ELECTIONS - Labor or Liberal

chops_a_must said:

Yes.

We now have more single mothers than ever before. People are having to be paid to be parents, rather than traditionally, because of long term financial security. This will have dire consequences in another 20 years time, when kids have grown up in a loveless family, and realise they were only brought into this world for money.

More banks own people's property than ever before.

The gap between rich and poor has grown excessively.

The removal of incentive for education.

The victimisation, alienation and removal of hope for the youth of Australia.

Sounds great.

Click to expand...

Hah, yes the blind dream of home ownership - in 25 years and at twice the price you actually were meant to pay. Until then, the bank owns it.

Garpal Gumnut said:

"Sociologically" this seems "good" to me.

any comments ??

Click to expand...

I also forgot to mention the Burden of tax being moved from the rich to the poor.

chops_a_must said:

The Greens?

I got offered to run as a green candidate in the 2005 WA state election. Seriously thought about it and declined.

I hope Howard gets pounded. Our universities, hospitals and conventions have never looked sicker. Not to mention a grim outlook for the youth in Australia.

What will Howard be remembered for in another 30 years? Apart from appeasing the cashed up bogans, what has been done in this country? Hawke and Keating are responsible for the strong economy we are seeing now, and that is increasingly viewed as the case. Absolutely no vision, and it will cost us in the long run.

Click to expand...

Dear Chops,

I understand many of your arguments but they stem from a centristic projective element common in Australia. Your "Bogans" are guys I go to the footy with, they earn big money, and spend it in companies I invest in, they fish and hunt, and live in the environment that bbrown only dreams of. Sorry choppie, I do agree with many of your sentiments but feel you need to spend a few years in the bush to connect with miners, farmers and support workers who pay for your economic prosperity.

Garpal

Garpal Gumnut said:

Dear Chops,

I understand many of your arguments but they stem from a centristic projective element common in Australia. Your "Bogans" are guys I go to the footy with, they earn big money, and spend it in companies I invest in, they fish and hunt, and live in the environment that bbrown only dreams of. Sorry choppie, I do agree with many of your sentiments but feel you need to spend a few years in the bush to connect with miners, farmers and support workers who pay for your economic prosperity.

Garpal

Click to expand...

I go to the footy.

Most of the miners I have met are among the most militant lefties I have ever met.

I don't actually have much of a problem with most types of mining, which is why I could never be a Greens politician.

My prosperity comes from athletes and office workers.

Cheers,
Chops.

drgonzo said:

Australia had begun to deteriorate "sociologically" before Howard became Prime Minister. Indeed, one may even suggest that this is not merely a trend in Australia but a trend being experienced worldwide. Furthermore, as requested by somebody else on this threat the comment needs clarification and is really kind of subjective.

For an example of how effective a Labor government really is, try living in little old Adelaide with Media Mike and his goons pumping our dollars into failed industries and blocking development in the City keeping big business out and the economy in a constant state of stagnation. And they wonder why this state is experiencing next-to-zero levels of population and economic growth and also the highest rate of welfare dependency.

Click to expand...

I remember my old accounting teacher telling me that the goal of Labor is to keep people financially dependent on them. After reading that post it seems true. I fear Mr Rudd will cave to unions and hurt industry which will hurt jobs and the economy.

Chops said the gap between rich and poor is growing. The truth is this works because the rich provide jobs for the poor. Without the rich the poor would be unemployed and welfare dependent.

WayneL "Johnny Rottens" government has cut taxes and kept inflation under control which is creating bumper profits and takeover bids for Australian stock. Surely being an investor you have benefited from this. Talk about biting the hand that feeds it. You make me sick.

mime said:

Chops said the gap between rich and poor is growing. The truth is this works because the rich provide jobs for the poor.

Click to expand...

Yep. When I was rich, I gave my poor self a job.

mime said:

WayneL "Johnny Rottens" government has cut taxes and kept inflation under control which is creating bumper profits and takeover bids for Australian stock. Surely being an investor you have benefited from this. Talk about biting the hand that feeds it. You make me sick.

Click to expand...

Dear Mime,

I would love to debate these points with you, but you have shown yourself to be irrationally partisan and of deficient comprehension of the topic at hand to ensure intelligent debate.

It would therefore be an exercise in futility.

I'm sorry you chose to insult me in the way you did and behind the safety of an anonymous internet persona, but let me just assure you, the feeling is mutual.

Oh and BTW, the Liberal party does not feed me. I feed myself from my own efforts. In fact If I were to bite their hand, it is because it is in my pocket all the time. I pay more tax now than I ever have.

wayneL said:

I pay more tax now than I ever have.

Click to expand...

The funny (not haha,silly) thing about paying more tax is that no one gets any additional benefits to a person paying less tax than they.

wayneL said:

Dear Mime,

I would love to debate these points with you, but you have shown yourself to be irrationally partisan and of deficient comprehension of the topic at hand to ensure intelligent debate.

It would therefore be an exercise in futility.

I'm sorry you chose to insult me in the way you did and behind the safety of an anonymous internet persona, but let me just assure you, the feeling is mutual.

