Federal Labor Party discussion

[Calliope]

More like once it gets beyond one sentence slogans you are in deep water and have to swim back to shore.

:topic

 

[wayneL]

Seriously, you can't string a few sentences together explaining a policy from Abbott that you can support?

WOW

I can only shake me head at the absurdity.

At least i can name a few policies from the ALP I support.

Policy is fleeting.

Ideology is everlasting.

Policy bribes.

Ideology shapes a country.

Social Democracy sux.

Conservatism sux, but sux less than SD.

Basic platforms are the place to look.

(By way of disclosure, I am classical liberal with grudging and pragmatic concessions to social liberalism)

 

[Julia]

Your answer contains absolutely no content.

In effect you cannot even tell us why you vote Abbott or detail a policy, nor do you justify your answer here as to why the alternative is scary.

Why the alternative is 'scary' is made plain by their history of failing to implement properly even the most well intentioned plans. This is in contrast to the Howard years when policy was clearly thought out, including all its ramifications, before being implemented. Certainly Work Choices was unpopular in the broad context, but it was still arguably best for the overall economic health of the nation.

Under Labor the other extreme has occurred, as they dance to the tune of the unions, and disadvantage business which is the essential life blood of the country.

Where John Howard lost much of the population was in his decision to support the USA in going to war with Afghanistan and Iraq. Most of us were completely against this decision, but he apparently saw it as an obligation to honour our relationship with the US. Personally I think it was taking loyalty too far.

Tony Abbott may have been one of John Howard's ministers, but the public never warmed to him, and they still don't. Where John Howard was clearly a conviction politician, even in the face of public opposition, he was always able to clearly present his policies to the electorate and to remain calm under the most intensive questioning.

I suspect many people who voted the Howard government out have since had more than adequate reason to regret that decision, given the disarray and infighting in the Labor Party, not to mention their proven inadequacy in terms of actually putting a policy into effect. Everything they have touched has gone wrong in some way. There is no reason to imagine the PNG deal will be any different.

In asking such a question, you've missed the broader context of what I'm saying.

A negative would be job losses. That's not to say that the fundamental principal is wrong, but it needs to be seen in a broader tax reform context than it has by Labor, and there also needs to be consultation. There is then a better prospect of getting the detail right.

As it is, it's just another knee jerk by Labor to help manage another problem of its own creation (carbon tax) in the light of an upcoming election campaign.

Agree. Already the ramifications of the policy, which seems entirely reasonable of itself, are coming to light and suggest tax losses to the government in terms of vehicles purchased etc far greater than what will be saved by the removal of the statutory benefit.

PS for anyone looking for reasons why Malcolm Turnbull should take over the Coalition leadership, there's an excellent long form interview with him by Ellen Fanning on SBS, 8.30 pm. Sorry, can't post a link as it's not yet up on their website.
I've been opposed to Mr Turnbull resuming the leadership because of his politically inept handling of it in the Godwin Grech affair, but his responses now suggest he has learned a lot. His fluency and apparently natural approach is in huge contrast to Tony Abbott.

PPS The above comments are in no way designed as a proxy answer to the question by Calliope.

 

[sydboy007]

In asking such a question, you've missed the broader context of what I'm saying.

A negative would be job losses. That's not to say that the fundamental principal is wrong, but it needs to be seen in a broader tax reform context than it has by Labor, and there also needs to be consultation. There is then a better prospect of getting the detail right.

As it is, it's just another knee jerk by Labor to help manage another problem of its own creation (carbon tax) in the light of an upcoming election campaign.

So basically you're saying to not make any changes to the tax system untill a totally comprehensive overhaul of the entire system can be done?

If a lot of jobs are lost over this change, then one has to question if the whole industry was built upon a tax break that was not actually supporting businesses?

 

[Calliope]

PPS The above comments are in no way designed as a proxy answer to the question by Calliope.

My only question to sydboy was to to name the posters referred to in his nonsense accusation;

"I know all the ASF right support Tony's nanny state gold plated paid parental leave, and fully support his direction action policies too."

All I got was bluster and a rude camp suggestion to "suck it up".

 

[sydboy007]

Certainly Work Choices was unpopular in the broad context, but it was still arguably best for the overall economic health of the nation.

Agree. Already the ramifications of the policy, which seems entirely reasonable of itself, are coming to light and suggest tax losses to the government in terms of vehicles purchased etc far greater than what will be saved by the removal of the statutory benefit.

