ELECTIONS - Labor or Liberal

[propro1234]

Vote 1 for the new dream-team, Shane Warne for President, Brad Hogg for PM.
lets get some spin coming outta Canberra that we can't pick from a mile off.

hey you are looking for a cricket government what about aussie rules and footy?

 

[2020hindsight]

hey you are looking for a cricket government what about aussie rules and footy?

forgotten I'd said that - 8 months ago (?) - (post #6 )

but I remember one of the arguments against us going to a Republic was that "your typical okker would be more likely to pick someone like Shane Warne than a sensible Presidential candidate" ( paraphrasing)

The Republic debate?
I must say, whilst we would need to define our terms, but basically I'd be for reopening the file

(and cricketers - apart from being expert at spin - seem to stick to milder drugs.
although lol - I notice that (even) Alan Greenspan has admitted he was heavily into pot as a teenage musician - back in the early 60's - very early 60's presumably )

 

[chops_a_must]

outrage. outrage. outrage.

if anyone saw 4 corners tonight they would now be aware of the incompetence on a criminal scale perpetrated by this 'wonderful experienced govt that so good on national security'.

BAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Andrew Peacock did pop his head up. I knew he couldn't stay away from another Howard train wreck.

So the soufflé can rise thrice!

But it's all over for Howard now. The disaster is complete, Peacock is there again.

On to more serious matters... Geez... the last 11 years of mistakes in the defence force kind of puts the Collins class subs debacle into perspective.

Sea Sprites (or lack of them)
Abrams tanks, that don't have the range to get out of the metro areas (very handy for a small continent like Australia)
Now this...

I wonder what sort of bribes were paid... or what dirt Peacock had on these guys. Howard sure hasn't been adverse to taking bribes in the past... I seem to be smelling some ethanol about now...

 

[2020hindsight]

http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/stories/s2069358.htm
The question of "one person one vote" is important or course - especially if city folk want to be selfish about drought relief for instance.

ANOTHER POST ON THAT abc WEBSITE ....
(and the risk of gerrymanders etc)

(personally I still think the bush needs a friendly handicap of some sort)

Gavin Sparrow :
28 Oct 2007 8:56:50am

I agree 110% with this article. "One 'Man' (person) One Vote" most certainly does not apply in Australia. And even with the constant gerrymander of allowing country residents almost "One Man Two Votes" my father, as an electoral commissioner many years ago, told me that he was offered a knighthood to %$^& an election by &*^%$#() an electoral redistribution. Please note: he was not knighted and I don't think any other commissioners ever were.But at least our preferential system is a very good basis on which to build a fair system. First past the post means dictatorship.

 

[noco]

with each day we see more embarrasment, deceit, and utter panic from our wonderful government. this will only heighten in the next few weeks as the punters get a crash course in political history, ie: see whats been really going on.

i stand by my statement made months ago. only the ignorant or the gutless would vote these criminals back in. ignorant to the lies and deceit and the backward policies. gutless 'cause they succumb to the fear campaign we've been warning about for 3 months.

and i stand by a prediction of 70% win for labor. that would restore my faith in the wisdom and courage of my country.

Arminus
Kevin Rudd has really got you sucked in. Why would he want to be Prime Minister when he could make 10 times more money as an actor in Hollywood.
He is nothing more than a media tart like ex Premior Beattie. He is full of carisma, rhetoric and no substance and that is not the ingredients for a good leader. Did you see the polls tonight? I think you are deluding yourself old fellow with your 70% win to Labor. Perhaps you are getting mixed up with the 70% union dominated shadow front bench.

 

[chops_a_must]

(personally I still think the bush needs a friendly handicap of some sort)

Why? Most people in the bush are retarded anyway; isn't that enough of a handicap already?

 

[wayneL]

He is nothing more than a media tart like ex Premior Beattie. He is full of carisma, rhetoric and no substance and that is not the ingredients for a good leader.

Sooooo.... how is that different to any other leader in modern politics?

 

[Sean K]

He is full of carisma, rhetoric and no substance and that is not the ingredients for a good leader.

Being charismatic and able to argue a point are not good leadership qualities?

 

[Wysiwyg]

Gawd help any government that threatens the compromised rights of workers.


ps they need to be smooth talkers, quick thinkers and look like a p.m.

 

[greggy]

Why? Most people in the bush are retarded anyway; isn't that enough of a handicap already?

