Does Gillard inspire confidence?

[Macquack]

The Labor Party not the "Labour Party" as you descrIbe it (SOUNDS LIKE HARD LABOUR) .

If you are going to be a smart ar*e Noco, at least attribute quotes to the correct person. It was Mr Z who penned "Labour" and I was quoting his post. That is why I highlighted it, because it was spelt wrong.

So according to Noco, "never ever" means "never ever in our current term of office".

 

[Duckman#72]

Understand your point re Abbotts reason Snake but I still think its damaging to Abbott not to go the 2nd debate its allowing Labor back into the game.

I disagree IFocus.

Originally I thought it was a mistake BUT as the weeks progress, the decision has made Abbott look strong. And the more Labor squeals about it, the more it smacks of desperation. Tony looks a strong leader as a result. Julia doesn't tell Tony what he will do - he tells Julia. I think it has been one of the significant turning points of the whole campaign.

Abbott turning down Gillard for a 2nd debate suggested to everyone that the Coalition was actually in control and comfortable with the way their campaign was heading. The louder and more venomous the chorus from Labor, the more panicked they appear. Even Todd Samson on The Gruen Transfer last night said that Tony Abbott has positioned himself as "The Man of Stability". I have never heard him say a positive word about the Coalition ever!!!

Isn't it amazing - only a few weeks ago the Coalition were being hammered for being "too negative". Now with only a week to go - the only thing Labor can throw at the electorate is negative scare campaigns.

Even unimpressive Coalition members (up to this point) have found their feet. Peter Dutton did well against Roxon yesterday as did Joe Hockey against Swan earlier in the week. Chris Pyne did well against Ferguson on the 7:30 Report.

I'm pleased to say that finally someone has come out to refute the "we saved200,000 jobs" claim of Swan and Gillard. Unfortunately it was someone from the Reserve Bank rather than the Opposition. But the Opposition let them get away with saying that crap for months.

If it was a football game.....the Coalition would be going into the last quarter with "all the momentum". (Not bad for a side that 6 months ago were 20-1 shots)

Duckman

 

[Mr Z]

So according to Noco, "never ever" means "never ever in our current term of office".

At least Howard took it to an election and got a mandate for it.... that is how democracy is supposed to work no?

 

[wayneL]

So according to Noco, "never ever" means "never ever in our current term of office".

I guess "never ever" has about the same honesty as the "L A W law" tax cuts.

 

[noco]

I guess "never ever" has about the same honesty as the "L A W law" tax cuts.

Yeah, the L-A-W Law tax cuts the Keating promised in his pre election speach and then reneged. Can well remember that was the year of the recession we had to have.

 

[trainspotter]

Whale Oil Beef Hooked !

"At the end of the day government is about teamwork and partnership and we will be proving that by working together." Julia Gillard (try telling that to Kevvie 07)

Probably just as well with the L-A-W tax cuts thingy that the Govt reneged on. The Budget deficit was a mere 68 billion at the time.

http://www.andrewmurray.org.au/documents/167/keating_memory.pdf .... some good reading here !

 

[Mr Z]

It is still a Faustian Choice...

I liked Paul Keating, at least they had some part of a clue back then. We seem to be all out of clues all round these days....

Damn whippersnippers! (YES I KNOW!)

and I do mean HARD LABOUR.... LOL they are going to tax your tax before this is all over. The idea that less is more when it comes to tax is lost in this country... fight or flight. I fight.

 

[Mofra]

So according to Noco, "never ever" means "never ever in our current term of office".

Fair's fair - spin is spin regardless of whichever side of the political spectrum is starts.
"Never ever" in plain English does not carry qualifiers with it. It would as ludicrous as suggesting a promise can be broken if it's "non-core".

 

[IFocus]

I disagree IFocus.

(Not bad for a side that 6 months ago were 20-1 shots)

Duckman

Yes over all so far Abbotts campaign is as good as Liberals could have hoped for and Abbott as good as he could deliver.

This is of course is helped by the small target strategy and Labors own goals.

One thing about the Labor issues depriving their campaign of clear air early on is the way Gillard has withstood the pressure over all she hasn't blinked which I have found impressive.

Hockey / Swan last night on the 7.30 report was pretty tame, I am no Swan fan but he can remember his lines and he is across the numbers with a smile. Some thing Hockey could do well to emulate he seemed under pressure and negative with out to much depth.

As for momentum the betting has turned back around for Labor

http://i.imgur.com/YmuWz.jpg


Before I had Abbott winning now I don't know suspect state Labor NSW and possibly QLD could win it for the Liberals on a seat by seat contest in those states but think its to close to call.

 

[noco]

Swanie is like a parrot with his repetitive lines.

* We have a plan.

* We have the balance right.

* It's very important for this country.

* It's good to be with you.

* Polly wants a cracker.

Would anybody like to add to the list?

 

[trainspotter]

Sorry noco I am still laughing at "polly wants a cracker" !! LOLOL.

 

[Julia]

Swanie is like a parrot with his repetitive lines.

* We have a plan.

* We have the balance right.

* It's very important for this country.

* It's good to be with you.

* Polly wants a cracker.

Would anybody like to add to the list?

How could you possibly omit "It was our stimulus that saved Australia from the GFC". No acknowledgement of the role of the Reserve Bank, the excellent position the coffers were left in courtesy the Libs, the prudent management of the banks, etc etc.
If it's possible, Swan is even more irritating than any of his colleagues, particularly as he gets worked up and becomes more and more shrill, even quite hysterical at times.

 

[Duckman#72]

If it's possible, Swan is even more irritating than any of his colleagues, particularly as he gets worked up and becomes more and more shrill, even quite hysterical at times.