Under workchoices - productivity declined AND work place deaths increased. How was was that good for the country? These inconvenient facts are always ignored by the right.

Under changes by Labor work place deaths have declined 33% since taking office!

So your argument is to continue allowing a tax break to be abused because to stop the abuse may cost the budget more? Not sure what revenue the Fed Govt will lose out on if car sales decline?

For all the claims of things being a shamzole we've had:

* uninterupted economic growth
* low inflation
* historically low interest rates
* low unemployment
* household savings rate back to the long term average of around 10% (it was pretty much continual decline under Howard, getting into negative territory just before he was voted out.)

all while battling against an overvalued AUD.

What is to complain about that????

 

[sptrawler]

So basically you're saying to not make any changes to the tax system untill a totally comprehensive overhaul of the entire system can be done?

If a lot of jobs are lost over this change, then one has to question if the whole industry was built upon a tax break that was not actually supporting businesses?

Does that also apply to the rationale, of the impost of a $23/ton carbon tax, that has directly resulted in job losses being inflicted.
Now being overturned, for a tax of $6, the jobs won't return.

One has to question was the whole tax about revenue, or about making change, that hasn't happened.

 

[sydboy007]

Does that also apply to the rationale, of the impost of a $23/ton carbon tax, that has directly resulted in job losses being inflicted.
Now being overturned, for a tax of $6, the jobs won't return.

One has to question was the whole tax about revenue, or about making change, that hasn't happened.

Not exactly sure what you mean by "making change, that hasn't happened"

If you mean that there hasn't been a reduction in the carbon intensity of the Australian economy, then that is false.

 

[Julia]

Under workchoices - productivity declined AND work place deaths increased. How was was that good for the country? These inconvenient facts are always ignored by the right.

FYI I have voted Labor more often than I have voted Liberal, so kindly don't slot me into your predetermined categories.

Under changes by Labor work place deaths have declined 33% since taking office!

If that is so, it would be because the government and the unions have together put so many regulations onto work places people almost have to ask permission before breathing.

So your argument is to continue allowing a tax break to be abused because to stop the abuse may cost the budget more? Not sure what revenue the Fed Govt will lose out on if car sales decline?

I've about had enough of your twisting of people's responses, sydboy. I did not at any stage say I think the FBT proposals should not be applied. I have simply passed on the views of people more in touch with the potential ramifications than I, and note that it would be typical of Labor to slam in a new 'policy' without thinking through all the possible outcomes.

You continually challenge pretty much every observation made against Labor, fail to ever acknowledge any of their massive stuff ups, and refuse to acknowledge any achievements or even basic party unitywith respect to
the Coalition.

Yes, this is a forum, and yes we should all be able to defend any comments we make, but you are just being as negative and non-constructive as you and your ilk accuse Tony Abbott of being.

I'd have thought better of you/

 

[sydboy007]

My only question to sydboy was to to name the posters referred to in his nonsense accusation;


All I got was bluster and a rude camp suggestion to "suck it up".

Did you understand when I told you that comment was made sarcastically?

And with all your posts, all you've done to confirm is that you DO NOT agree with Abbotts paid parental leave scheme, and you DO NOT agree with his direct action plan, yet you WILL vote for him but can't link to a policy document as a reason for giving him your vote.

I wish I could have such blind faith in a politican.

- - - Updated - - -

Policy is fleeting.

Ideology is everlasting.

Policy bribes.

Ideology shapes a country.

Social Democracy sux.

Conservatism sux, but sux less than SD.

Basic platforms are the place to look.

(By way of disclosure, I am classical liberal with grudging and pragmatic concessions to social liberalism)

So what was Howards middle class welfare splurge? Most of it didn't help to improve the economics of the country. it was spent to increase productivity, it didn't seem to make the tax system any simpler or reduce compliance costs for business.

I don't remember their being a CBA for child care rebates or leaving part of FTB non means tested.

His halving of the CGT on assets over 12 months lead to skyrocketing house prices where the IP sector in aggregate hasn't made a $ profit in 13 years! How has that benefited the country?

 

[sptrawler]

Not exactly sure what you mean by "making change, that hasn't happened"

If you mean that there hasn't been a reduction in the carbon intensity of the Australian economy, then that is false.

No not saying there hasn't been a reduction in the carbon intensity, but the BIG DIRTY BROWN COAL OGRES, are still spewing.
The solar and wind generation was happening anyway, the justification for the carbon tax was the big polluters.
However no doubt you will come up with some warm, soft centred, feel good explanation for a complete stuff up,
that has left mayhem and being reversed. But that's just you and I respect that.