Some of my mates who live in the bush are doing it tough right now, hoping for more rain. They're going through tough times at present, but are hanging in there.
Most people in the bush are certainly not retarded, but I can tell right now that my brother certainly is through no choice of his own.
I reckon its great how we still look after those going through rough times and the disadvantaged.

 

[chops_a_must]

Some of my mates who live in the bush are doing it tough right now, hoping for more rain. They're going through tough times at present, but are hanging in there.
Most people in the bush are certainly not retarded, but I can tell right now that my brother certainly is through no choice of his own.
I reckon its great how we still look after those going through rough times and the disadvantaged.

Sorry to hear that. I was speaking metaphorically, obviously. But my point was demonstrated by the Yarragadee protests. And my gripe is with the rural vote in WA which have excessive legislative control.

I'm wondering if we do actually look after those going through rough times anymore though. The last ten years has seen an absolute raping of mental health services, as well as a crackdown on those people with disability pensions.

I do believe it's time for quote; perhaps from one of my favourite sources, Catch-22:

"Major Major's father was a sober God-fearing man whose idea of a good joke was to lie about his age. He was a longlimbed farmer, a God-fearing, freedom-loving, law-abiding rugged individualist who held that federal aid to anyone but farmers was creeping socialism. He advocated thrift and hard work and disapproved of loose women who turned him down. His specialty was alfalfa, and he made a good thing out of not growing any. The government paid him well for every bushel of alfalfa he did not grow. The more alfalfa he did not grow, the more money the government gave him, and he spent every penny he didn't earn on new land to increase the amount of alfalfa he did not produce. Major Major's father worked without rest at not growing alfalfa."

Ding a ling a ling.

Which bring us to another point. Why should farmers be given federal assistance for a failing business venture? As a small business owner, I don't have a right to ask for a handout from the government if it turns sour - even if it is through no fault of my own. What is the difference in this instance?

And it's fairly rich then, to sit at a trade table and ask Europe to stop building cheese mountains and wine lakes, or to ask the US to stop paying farmers for doing nothing, when we ourselves are subsidising farmers. Let alone expect third world countries not to have government interference in the rural sector.

It is good to see Howard looking to target young voters though:

 

[Julia]

Which bring us to another point. Why should farmers be given federal assistance for a failing business venture? As a small business owner, I don't have a right to ask for a handout from the government if it turns sour - even if it is through no fault of my own. What is the difference in this instance?

I agree about this. In an "Insight" programme a few weeks ago Brian Toohey, journalist with, I think, the Fin Review suggested that if farmers were to receive aid from the taxpayers in times of drought, then they should repay that aid when times are good, along the lines of the HECS system.
Sounds fair to me. I suspect at least a portion of aid given to farmers is on an emotional basis (the backbone of the country and that sort of thing) rather than justifiable support of a viable business during a temporary setback.

 

[2020hindsight]

John Clarke and Bryan Dawe talk to John Howard about global warming and climate change

 

[Whiskers]

Which bring us to another point. Why should farmers be given federal assistance for a failing business venture? As a small business owner, I don't have a right to ask for a handout from the government if it turns sour - even if it is through no fault of my own. What is the difference in this instance?

And it's fairly rich then, to sit at a trade table and ask Europe to stop building cheese mountains and wine lakes, or to ask the US to stop paying farmers for doing nothing, when we ourselves are subsidising farmers. Let alone expect third world countries not to have government interference in the rural sector.

The little bit of drought aid Aus pays farmers is peanuts compared to the subsidies the US and Europe pay farmers.

A lot of the Drought Aid is low interest loans, not a handout.

When farmers are drought declared they only get the same as the dole, but called (I think) something like Drought Relief Grant. If your business is adversely affected by drought, ie a business that relies on farming activity, you can get the same assistance.

 

[Whiskers]

I agree about this. In an "Insight" programme a few weeks ago Brian Toohey, journalist with, I think, the Fin Review suggested that if farmers were to receive aid from the taxpayers in times of drought, then they should repay that aid when times are good, along the lines of the HECS system.
Sounds fair to me. I suspect at least a portion of aid given to farmers is on an emotional basis (the backbone of the country and that sort of thing) rather than justifiable support of a viable business during a temporary setback.

Hi Julia

Further to my reply to chops, the HECS theme has been beat about by an occassional illinformed or predjuced 'cityite' reporter before. As I mentioned to chops, a lot of the aid is loans, albeit low interest, that still have to be repaid.