Oh and BTW, the Liberal party does not feed me. I feed myself from my own efforts. In fact If I were to bite their hand, it is because it is in my pocket all the time. I pay more tax now than I ever have.

Click to expand...

You can argue for "sociologically" all you want but the truth is that jobs keep people happy. "Johnny Rotten" has kept to unemployment very low. I left my previous job because I was unhappy with conditions. I found a new one that was flexible enough to support my study within days of leaving my old one. I thank John Howard's Government prosperity and demand for employees for it. All you are doing is having bitch and whine about some of the best quality of life we have had in a long time.

Oh and changing the format of your post to sound more articulated and educated to make me feel socially inferior is pathetic.

mime said:

You can argue for "sociologically" all you want but the truth is that jobs keep people happy. "Johnny Rotten" has kept to unemployment very low. I left my previous job because I was unhappy with conditions. I found a new one that was flexible enough to support my study within days of leaving my old one. I thank John Howard's Government prosperity and demand for employees for it. All you are doing is having bitch and whine about some of the best quality of life we have had in a long time.

Oh and changing the format of your post to sound more articulated and educated to make me feel socially inferior is pathetic.

Click to expand...

Dear Mime,

You are entitled to your opinion about Johnny Rotten. So am I. Throwing insults like "you make me sick" because your opinion differs to mine is ipso facto, socially inferior. There has been no effort required by myself to demonstrate that.

If you read my posts this is my normal vernacular, to which you have again decided to criticize in a most distasteful way; so once again you have hoisted yourself by your own petard.

As far as best quality of life? I would argue that point strenuously; there is a vast difference between "quality of life" and "standard of living". But these are matters of opinion to which I restate; we are both entitled to have an opinion.

Now run along and vote liberal, for the first time in my life I shan't be, as is my right in a democracy.

Ciao

Couple of things i dont like is that fact that the CSIRO and science research in general has been decimated. We might have been the clever country once, but .... that was a while ago.
But you can bet that there'll be federal funding allocated (to the same accounts it was taken away from) to try to put the plug back in the bath - when 95% of the water has gone (overseas).

2020hindsight said:

Couple of things i dont like is that fact that the CSIRO and science research in general has been decimated.

Click to expand...

Yep, if a CSIRO scientist disputes the government on scientific fact, they are sacked. And we hear nothing of it...

mime said:

Chops said the gap between rich and poor is growing. The truth is this works because the rich provide jobs for the poor. Without the rich the poor would be unemployed and welfare dependent.

WayneL "Johnny Rottens" government has cut taxes and kept inflation under control which is creating bumper profits and takeover bids for Australian stock. Surely being an investor you have benefited from this. Talk about biting the hand that feeds it. You make me sick.

Click to expand...

The rich have always employed the poor. The problem is that it's come to the point where an average worker on average wages is no longer able to reasonably afford essentials (especially housing) without permanent dependence on the rich (renting or debt). We didn't have that problem 30, 20, 10 or even 5 years ago but it's a problem now. Meanwhile working hours increase and executive pay soars to levels far in excess of what any one person can reasonably spend without basically throwing it away.

I often come to the example of what used to happen at the APPM mill (aka "the pulp") in Burnie (Tas) for quite some time. 15,000 people in the town with fully 4500 of them employed at the pulp. Lots of husband / wife and grandfather / father / son teams there during that era.

And the pay scales? Well, the management were paid 3 times that of those on the factory floor. When the company did well, everyone from apprentices to the management benefited. When hard times hit, management shared the pain.

I'd call that a fair and equitable system. Everyone could afford to live in a reasonable manner. Sure, the manager could afford a better car and a better house than a labourer but everyone had a reasonable standard of living relative to others in the community.

Fast forward to 2007 and practically everywhere (including what remains of the pulp at Burnie) we see ridiculous gaps between the workers and management. And worse still, management makes an error and gets a bonus whilst the workers lose their jobs to pay for it.

It comes down to fairness. Of course a manager ought to be earning more than somebody sweeping the floor. But it shouldn't be to the point where those at the bottom go without whilst those at the top see their pay soar in to the statosphere whilst the company goes broke in the process.

It may well be the case that Labor makes people dependent on government to survive. But it is equally the case that Liberal has made millions dependent on banks and RBA policy. One real tightening of credit, a situation completely beyond the control of Howard and Co, and thousands or even millions find themselves sunk.

Right now we have mortgage payment levels worse as a percentage of income than at the peak of interest rates under Labor. Australians have become incredibly dependent on bankers and bosses for their day to day survival and yet this comes at a time when all seems well on the surface. Just wait until some real economic pain strikes someday (something that is as sure as the sun coming up in the morning IMO). We find virtual slaves who have no option but to take whatever is offered by the bankers and bosses running the country.

At least those dependent on government under Labor knew who to hold accountable. Nobody's likely to stand up and take the blame if (when IMO) the market heads the wrong way and many find themselves in real trouble with little remaining of the social security safety net to catch their fall.

