had paid out in mortgage and overheads.

So it wasn't all bad news for everyone.

And these days, no one ever mentions retirees who are too conservative to buy shares so they have their nest egg in term deposits.  They would be a lot happier if interest rates were higher.

Julia

Julia


----------



## The Mint Man (25 May 2006)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*

Did anyone watch question time today on ABC?
It was almost like they had been reading my comments on this thread.
Peter Costello was comenting on how Labor thought that 10.5% interest rates and 8.5% unemployment was really good back in the early 90's. gotta love his comment on labour 







> You can't trust Labour with economic managment



.

Also the libs droped another bomb on the unions/labour by making it known that an independent enquiry had found that the CFMEU (construction Union) had told contractors on a building site *"not to pay workers" * for 4 hours pay in which those employees were collecting donations for a work mates family as that work mate had recently passed away   :swear: 
The independent enquiry also found that this had been done by the CFMEU in order to get more publicity for the unions/labours your rights at work campaign.

How sick, they basically used someones death in order to gain publicity  

I imagine that it comes as no supprise to you other forum members if I said that the union that I was a member of, the union that riped me off, the union that did not help me, the union I feel used me and some of my work mates merely for financial gain (as described in my previous post) was also the CFMEU. :badass:


----------



## The Mint Man (12 July 2006)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*

thought I would bump this up as it seems more relevent now then when I posted it...
feel free to put your vote in if you already havent or even discuss further.

cheers


----------



## BSD (12 July 2006)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*

Still too weak to run for PM or go to back bench to build numbers. 

Wimp


I personally believe pollies have a very small effect on the economy. I cant stand either side, but am sick of people making claims regarding the LIbs managing the economy. 

Anyone care to name the three greatest moments of Liberal economic management (seeing it is their apparent strength)?

Here are the three I would put forward for the re-payment of debt:

1. Selling Telstra 
2. Global resources boom
3. Being the largest taxing government of all time

I could pay-off my mortgage by being homeless too. 

Costello has wasted 10 years

Turnbull for PM and treasurer!


----------



## twojacks28 (12 July 2006)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*



			
				BSD said:
			
		

> Still too weak to run for PM or go to back bench to build numbers.
> 
> Wimp
> 
> ...




BSD you are crazy. where have you been over the last ten years on another planet im guessing. the government have a huge influence on running the economy. if it wasnt for the government the economy would be no where now. also for your information the liberal government isnt the highest taxing government of all time. in fact they are one of the lowest taxing governments in australia. turnbull would be hopless in both of your proposed postions he is totally clueless in relation to the economy and as pm.


----------



## BSD (12 July 2006)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*

Interest rates - set by the market

Wages - set by the market

Property prices - set by the market

Commodity prices - set by the market

Surpluses - taxing more than spending

Govt Spending - UP

Govt Taxing - UP

Debt - down

Assets - down

Explain to me how the federal govt  "runs the economy". The liberal mantra (in the past) was to leave the economy to its own devices. 

Did the State govts do anything to help the great times we have had or don't they matter?

Name the three major economic changes made by the current government beyond the GST (which is good) that have had the effect of real reform like floating the dollar:

1.
2.
3.

Turnbull clueless on the economy?

Do some homework mate. He was a very successful banker. More than anyone can say for most of the career politicians and failed lawyers running around and embarassing themselves. 

Are Howard and Costello responsible for the last 50 basis points of rising interest rates, the fall in Sydney property prices or the booming oil and iron ore prices?

The Federal Government is the largest taxing government of all time - FACT

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,19697042-28737,00.html


----------



## wayneL (12 July 2006)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*

BSD,

Hooray! Well stated!

(Not so sure about Turnbull.. but don't know that much about him ast this stage)


----------



## BSD (12 July 2006)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*



			
				wayneL said:
			
		

> Not so sure about Turnbull.. but don't know that much about him ast this stage




Best of a very bad bunch!

I gave up following politics closely a year or so ago - it got too depressing. 

The race to the bottom got too much for me.


