Wysiwyg
Everyone wants money
- Joined
- 8 August 2006
- Posts
- 8,428
- Reactions
- 284
Poor Queensland,
just watch your $100 billion debt head skywards,
What does the wm stand for.
Is it beer wine marijuana?
Poor Queensland,
just watch your $100 billion debt head skywards,
What does the wm stand for.
Is it beer wine marijuana?
I agree. Springborg is probably a reasonable bloke but - like Brendan Nelson federally - he just doesn't have any sophistication or real political savvy.As I've said previously, Qld elections are won or lost in Brisbane The result tonight shows that nothing has changed. SE Queenslanders will not vote for a country bumpkin. To win an election the LNP will have to produce an urbane charismatic leader.
?????Sorry mate, count me out, I'd hate to be a politician.
gg
LOL, how could you possibly know for sure?
I was watching "The Insiders" this morning and many of the pundits blamed the LIB/Nats doing so badly because the policies were not provided in any detail. Pretty much what Julie said were her reservations earlier in this thread.
You have to win government. You can't wait for the others to lose it.
Grace, I'm not sure that this is really true, at least across the whole population. I wasn't in the least swayed by anything Anna Bligh or her advertising said. I didn't vote for her. But not because of any advertising or marketing. I did not receive a single telemarketing call (on the Do Not Call register).It came down to advertising - Anna's one liners "more jobs, not cuts" she said over and over and over in your head, until the people of QLD could not think of anything else. So they voted Labor.
So, Anna got in, not on her Leadership ability, it was her smart marketing people. What about the telemarketers - vote labor, vote labor...what a con job.
No. You can't attribute his loss to the public servants voting against him.Lawrence wanted to get rid of the fat cats in the beaurocracy - he lost every public servant vote (if he ever had them). There was doubt in their mind on how he was going to go about saving that money in that sector. Would they lose their job? Even though he said over and over, no job cuts but efficency program. I think this cost him the job.
No argument from me here. And then there will be debt to service from the Feds as well.Big problem now, my kids are going to be paying for Labor debt for a long long time in taxes. Queenslanders will get what they deserve with Labor....wait until she does this Budget, all that money gone, the royalty revenue smashed....poor Anna, you've spent it in the boom, you rats. What are you going to do now when you have to think about what you are doing. She couldn't afford to go to an election after the budget - she would have lost!!!!!!!!
The people have spoken, now it's time to get on with the job, good luck Queensland, you are a great state.
unbiased
Yes well done Qld. Labor Party.![]()
Neither did I, but they were active with this.Grace, I'm not sure that this is really true, at least across the whole population. I wasn't in the least swayed by anything Anna Bligh or her advertising said. I didn't vote for her. But not because of any advertising or marketing. I did not receive a single telemarketing call (on the Do Not Call register).
.No. You can't attribute his loss to the public servants voting against him. I really wanted to toss Labor out. Really wanted to feel able to vote for the LNP. But there was just no detail about how they were going to fund their promises which overall seemed rather vague anyway.
To say "we will access a 3% dividend across the board" smacks of a wish rather than carefully calculated savings. Had they been able to say "we will take $X from ABC and $XX from XYZ etc, then I could have believed he had actually done the calculations, as opposed [to making a wild statement which he hoped would work out in practice
In short, I found Lawrence Springbord not credible on an economic front.
Plenty of advertising from the LNP also.Julia
Neither did I, but they were active with this.
I looked at the LNP website and could see no reference to how they proposed to fund their promises.Labor provided a one page explanation to their promises, LNP provided 35 pages. See, not even you got it and you are much smarter than the general population!
Grace, I've already explained this. To repeat, I found the suggestion of using a "3% efficiency dividend" vague. There was no detail that I saw which described where this would come from. Didn't see even a single example.Why would that be?
He said something along the lines of "we will be looking for how we fund those issues", that just blew me away. I wouldn't have voted for someone like that
Hello and welcome to Aussie Stock Forums!
To gain full access you must register. Registration is free and takes only a few seconds to complete.
Already a member? Log in here.