Its amazing how we see things differently. I don't know what show IFocus was watching but on the 7:30 Report I thought Swan seemed nervous, agitated and at times flustered, whereas Hockey was measured, calm and gave a performance that suggested he was in control.

Swan is certainly the weakest link.

Duckman

 

[IFocus]

Yes we do see things differently.......makes the world go round

Just on the GFC people speak of it now like it was no big deal.......


In case you forgot from Christine Christian, CEO of credit reporting firm Dun & Bradstreet Australia

At the end of the first quarter — in October 2008 — the research indicated that the crisis had much further to play out. There are about 3 million businesses in our database, 800,000 that actively trade on any sort of credit basis, that generate the majority of GDP.

We re-rated 130,000 of them. There's never been such an adjustment at one time. 130,000 firms had been rated at a higher risk of financial distress between October 1 and March 2009, [which meant that] over the next 12 months they would experience severe financial distress — they were seriously on the brink.

 

[sails]

I wonder how many of Labor's expensive promises will be conveniently delayed due to insufficient funding. Or perhaps they intend to borrow the money - so no need for costing anyway...

WAYNE Swan has admitted policies announced at Labor's official campaign launch on Monday will not be costed by Treasury, as he hammered the Coalition for refusing to have their prices checked.

http://www.news.com.au/features/fed...ampaign-costings/story-e6frfllr-1225904750492

 

[basilio]

Just on the GFC people speak of it now like it was no big deal.......


In case you forgot from Christine Christian, CEO of credit reporting firm Dun & Bradstreet Australia

At the end of the first quarter ”” in October 2008 ”” the research indicated that the crisis had much further to play out. There are about 3 million businesses in our database, 800,000 that actively trade on any sort of credit basis, that generate the majority of GDP.

The terror surrounding the GFC has been sort of forgotten. I remember when there were runs on the English banks, the series of investment bank collapses in America and then the realisation that the Australian banks were about 2 days away from a run. That was when the government stepped in with the bank guarantees.

Whatever we may think of their morality the banks are the linchpin of our economic system. If there are widespread failures amongst the banks then every other business will be paralyzed as well as the operations of transfer payments to pensioners, wages the lot.

It's worth remembering this because we still haven't separated the functional elements of the banking system - savings and payments, from the speculative side which has got them into so much trouble and could still take us all down.

 

[Mr Z]

How could you possibly omit "It was our stimulus that saved Australia from the GFC".

Reality is we did OK because this did not hit Asia as hard as was touted. The stimulus has just added future pressure to our situation by dragging future spending forward, it lead some people up the slaughter house path and will cost most more in the longer run. You cannot borrow and stimulate, you are merely redistributing funding from the private sector to the public and typically expending it in a much more inefficient and non economic way. The real stimulus ran out with the surplus and that was blown in a disgusting give away. The sad thing is that the lag is such between cause and effect that the culprit is not normally blamed once the full cost becomes due. Government and we need to accept that the best thing they can do is stay out of the way, in most all cases this will produce a better result.

As mad as it sounds, if you look at the total of our economy letting banks and these large enterprises fail is the shortest way out of the woods. Yes the damage short term is greater but the net damage longer term is less and the economy will bounce back healthier faster than you would think is possible. The way we do things today is more palatable politically but its rife with moral hazard and ensures that the culprits actually have a chance to continue their bad habits. It works against one of the basic tenants of capitalism, against one of the things that makes it work, failure is apart of the process of efficiently distributing resources, failure is the market telling you you are have it wrong. The fact is we are punishing the people in our economy who are doing the fundamentally correct thing and rewarding those that are not.

Anyway... they saved us from nothing, in the end this will be what it is and government will just share the bill for it in some arbitrarily decided way.

Be clear on that much.... Oh and I don't expect that the Libs would have been stellar in their handling of the scene either, should it have been down to them.

No Gillard does not inspire confidence, neither does Abbot and it seems the people that would maybe inspire confidence saw the light early and decided it was a probable no win situation. Look for Costello to return when we are near the lows of this cycle, just a hunch.

I agree Julia, there are still big issues for our banks to face and there is likely a GFC round two coming. There is certainly enough fuel in the derivatives market to light up something that would eclipse the 'GFC'. When is the question, there is plenty of why.

 

[Julia]

Great summary, Mr Z. Governments, sadly, have little interest in anything other than their short term survival.

 

[trainspotter]

Howard took over from Keating and debt was a mere 96 billion BUT he had the good fortune of 10 years of economic growth to pay it off. I think he left around 40 billion for Krudd to play with. IF Tony Abbott gets up and wins on 21st August he will inherit a country that will be 120 billion in debt with the economic future not looking as rosy as to what Howard had to fiddle with.

(figures are open to conjecture as I am working off memory here and not research) But you get my drift.

 

[Calliope]

The audience at Rooty Hill certainly had no confidence in her. I'm not surprised they laughed at her

When the Labor party stops "moving forward" and starts looking back after next Saturday to understand why its election campaign was such a debacle, there's hardly a better place to begin than the public forum at Rooty Hill on Wednesday night.

The message from the audience of 200 undecided voters, selected by the political polling company Galaxy, was one that has dogged the Gillard government for its entire seven-week reign.

It came in the first question to the Prime Minister from a woman named Louise who described herself as attending to "home duties at the moment"

''What's really been playing on my mind and really been worrying me for weeks now is the people that organised this [ousting] of Kevin Rudd, Mark Arbib and Bill Shorten. Are they going to be rewarded for what they did to Kevin Rudd?"she asked Julia Gillard.

Gillard tried valiantly to explain, but wound up getting tangled in a web: "There's no one, you know, you've used a couple of names, there's no one who organised this. There's no one who's going to be rewarded for it."

The audience laughed at her.

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/humble-abbott-levels-with-voters-20100813-1232s.html