 

[sydboy007]

FYI I have voted Labor more often than I have voted Liberal, so kindly don't slot me into your predetermined categories.


If that is so, it would be because the government and the unions have together put so many regulations onto work places people almost have to ask permission before breathing.



I've about had enough of your twisting of people's responses, sydboy. I did not at any stage say I think the FBT proposals should not be applied. I have simply passed on the views of people more in touch with the potential ramifications than I, and note that it would be typical of Labor to slam in a new 'policy' without thinking through all the possible outcomes.

You continually challenge pretty much every observation made against Labor, fail to ever acknowledge any of their massive stuff ups, and refuse to acknowledge any achievements or even basic party unitywith respect to
the Coalition.

Yes, this is a forum, and yes we should all be able to defend any comments we make, but you are just being as negative and non-constructive as you and your ilk accuse Tony Abbott of being.

I'd have thought better of you/

i appolgies if i appear to be harsh. As you are tired of being slotted into a predetermined category, I think you can see that's what is done to most people who don't take a right view on this forum. I've had people say I must be drunk or mentally challenged to say anything supportive about labor.

At least when someone asks me a direct question I answer them.

It seems when something good happens under labor there is still a negative reason for that good.

The views on FBT that have been passed to you seem to be incorect, at least at a Federal level. A reduction in car purchases would affect the states due to lower GST revenue, but the impact at a federal level would be if job losses cause unemployment benefits paid to be higher. Still, the claims it will cost working people money I find hard to believe. Anyone doing a lot of driving for work is going to have a smart phone and can instal a simple app to monitor their driving so as to easily log what are work / personal trips. Allowing people to just claim 20% without proving it just opens it to abuse.

Plenty of people on this forum talk about Labors stuff ups, and when they are factually correct I've never challenged them. I've always felt labor shouldn't have had the second splurge of spending during the GFC, but then that is more from hindsight.

I just find it hard to fathom why people can't really explain why they'll vote for Tony.

 

[wayneL]

So what was Howards middle class welfare splurge?

Bribery

Most of it didn't help to improve the economics of the country. it was spent to increase productivity, it didn't seem to make the tax system any simpler or reduce compliance costs for business.

I don't remember their being a CBA for child care rebates or leaving part of FTB non means tested.

His halving of the CGT on assets over 12 months lead to skyrocketing house prices where the IP sector in aggregate hasn't made a $ profit in 13 years! How has that benefited the country?

I wouldn't call halving of CGT middle class welfare. But there was plenty of it however and I strongly agree with most of your point... and I spoke out against it at the time.

 

[cynic]

I just find it hard to fathom why people can't really explain why they'll vote for Tony.

I find it hard to fathom how anyone could find it hard to fathom that people aren't necessarily casting a vote for Tony, but are actually casting a vote against the incumbent government due to dissatisfaction with their recent performance! Is that so terribly difficult to grasp?

 

[Tink]

Exactly cynic.

Agree with your post Julia, well said, regarding the Labor government failing to implement plans properly, the wastage, the unions and destruction of business.
The carbon tax which has affected overall.
These are the big factors.

I am also a swinging voter, but after seeing this performance, the backflips, the lies of saying one thing and doing another and still he doesnt admit he was wrong, the infighting, no way I would take that risk on our economy.

Abbott may not be popular, but I have more faith with the Coalition party, as Malcolm has said on alot of his interviews, if you like me, know I am in the party and a part of the leadership.
I look at Labors line up and no way I would feel comfortable, they need a term out to re- establish themselves.

We have no idea what they stand for, they are all over the shop saying yes to everything, on the run policies, and we have seen Rudd in action already, he was not a man of his word.

 

[Calliope]

I just find it hard to fathom why people can't really explain why they'll vote for Tony.

I guess it is too hard for a rusted on leftie to fathom, so I will tell you again;

The alternative is too scary.

 

[sydboy007]

I find it hard to fathom how anyone could find it hard to fathom that people aren't necessarily casting a vote for Tony, but are actually casting a vote against the incumbent government due to dissatisfaction with their recent performance! Is that so terribly difficult to grasp?

I guess it is too hard for a rusted on leftie to fathom, so I will tell you again;

The alternative is too scary.

So basically people seem to be arguing Labor is really bad, the Coalition is just bad so therefore better to vote for them?