----------



## twojacks28 (12 July 2006)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*



			
				BSD said:
			
		

> Interest rates - set by the market
> 
> Wages - set by the market
> 
> ...




I cannot be bothered trying to explain to a person who is so narrow minded and anti liberal.


----------



## BSD (12 July 2006)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*



			
				twojacks28 said:
			
		

> I cannot be bothered trying to explain to a person who is so narrow minded and anti liberal.




Surely you want to run with a few platitudes about - 

"ensuring low interest rates" - forgetting the RBA and bond market

"cutting taxes" - forgetting the highest taxing govt part

"paying off debt" - forgetting the asset sales and budget surpluses from the highest taxing theme

"creating high growth" - forgetting the expanding terms of trade from the commodities boom


Forget your party alliance (i dont have one) talk to the facts

Or is Rory of Macquarie a freedom hating communist?


----------



## Julia (12 July 2006)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*

Costello is pushing his luck when suggesting  a leadership challenge might be on.  He does not have, and is not likely to have, the numbers, either in the Parliament or for that matter in the electorate.

Julia


----------



## Smurf1976 (12 July 2006)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*

Very well said BSD.

I don't doubt that governments do have an influence over the economy, but to suggest as many do that liberal = low interest rates = good for everyone is absolute nonsense. Firstly, interest rates are set by the markets and low rates are NOT good for everyone. Indeed if they're accompanied by low wage inflation then those with high debts don't necessarily benefit in the long term despite the short term attractiveness of low interest rates. 

As for state governments, they are the ones who largely determine if a major project sinks or swims so they must take some credit / blame for the present circumstances. Local government sometimes has a significant role too in stopping or supporting significant businesses. And of course it is state and local government which largely provides the infrastructure which all businesses use.

One rather open ended question however. WHO was responsible for training workers? That is, who totally messed up and caused the skills crisis? I don't have figures but I suggest that "privatisation" is a large chunk of the explanation where trades are concerned since the old state-run utilities were always churning out apprentices whereas their private replacements seriously dropped the ball on this one. As for the politics of it, I seem to remember both Liberal and Labor having supported it at various times.

Another one. WHO is supposed to be doing something to plan for the day when petrol at $1.50 a litre seems so cheap as to be unbelievable to anyone then too young to remember. When driving the car on any given day is a serious financial decision rather than a "right". Nobody seems to be doing much planning at all apart perhaps from the WA government with public transport, the Tas government by retaining ownership of Australia's dominant renewable energy producer and a few local councils discussing it. At a federal level, the head is absolutely in the sand be it Labor, Liberal, Green etc whilst even the media (ABC and John Laws this week) are waking up to the problems with oil.


----------



## Realist (12 July 2006)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*



			
				Julia said:
			
		

> And these days, no one ever mentions retirees who are too conservative to buy shares so they have their nest egg in term deposits.  They would be a lot happier if interest rates were higher.




Question..

Do high interest rates always equal high inflation?


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (13 July 2006)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*



			
				Realist said:
			
		

> Question..
> 
> Do high interest rates always equal high inflation?




Ask Bob Hawke.


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (13 July 2006)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*

BSD has said it well.

Real managers for the economy and career politicians for the doll.


----------



## Rafa (13 July 2006)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*

TwoJacks, i know you are completly ANTI LABOUR...
But BSD has provided a very objective analysis that is definitely not pro labor...

I certainly agree with him... I would also like to add that the present day Liberals are Liberal in name only... They are one of the most interventionist govt's going around... just got to think of the FHOG, Baby Bonus, 30% health rebate, child care rebate, Fam Tax A, B, C, D, etc, etc... very Labouresq i might say... you only got to see the massive increase in business red tap, tax laws, both business and individual, etc, etc to see this!

This is one of the reason Labor look clueless in recent times, its cause major Liberal and Labor policies are almost identical, making Labor looks bereft on ideas... The Workplace Laws are the first time in the last 12 years that Labor actually has a chance to differentiate themselves from the Libs...

thats another topic in itself... so we won't get sidetracked...