Credit where it's due though. At least the Liberals have repeatedly admitted they know nothing about running a business and ought to not be doing such things. They just fail to mention that they are still putting their hands up to run the largest business in the country - the country itself.

10/10 for Howard's performance as a politician though. He's incredibly capable as far as that aspect is concerned. It's just that I'd rather have leadership than politics. Passing responsibility for everything onto someone else isn't what I'd call leadership. It's clever politics however.

But don't take that as a pro-Labor post. There's no certainty that a Labor government now would do any better. They may even do worse.

I think running a country is a bit of a balancing act. A bit like ying and yang. If one side had it there way all the time well the country would collapse and fall in a hole just as the soviet union did. Sure times have been pretty good under the libs but we've moved too far to the right in my opinion and need a leftist change to balance out the equation. I'm sure if labour wins the next election in 5 or 10 years we will be critising how they have neglected the issues that the libs are best at dealing with. The country needs new direction.

Stop_the_clock said:

ummm did I miss something....8 interest rate rises later and the head of the RBA continually warning Howard of Inflation risks due to infrastructure and transportation bottle-necks on our ports, rail, and freight etc.

Click to expand...

oh please, perhaps you would prefer interest rates of 25% when labor was in. People seem to forget just what it was like under labor control.

Neither party is perfect, but the way hawke and keating screwed Australians & the economy up the ass, there's no way i will ever vote labor. For decades labor has also been notorious for corruption and vote rigging - even my long-gone grandfather used to say this back in the day. Keating was arrogant, refused to wear australian made suits & referred to Australia as the "ass end of the world" and asia as "that place you fly over on your way to europe." He now lives a gay lifestyle. Peter beatie is a corrupt f*ckwit and hawke is a plain drunk.

Howard has been tremendous in comparison and although it is impossible to please everyone I feel he has done a much better job than say kim beasley would have... god the thought of him in control makes me laugh

Interest Rates:

Where did anyone ever get the idea that the Australian government has any control over interest rates?

Look. Aussie interest rates are largely governed by the US federal reserve... plus or minus a point either way.

I'll not defend Hawke & Keating as both lower than a snake's belly, but the high interest rates of the time were largely due to overseas influences. Likewise, the currently low rates are a reflection of those in the US/UK.

So let's not give merit or demerit to any government over interest rates.

maverick11 said:

Keating was arrogant, refused to wear australian made suits & referred to Australia as the "ass end of the world" and asia as "that place you fly over on your way to europe." He now lives a gay lifestyle. Peter beatie is a corrupt f*ckwit and hawke is a plain drunk.

Click to expand...

And The Right Honourable John W Howard is in the advanced stages of the political strain of dementia...alzheimer politicus..

wayneL said:

Interest Rates:

Where did anyone ever get the idea that the Australian government has any control over interest rates?

Look. Aussie interest rates are largely governed by the US federal reserve... plus or minus a point either way.

I'll not defend Hawke & Keating as both lower than a snake's belly, but the high interest rates of the time were largely due to overseas influences. Likewise, the currently low rates are a reflection of those in the US/UK.

So let's not give merit or demerit to any government over interest rates.

Click to expand...

This is despite the fact that in the last 25 years, it is actually HOWARD that has delivered the largest interest rate within this period. Or ever in Australia's history.

I thought I'd respond directly to the questions:


Liberal


Firstly, Liberal are just too far ahead. A landslide is required and I don't think there will be a landslide. Example, if the coalition retains all of its seats in WA, it will almost certainly win as their aren't enough marginal seats outside of WA to switch the balance of power.

Secondly, look at what labor are winning on at the moment... Climate change. I don't think Climate Change is a widespread vote getter, especially when most of the so called solutions to climate change involve voters footing the bill. I'd also point out that they don't seem to be winning on IR... following Workchioices, the sky hasn't fallen in and, apart from Union diehards, there doesn't seem to be much outrage.

Thirdly, things are good. Unemployments low, people are doing well. In a compulsory voting system the question is often whether or not the government has done enough to lose the election. I don't think they have. Also, its particularly prosperous in WA (see above comment about the effect of retaining WA seats).

Finally, I think some people will be abit scared by the idea of wall to wall labor governments, scared that it will lead to Union domination or just Labor domination. WA is already enough of a nanny state as it is.

It will be tight though... the Unions will be putting enormous money and resources into this campaign, especially if the Peel By-election is anything to go by. From what I heard, they had Union volunteers doorknocking every door in the electorate on the day of the vote.


Liberal


Higher productivity and a better regulatory environment for business. Also, Uranium comes into play which means all of these little uranium explorers take off.

See ya,
Ted

Smurf1976 said:

10/10 for Howard's performance as a politician though. He's incredibly capable as far as that aspect is concerned. It's just that I'd rather have leadership than politics. Passing responsibility for everything onto someone else isn't what I'd call leadership. It's clever politics however.

Click to expand...

Indeed, however, being labelled a politican is hardly the best compliment one could bestow on somebody else and Howard's head and shoulders above everybody else in that respect.