Calliope

why do you feel it is OK to make snide remarks? What evidence do you have than I'm a "rusted on leftie"? Could you limit yourself to just to the factual information rather than personal attacks?

Can I just use a few quotes from you to highlight what you've done (they can be found in the gay marriage thread)

* Your posts are all unfounded presumptions # 499

* Making unfounded accusations and abusing people who don't think like you, is the worst form of bigotry. #499

* I suppose you colluded to put me down. The attack was out of the blue. What is your motive? Just spite? Why? #522

* The last thing I expected was the nastiness my comments attracted. #526

- - - Updated - - -

Bribery




I wouldn't call halving of CGT middle class welfare. But there was plenty of it however and I strongly agree with most of your point... and I spoke out against it at the time.

Has Abbott done anything to make you think he will attack middle class welfare? So far he's taken the populist route at every turn. I'm not trying to defend Labor, just that I fear people are jumping out of the frying pan into the fire.

This is what halving of the CGT did to house price inflation and budget

 

[FlyingFox]

So basically people seem to be arguing Labor is really bad, the Coalition is just bad so therefore better to vote for them?

Calliope

why do you feel it is OK to make snide remarks? What evidence do you have than I'm a "rusted on leftie"? Could you limit yourself to just to the factual information rather than personal attacks?

Can I just use a few quotes from you to highlight what you've done (they can be found in the gay marriage thread)

* Your posts are all unfounded presumptions # 499

* Making unfounded accusations and abusing people who don't think like you, is the worst form of bigotry. #499

* I suppose you colluded to put me down. The attack was out of the blue. What is your motive? Just spite? Why? #522

* The last thing I expected was the nastiness my comments attracted. #526

- - - Updated - - -



Has Abbott done anything to make you think he will attack middle class welfare? So far he's taken the populist route at every turn. I'm not trying to defend Labor, just that I fear people are jumping out of the frying pan into the fire.

This is what halving of the CGT did to house price inflation and budget

No point fighting the good fight. All you will get is snide remarks and attacks ... no discussion of substance. Calliope is just going to take the Pierre de Fermet route, "I have all the answers but there isn't enough space on this forum to write it.( i.e I can't be bothered articulating them)". Easiest way to win an argument, isn't it.

And any comment that seems remotely leftish will see you being labelled a hipie, weeding smoking, tree hugging leftie.

Unlike what some of the posters in this forum believe, the world is not black and white, nor is it shades of gray ...

 

[sails]

No point fighting the good fight. All you will get is snide remarks and attacks ... no discussion of substance. Calliope is just going to take the Pierre de Fermet route, "I have all the answers but there isn't enough space on this forum to write it.( i.e I can't be bothered articulating them)". Easiest way to win an argument, isn't it.

And any comment that seems remotely leftish will see you being labelled a hipie, weeding smoking, tree hugging leftie.

Unlike what some of the posters in this forum believe, the world is not black and white, nor is it shades of gray ...

So all you have left is to denigrate other posters who don't share your viewpoint?

I think history will judge the labor government of the last six years as the worst ever. We pay for these people to represent us - instead we now have billions in debt and little to show for it. Their history of management is dismal at best. They legislated a carbon tax against the will of he people as shown by opinion polls. They allowed over 45,000 arrivals who, by their own admission, are not genuine refugees fleeing persecution at massive cost to taxpayers.

This government is nothing like the labor party of Hawke and Keating. In fact, what do they actually stand for any more except desperation to be in power?

 

[Julia]

So all you have left is to denigrate other posters who don't share your viewpoint?

I think history will judge the labor government of the last six years as the worst ever. We pay for these people to represent us - instead we now have billions in debt and little to show for it. Their history of management is dismal at best. They legislated a carbon tax against the will of he people as shown by opinion polls. They allowed over 45,000 arrivals who, by their own admission, are not genuine refugees fleeing persecution at massive cost to taxpayers.

This government is nothing like the labor party of Hawke and Keating. In fact, what do they actually stand for any more except desperation to be in power?

And that says it all when you're looking for why people will vote for the alternative, sydboy.

For me it's also the total lack of integrity amongst the Labor Party itself: their backstabbing and disloyalty so absolutely demonstrates that they as individuals will do anything at all, even compromise their most deeply held principles, to hold on to their own seats, and as a party, to hold on to power.

The notion that the purpose of their existence should be the welfare of all Australians and the protection of our way of life seems not even a secondary consideration. Repugnant.