Anyway...
Once the economy is opened up... free market, rates, fores, etc, (incidentally done by Labor) it doesn't matter who is incharge... the market takes care of it....




I vote for Politicians on the DOLE!!!


----------



## lukem (13 July 2006)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*

hi guys, I just joined today. I'm kinda surprised actually that I haven't come across this forum before..

I have to disagree with you BSD about the effect of politicians on the economy. How could you say they _don't_ have an impact?! Everything they do impacts the economy. This is not to say that I'm defending the Liberals. God no! John Howard sucks, as does Peter Costello.

You say that interest rates are set by the market - doesn't the RBA set the interest rate? 

Wages, property prices, commodity prices etc are all effected by government intereference in the market. How much different would our consumption and savings be, if we weren't taxed? 

I agree with you about the tax. I want my money back!  


I dunno, I just can't see Costello booting Howard. I'm not so sure he has the support..


----------



## blueroo (13 July 2006)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*



			
				BSD said:
			
		

> Name the three major economic changes made by the current government beyond the GST (which is good) that have had the effect of real reform like floating the dollar:



I agree with you BSD, but only 99%.

I have not found much anything that is "good" about GST.

Some of the bad imo are:
1) The Tax Act increased by many volumes.
2) Business people are now the tax collectors.
3) The ATO are constantly sneaking GST onto previously non-taxed goods (namely food items).

And to top it off, here is a good article in the SMH:
http://www.smh.com.au/news/business...ello-says-it-is/2006/07/07/1152240492841.html 

Just my


----------



## Smurf1976 (13 July 2006)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*



			
				Realist said:
			
		

> Question..
> 
> Do high interest rates always equal high inflation?



LOW interest rates tend to be associated with high inflation. 

Supply and demand - increasing the money supply to hold down interest rates. The increasing supply of money = lower value of money (inflation).

Whilst it may be convenient to think of prices generally rising, it is actually a case of the money losing value as its' supply increases faster than real economic growth. The Dollar has lost most of the value it once had, as have other currencies and continues to lose value as its supply is increased.

The inflation we've seen in housing, commodites etc and that is now leaking through into consumer prices is the end result of easy money (in practice, low interest rates).   

(All in my opinion, I'm not a licensed adviser etc.)


----------



## lukem (13 July 2006)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*



			
				Smurf1976 said:
			
		

> (All in my opinion, I'm not a licensed adviser etc.)



That's pretty accurate Smurf1976, although:



			
				Smurf1976 said:
			
		

> Whilst it may be convenient to think of prices generally rising, it is actually a case of the money losing value as its' supply increases faster than real economic growth.



It's not that the money supply is increasing faster than real economic growth, but rather that it is increasing period. 

Since I think, March?, April? of this year, the Fed no longer reports on the money aggregates. They've been discontinued, so who knows how much money they're creating.


----------



## twojacks28 (15 July 2006)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*



			
				Rafa said:
			
		

> TwoJacks, i know you are completly ANTI LABOUR...
> But BSD has provided a very objective analysis that is definitely not pro labor...
> 
> I certainly agree with him... I would also like to add that the present day Liberals are Liberal in name only... They are one of the most interventionist govt's going around... just got to think of the FHOG, Baby Bonus, 30% health rebate, child care rebate, Fam Tax A, B, C, D, etc, etc... very Labouresq i might say... you only got to see the massive increase in business red tap, tax laws, both business and individual, etc, etc to see this!
> ...





hahah you make me laugh rafa im not anti labor or anyone for that matter. the fact is that the government does influence the economy in a big way. since the liberal government took over years ago the economy has improved dramatically. bsd some of your points are true but to say that the government has nothing to do with the economy is absurd. for your information the gst was put in place to combine all taxes. if anything it has been good as it got rid of many taxes which we originally had. we have less now with the gst. it makes sense to have one main tax instead of many separate taxes.


----------



## lukem (15 July 2006)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*



			
				twojacks28 said:
			
		

> it makes sense to have one main tax instead of many separate taxes.



