Hmmm... from a young gun still very wet behind the ears and reasonably brainwashed by our education system.
Some of us actually think for ourselves...
+1. And as a result the loss of confidence by both business and individuals, especially in the face of so many stuff ups by the government and their internal wrangling.Politically, the main difference I see between the two parties relates to honesty.
Liberal said they would do something unpopular at the time (GST) and went to an election with that as their single most significant policy. They did as promised, and introduced a GST after the election.
Labor said they would NOT do something unpopular at the time (carbon tax) and went to an election with that as a key policy. Then they went ahead and did it anyway almost immediately after being elected.
It comes down to honesty. We all know that politicians aren't known for outstanding honesty, but in Labor's case the breach of trust is clearly in the "intentionally misleading" category with this one. If it were any product or service other than a government, the ACCC would be called in to investigate and would be handing out fines quick smart since the supplier has clearly mislead consumers about the service they would receive.
The service as supplied to the people, clearly does not match the description provided at the time of making that decision, the discrepancies becoming apparent almost immediately after the election. If it were a phone, car or even a house you'd be entitled to a refund.
As I see it, the real point is that the people feel they have been conned by Labor. A key policy was clearly stated, then reversed as soon as the election was over. That's dishonesty no matter how you look at it, and people don't like being duped. For this reason, they are unlikely to trust those responsible for quite some time.
It's similar to the situation faced by anyone in any relationship. Do something that is unpopular but with clearly stated reasons and in an open manner and people may well accept it. Deny that you are going to do it, then do it anyway, and you'll find yourself hugely disliked not due to the action itself but because you lied about the fact you were doing it. That goes for everything from personal relationships to workplaces. People simply don't like being lied to or intentionally mislead no matter what the policy or underlying reasons may be.
+1.You know we did go through an asian financial crisis while howard was in.
If you think that the major parties are the same and the small differences don't matter, better check again. Just differences on IR alone can swing this country from productive to loserville. Those that are employed might think they are the same. But those that have their own business tend to see the difference and future problems that are setting up. I highly doubt NBN would have got up under libs either. Small differences can mean a hell of a lot and lead to bigger picture results
Ok firstly a disclaimer I really detest Labor & Unions and everything they stand for....
But surely the Carbon Tax fiasco was more of Gillard compromising Labor Values to appease the Greens to
grab power rather than dishonesty .If Labor obtained a majority would they still have brought in the Carbon Tax?
Probably semantics but thats my view
In an election-eve interview with The Australian, the Prime Minister revealed she would view victory tomorrow as a mandate for a carbon price, provided the community was ready for this step.
Labor said they would NOT do something unpopular at the time (carbon tax) and went to an election with that as a key policy. Then they went ahead and did it anyway almost immediately after being elected.
"If re-elected" but they were not.
To form Government they had to compromise with others, some of whom demanded a carbon tax.
Many of you need to get over this little misnomer for clearer debate.
Technically that is correct. However my life experience to date tells me that the situation was not handled well."If re-elected" but they were not.
To form Government they had to compromise with others, some of whom demanded a carbon tax.
In fact, what is happening is that The People have been saving harder than ever, to the detriment of the economy. I know you are talking about gov't debt but there are also many experts out there demanding that the gov't borrow even more to fund vital infrastructure. As a nation we're getting left behind.If your heart is a bit iffy at the age of 100 then all things considered you haven't done too badly. It's a very different story however if you're having issues at the age of 25.
If the car is hard to start and has a few rattles after 350,000 km then you'd expect that. But if it was doing that after 10,000 km then you'd be straight back to the dealer demanding it be fixed.
Now, Australia has just experienced a massive commodity boom in terms of both price and volume. We have also had good rains on the farms and an incredibly long period of general economic growth. To have increasing debts amidst this backdrop is akin to the new car that won't start or the 25 year old with heart problems.
if there was a drought, perhaps YPS could be running at 1480MW instead of 653....It's not a good sign to be having troubles, with anything, at a point where underlying conditions are the best they have been for decades and will most likely deteriorate going forward. We ought to have cash in the bank right now, not a growing pile of debt.
What happens if coal and iron ore prices fall in a heap and there's a drought? That's a credible scenario and we would seem to be pretty much stuffed if it happens.
Borrowing for infrastructure of lasting value I'm fine with. Borrowing to fund ongoing consumption of no lasting value is another matter however.I know you are talking about gov't debt but there are also many experts out there demanding that the gov't borrow even more to fund vital infrastructure. As a nation we're getting left behind.
If Labor were not satisfied with minority government, they should have gone back to the people. Politicians are elected to represent the people, not each other."If re-elected" but they were not.
To form Government they had to compromise with others, some of whom demanded a carbon tax.
Many of you need to get over this little misnomer for clearer debate.
Have you started rolling your own ?The Hover dam was suppose to be a game change and save USA however it has turned out to be one big Dud.
It sucked people into investing in land and farmer's moving to Nevada all over the government propaganda pushing cheap plentiful water.
Now the Mead dam is at 50% and looks like running out of water so the feds are now digging under the lake trying to find more water as the dam was a dud the feds have decided to do it all over again, so infrastructure needs to be well thought out before it is Oked.
The Snowy river scheme is the OZ version of Hover.
A quick Google search finds that they are using a mole (tunnel boring machine) and installing a new intake below the level of the present intakes.Now the Mead dam is at 50% and looks like running out of water so the feds are now digging under the lake trying to find more water
This (Australians are mentally depressed) is why our performance at the Olympics was not up to its normal standard.
Worrying about Australia's present state and future has taken the edge off our Olympians.
The governments constant disregard of the electorates frustration, is depressing everyone.:1zhelp:
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?