The bit that is often not emphasised is that farmers don't get the payment in any or every drought, far from it. This assistance is paid in 'Exceptional Circumstance Drought' conditions.

As for the drought releif payment, the equivilant of the dole, paid to drought declared farmers, that payment stops as soon as the area is removed from the exceptional circumstances drought declared list. Unlike the dole where people can deliberately fail job interviews etc to stay on the dole, farmers have no control over how long they will recieve it. When the beauracrats decide the drought is over, so is the payment.

Many farmers have been too proud to accept the payment. It has only been in the last few years that a concerted campaign has been waged by centrelink and various welfare groups in the face of significantly increasing rural suicides that many farmers have relunctantly accepted the payment in the face of the worst drought in living memory in most areas.

If you think about it, wouldn't you rather pay a subsistance benifit to a farmer in exceptional circumstances drought conditions, who typically employs a few people in normal seasons and is literally the backbone of rural towns and small businesses in those towns, or would you prefer to pay it to the no doubt just as many professional welfare cheats that mostly hide in the cities and contribute nothing to society.

If it is good enough to advocate that farmers repay their welfare payments in the good times, then why not the unemployed repay the dole after they get a job. Why stop there, have single parents repay their benifits, the disabled, pensioners...

 

[Rafa]

I must say, i have NO problems whatsoever with helping out the family farmers...
Without a farming community, i fail to see how a country can survive...


and yes, i know there is gloablisation and we can import, etc, etc.. but that is only been possible, on a mass scale in the last 50 years and with the era of cheap oil ending, probably won't last another 50 years...


self sufficiency has to be the goal of every country... and that starts with having food on the table.

 

[nioka]

John Clarke and Bryan Dawe talk to John Howard about global warming and climate change

This video is no longer available. I wonder who pulled it?

 

[Julia]

Hi Julia

Further to my reply to chops, the HECS theme has been beat about by an occassional illinformed or predjuced 'cityite' reporter before. As I mentioned to chops, a lot of the aid is loans, albeit low interest, that still have to be repaid.

The bit that is often not emphasised is that farmers don't get the payment in any or every drought, far from it. This assistance is paid in 'Exceptional Circumstance Drought' conditions.

As for the drought releif payment, the equivilant of the dole, paid to drought declared farmers, that payment stops as soon as the area is removed from the exceptional circumstances drought declared list. Unlike the dole where people can deliberately fail job interviews etc to stay on the dole, farmers have no control over how long they will recieve it. When the beauracrats decide the drought is over, so is the payment.

Many farmers have been too proud to accept the payment. It has only been in the last few years that a concerted campaign has been waged by centrelink and various welfare groups in the face of significantly increasing rural suicides that many farmers have relunctantly accepted the payment in the face of the worst drought in living memory in most areas.

If you think about it, wouldn't you rather pay a subsistance benifit to a farmer in exceptional circumstances drought conditions, who typically employs a few people in normal seasons and is literally the backbone of rural towns and small businesses in those towns, or would you prefer to pay it to the no doubt just as many professional welfare cheats that mostly hide in the cities and contribute nothing to society.

If it is good enough to advocate that farmers repay their welfare payments in the good times, then why not the unemployed repay the dole after they get a job. Why stop there, have single parents repay their benifits, the disabled, pensioners...

Hi Whiskers,

I absolutely accept your point. I was under the impression that the payments made to farmers were grants, not loans. I have no problem with any such payments/loans being made where the farms are (under no drought circumstances) viable businesses, but if conditions are simply no longer viable because of climate change or anything else, I just don't see much point in sustaining people's existence where nothing is going to change.
Also don't think we have any business growing crops like rice and cotton in Australia.
In another thread, I mentioned that I'd bought on the same day two bunches of asparagus at the same price - one was grown in Australia and the other was grown in Peru.

 

[--B--]

I have no problem with any such payments/loans being made where the farms are (under no drought circumstances) viable businesses, but if conditions are simply no longer viable because of climate change or anything else, I just don't see much point in sustaining people's existence where nothing is going to change..

I 100% agree with your sentiments, Julia.

 

[2020hindsight]

did I hear on ABC this morning that Bennalong is 15th seat in line to fall - IF there was a uniform percent swing across the country - and Labour need 16 to win govt?

i.e. whoever wins Bennalong (pretty much) wins govt(?)

and if it goes to script, Peter Costello will be leader of the coaltion by the end of Nov