It would make _more_ sense to have NO taxes..


----------



## twojacks28 (15 July 2006)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*



			
				lukem said:
			
		

> It would make _more_ sense to have NO taxes..





ahh no that is not possible.


----------



## lukem (15 July 2006)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*



			
				twojacks28 said:
			
		

> ahh no that is not possible.



Why not?


----------



## Smurf1976 (15 July 2006)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*



			
				lukem said:
			
		

> It would make _more_ sense to have NO taxes..



I can see the benfits in _less_ government but IMO there would be serious problems in a situation with _no_ government. Apart from making laws, some of which are necessary for the functioning of a civilised society, there are some economic activities where private ownership just doesn't work.

Imagine how privately owned and run road traffic control would work, for example. How, exactly, do you collect the money from someone who just happens to push the button at the traffic lights to cross the road? A toll on literally every road? That would send business broke real fast since the nature of traffic control is that it is necessarily a monopoly. A privately owned monopoly with no government to regulate it isn't going to be cheap...

And somewhat more seriously, who defends the country if not taxpayers? Do we see Woodside with its own defence force in NW Australia and Zinifex with another one in Hobart, all pursuing different strategies? A nhge cost that would send business broke. It just wouldn't work in practice. And who pays to defend the likes of the Gold Coast? Hotel owners with 100+ individual defence forces?

There is a legitimate role for government IMO, but not as much as we have now. Some laws yes, some direct provision of services certainly. But not all the red tape and pointless inquiries etc that we see today. Worth noting too that much of the welfare payments do nothing other than hand some tax back to the same people that paid it in the first place whilst adding expensive administration charges on top. Not very efficient. 

How would this be funded if not through taxes? Nationalise a few key industries? Possibly an option that's not as silly as it sounds - look at how the OPEC countries fund everything through state-run oil companies. The Australian equivalent would seem to be uranium.


----------



## twojacks28 (16 July 2006)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*

also as many of you are saying the liberal government is the highest taxing government the reason is that most people are making more money per year now which means they pay more tax. they havent put taxes up or introduced lots of new taxes the fact is that most people make more money on average. therefore people pay more tax


----------



## blinkybill (16 July 2006)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*

I think Costello has done his dash now and lost any credibility he might have had after expecting Howard to hand over the leadership to him when he knows full well that he doesn't have the numbers in his party let alone the general public to support him. Imo Costello should have either just challenged the leadership or shut up because he's come out looking very weak and stupid.

I don't think Costello will ever be the Liberal leader after the way he has handled the last couple of weeks, especially after he emphatically denied some time ago that a deal was ever done. He was either telling lies then or is telling lies now.

I think Howard will stay on now until at least 12 months after the next election before retiring and unless the coalition does something really stupid before the next election I think they will win quite easily inspite of the IR reforms.


----------



## Rafa (17 July 2006)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*



			
				twojacks28 said:
			
		

> hahah you make me laugh rafa im not anti labor or anyone for that matter. the fact is that the government does influence the economy in a big way. since the liberal government took over years ago the economy has improved dramatically.




TwoJacks,

Its fair to say, and most commentators are now saying it, that its the reforms of the Keating era that have really made the big difference to Australia in the last 10 years... 



> From the Editor of The Australian... (a definite pro-liberal paper...)
> The prosperity Australians enjoy at present is in large part due to reforms put in place more than a decade ago by Paul Keating's national competition policy. Just as much as the China-led resources boom, it is those reforms that underpin Australia's record stretch of economic growth and the lowest unemployment rate for 30 years.





In terms of reform, the Liberals have delivered...
1. Tax Reform: with the move away from Income tax, towards consumption tax...
2. IR Reform: with the move towards individually negotiated contracts as opposed to collective negotiations 
3. Privatisation....

The results of these reforms are still to be fully realised... In fact, we are really not going to know if they are any good for at least the next 5 years or so... 

Funnily enough, most of these reforms are driven by the PM Howard (unlike previously, when Keating as treasurer championed them)... To come back to the topic, Costello has not shown any prime ministerial qualities and ideas to indicate he would make a good PM!

My vote goes to Howard to stays on as PM...


----------



## twojacks28 (18 July 2006)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*



			
				Rafa said:
			
		

> TwoJacks,
> 
> Its fair to say, and most commentators are now saying it, that its the reforms of the Keating era that have really made the big difference to Australia in the last 10 years...
> 
> ...





if thats what you believe then thats fair enough. costello hasnt shown much about becoming pm as he doesnt need to. just now that costello has improved the economy drastically. it wasnt just the keating government which made changes.


----------



## Smurf1976 (18 July 2006)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*

Funny how all this talk about improving the economy fails to mention our truly Third World high Current Account deficit.

It's not hard to improve your lifestyle by running up debt. The problem is when those lending the money say "enough".

But the government has repaid debt I hear you say. Certainly, they have repaid debt but to give a true picture you need to deduct the proceeds of asset sales from that. It doesn't look so impressive then... And of course I'm talking about the WHOLE economy and not merely the finances of the government itself.

It'll be easier to asses the situation once the effects of years of inflationary monetary policy, and more recently tax policy, filter through to the checkout and wages.


----------



## Rafa (18 July 2006)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*

Yes, time will certainly tell.

Just as we all thought Keating was a Dill and have now been proved incorect, the reforms of the last few years will come home to roost in the next 5- 10 years...

We'll wait and see...


----------



## twojacks28 (18 July 2006)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*



			
				Rafa said:
			
		

> Yes, time will certainly tell.
> 
> Just as we all thought Keating was a Dill and have now been proved incorect, the reforms of the last few years will come home to roost in the next 5- 10 years...
> 
> We'll wait and see...




haha yeh rafa then we can continue this discussion


----------



## Rafa (18 July 2006)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*

hehe     

yes, we certainly will two jacks...


i wonder what we will be doing then... :bier:


----------



## twojacks28 (18 July 2006)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*

hmm i can think of a few things


----------



## lukem (19 July 2006)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*

Sorry, for the few days late reply, I haven't been on the 'puter. 

Smurf, you bring up a couple of examples that I'm sure many people would probably agree private enterprise couldn't run. There are many other examples you could think of and ponder how the free market could achieve what the govt already does with them. I know for the two that you wrote - roads & national defense, I've thought previously to myself how they would function in a truly free market society. I of course don't have all the answers, but the more that I read, the more I find that people have thought about many of these same issues and have theorized as to how they would operate. What many people think are 'public goods' and solely the domain of government, could instead be better run if it was in private hands.

For roads, here is a link to an article in The Journal of Libertarian Studies by Walter Block: _Free Market Transportation: Denationalizing The Roads_. There is also a book that I haven't read yet (but I have put an order in for it at my library ) that is edited by Hans Hermann Hoppe called _The Myth of National Defense_. Here is a link to it on Amazon.

There is a wealth of information to be found on the Internet (it's just a matter of finding free time to read it!) vis-Ã -vis laissez faire capitalism, libertarianism, Austrian economics etc. If you're interested, you'll find a ton of interesting information on the von Mises Institute website. They have all kinds of thought provoking daily articles that are available to read on the site.


----------



## Julia (31 July 2006)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*

Well, the question forming the title of this thread is now academic.

John Howard has just announced his decision to contest the next election as Prime Minister.

No surprise.

Julia


----------



## Prospector (31 July 2006)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*

Unfortunately.  I think Peter would make a good PM, he just has this unfortunate air about him that comes off as smugness.  Surely it is time for John Howard to go - without sounding like a Gen X'er (or is that a Y'er : ) I just think we need someone a little younger!


----------



## visual (31 July 2006)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*



			
				Prospector said:
			
		

> Unfortunately.  I think Peter would make a good PM, he just has this unfortunate air about him that comes off as smugness.  Surely it is time for John Howard to go - without sounding like a Gen X'er (or is that a Y'er : ) I just think we need someone a little younger!




Oh Prospector,your ageist! :


----------



## TimmyC (31 July 2006)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*

if it aint broke dont fix it, Johny should stay but i've got no problem with costello taking over when howards time is up


----------



## The Mint Man (1 August 2006)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*



			
				Prospector said:
			
		

> he just has this unfortunate air about him that comes off as smugness.



cant agree more.


----------



## rub92me (1 August 2006)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*

Well after Johnny is finally done here (in another 10 years or so just to keep Peter guessing) maybe he can run China: he'd still be considered young for government there...


----------



## Duckman#72 (1 August 2006)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*



			
				Prospector said:
			
		

> Unfortunately.  I  Surely it is time for John Howard to go - without sounding like a Gen X'er (or is that a Y'er : ) I just think we need someone a little younger!




Hi Prospector - don't get me started on Gen Y!!! 

Can you imagine the first true Gen Y'er running for PM? Standing on the campaign platform asking..."Why should I run for PM? *What will the country do for ME*"

Costello is living in fairyland. Best outcome for the Coalition in the short term. Beasley is so insincere in all his media bites. I don't think he has enough credibility to last another election. 

Duckman


----------



## Julia (1 August 2006)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*



			
				Duckman#72 said:
			
		

> Hi Prospector - don't get me started on Gen Y!!!
> 
> Can you imagine the first true Gen Y'er running for PM? Standing on the campaign platform asking..."Why should I run for PM? *What will the country do for ME*"
> 
> ...




Hi Duckman

Completely agree on all counts.  

I'm quite happy that Costello has been relegated to the semi-background again.  He was becoming distinctly irritating with his presumption of entitlement to the Prime Ministership.  He appeared to completely ignore the fact that most Australians just simply didn't want him!

I think a couple of years ago some "adviser" must have told Kim Beasley that he needed to shed his "nice guy" image, stop being a teddy bear character, and project some sense of power and dynamism.  Well, Kim, sorry old son, it just doesn't work.  You just can't be what you're not.  When he's trying so hard to sound strong and purposeful, he just sounds faintly ridiculous.

Wouldn't Kevin Rudd be better?

Julia


----------



## StockyBailx (1 August 2006)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*

Suprising results, so far, I have only read this page and found a lot of negativity towards Peter and feal thats totaly wrong and you's all should wake up to your selfs. Johny's the one in fairyland taking the country for a ride, hiding behind the governer general and denial to Australians of thier true identity. Personaly i hate the pig and we deserve better. If Peter was elected PM, I mite even start to like and appreciate the Aust Government, a Republic is what we need and I'm sick and tired of living under that dirty bitches skirt it stinks.

Feel very insulted that Peter didn't get a chance & that Australias true identity of a republic get nothing but a snotty mention into Australias way of life, and is not presented at the table more often. This Commonwealth stinks and always will!

I really don't understand how you's can let the Government take you all for granted and insult your real values in life?


----------



## The Mint Man (23 May 2007)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*

well.... I thought I would give this thread a re-birth considering there is talk in the press about if it is or isn't too late for John Howard to pass the PM position onto Peter Costello.
My personal opinion is that it is not too late and even though some members of the press would call this a hospital pass, I wouldn’t really agree with that. 
Would it change my vote if this did happen? No, I’m voting for libs either way, I think that they will do the best job and the thought of all the states being labor as well as federal scares me. Not to mention the unions.

I think that if John Howard hands over the top job before the election he needs to do it by the end of next month, I think that this would win a few votes from the people that think he’s too old, or whatever they think???..... People are strange, I mean I’ve heard of people that will vote for Rudd based on his Sunrise PR work. 
If there has to be a change of PM the IMO Peter Costello would make a better one than Rudd would.
Either way, I feel there is a change going to happen in the next 6 months... either Rudd wins the election, Howard wins and hands it over to Costello or Howard hands it over now/soon.
Lately I have just had this feeling that Howard may have to think about handing it over, after all he has said that he will do what he thinks is best for his party.


Cheers


----------



## Julia (23 May 2007)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM?*

I'm ambivalent about this.  Actually think Costello would be OK as PM, and definitely better than Rudd.  At least we know he is competent in terms of running the economy.  Can't say the same about Wayne Swan.

My reservation is that such a change at this late stage would smack of pure panic by the Libs and they would be mocked to hell and high water by the Opposition.  But perhaps that would be short lived and we still have several months until the election.

Certainly a contest between Costello and Rudd might wake everyone up a bit.
I will be voting Liberal anyway, but am warming to the idea of a change in leadership.  I don't suppose Costello would be too hard to persuade to the notion.  His chances of being PM are receding ever further into the distance under the present circumstances.


----------



## Captain_Chaza (23 May 2007)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM?*

NO! I think he is TOO short

History teaches us not to have  short people in top positions

Salute and Bon Voyage


----------



## wayneL (23 May 2007)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM?*

I think he would be a good PM, but I reckon the Lib leadership right now is a poison chalice. I wouldn't take it if I were him.

3 years of humble pie would probably improve him too.

Best result IMO:
*Libs lose this election
*We get 3 years of Labour to swing the pendulum back a bit ( 3 years of Julia Dullard, Wayne Swine et al would be a stretch but a temporary inconvenience i imagine)
*Peter Pan takes over Libs and wins the next election.
*Turnbull, Abbott & Nelson somehow disappear before then


----------



## The Mint Man (23 May 2007)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM?*



Julia said:


> At least we know he is competent in terms of running the economy.  Can't say the same about Wayne Swan.



For sure!


> My reservation is that such a change at this late stage would smack of pure panic by the Libs and they would be mocked to hell and high water by the Opposition. But perhaps that would be short lived and we still have several months until the election.



Possibly... but I think that it could also work in Liberals favour if all Labour could do was mock them, the Australian public is looking for policy not mockery! and so far Labor has not delivered on that front. A change in the Liberal camp could throw Labor off their game. It would also be considered hypocritical for labor to mock considering how many changes labor has had over the last few years.... but hey that rarely stops them and we have seen some exampls of that lately.

Chaza, your a goose.

Cheers.


----------



## Bloveld (25 May 2007)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*



The Mint Man said:


> two jack
> 
> Also entrenched in my mind are the tales my dad tells me of having to work ridiculous hours only to come home at night to mind the kids (myself and 2 brothers) while my mum walked out the door to go to work to earn extra money, In other words they hardly seen each other, mabey 1/2 an hour a day! And all of this was because of the *17-18% interest rates* on their mortgage. :swear:
> 
> ...




Yeah how long did they have to do that for?
And how is it any different today?


----------



## The Mint Man (25 May 2007)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*



Bloveld said:


> Yeah how long did they have to do that for?
> And how is it any different today?



Hmmm,
To be honest I dont understand the reason for your first question and as for the second one... well for me personally I own a house which I have a mortgage on but get this, I work part time (25 hrs per week) and my missus works casual (around 10 hrs a week) Now tell me if you could do that before!! thanks to low unemployment, better wages more casual and part time jobs being available I am able to do this. No I dont have any kids ATM but if I did I sure as hell wouldn't have to work as hard as my parents did.
Granted that there are 'battlers' (for lack of a better word) these days but IMO not as many as the times I speak of.  

Please say whats on your mind, thats what the forum is for!

Cheers


----------



## Broadside (25 May 2007)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM?*



wayneL said:


> I think he would be a good PM, but I reckon the Lib leadership right now is a poison chalice. I wouldn't take it if I were him.
> 
> 3 years of humble pie would probably improve him too.
> 
> ...




I would like to see that scenario, or even better the Coalition scrapes in this year and then Howard is dumped/resigns for Costello to lead.  If ALP wins, likely it will be for at least 2 terms, Australian electorate rarely turfs out a govt after one term, electoral inertia.


----------



## Bloveld (29 May 2007)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*



The Mint Man said:


> Hmmm,
> To be honest I dont understand the reason for your first question and as for the second one... well for me personally I own a house which I have a mortgage on but get this, I work part time (25 hrs per week) and my missus works casual (around 10 hrs a week) Now tell me if you could do that before!! thanks to low unemployment, better wages more casual and part time jobs being available I am able to do this. No I dont have any kids ATM but if I did I sure as hell wouldn't have to work as hard as my parents did.
> Granted that there are 'battlers' (for lack of a better word) these days but IMO not as many as the times I speak of.
> 
> ...




Firstly the high jnterest rates only lasted a short time.

Back in 89 I was clearing $1000 a week. I could nearly buy an average house with 1 years wage. Now it would take about 3 years an I am basically doing the same job.
The point is that an average wage earner cant pay back the average mortage.
So you may think things were hard then, I think its harder now.


----------



## toothfairy (29 May 2007)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM*



The Mint Man said:


> two jack
> :iagree:
> especially when you think of the debt labour left behind.
> Also entrenched in my mind are the tales my dad tells me of having to work ridiculous hours only to come home at night to mind the kids (myself and 2 brothers) while my mum walked out the door to go to work to earn extra money, In other words they hardly seen each other, mabey 1/2 an hour a day! And all of this was because of the *17-18% interest rates* on their mortgage. :swear:
> ...



High or low interest rate is a global situation that is not very dependent on what Australian political leader can decide on. At the moment the whole world is on relatively low rate. We are just following them, as a matter of fact we are higher than most of the major economically developed countries. There is absolutely nothing that Costello/Howard can do if the whole world has a high interest rate now but to follow (like they always like to follow Mr. Bush). I won't give them any credit for the REASONABLE interest rate that we are facing now, the US rate is typically 1% lower than ours.
Back to your survey, is Costello a good PM, you got to be kidding, he is a bit stale (too experienced in the wrong job). LOL.


----------



## disarray (30 May 2007)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM?*

does labor even have a policy beyond an anti-liberal policy soundbyte? john howard is one of the few leaders in parliament with any kind of vision (as parochial as it is). sadly this reflects the truly appaling state of our current crop of political leaders if little johnny is the best we can come up with.


----------



## toothfairy (30 May 2007)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM?*



disarray said:


> does labor even have a policy beyond an anti-liberal policy soundbyte? john howard is one of the few leaders in parliament with any kind of vision (as parochial as it is). sadly this reflects the truly appaling state of our current crop of political leaders if little johnny is the best we can come up with.



 Ah, talking about parochial, Costello is getting worst in his old age, his narrow minded side came out when he was making some sort of rediculous statement about people of other religions (Muslims for my memory) last year when there was some panic about terrorism, he is definitely getting worse, not PM material.
I think I rather concentrate in share trading, doesn't matter who wins, ASX will still be opened. Vote for ASX.


----------



## Rafa (30 May 2007)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM?*



disarray said:


> john howard is one of the few leaders in parliament with any kind of vision




John Howards vision doesn't extend beyond getting voted in at the next election 

Costellos recent comments make me think he intends to follow Howards blue print...


----------



## disarray (30 May 2007)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM?*



Rafa said:


> John Howards vision doesn't extend beyond getting voted in at the next election




i pretty much agree. and it seems thats the best vision we can hope for from our political leaders.

there was a dateline discussion on the other night talking about long term plans for the country, unfortunately the discussion was largely a waste of time because government plans centre around winning elections, not running the country.


----------



## Rafa (30 May 2007)

*Re: Would Peter make a good PM?*

is dateline the show on SBS hosted by Jenny Brockie... If it is, then i did see that the other night...

As usual, a lot of hot air in the room...

Couple of key points i thought were...
the nation need extra spending in transport infrastructure, broadband infrastructure, water infrastructure, education and aboriginal health.

Whilst the latter two may need govt spending, the frist three issues don't...... as long as the framework is in place to *enable* the private sector to deliver, is should be fine.

the broadband issue is one area where the framework simply isnt in place.


----------

