Federal Labor Party discussion

[MrBurns]

I'm not sure what you mean here. If Rudd said originally that he believed there should be an ETS (rather than a carbon tax), got rolled on it, and now that he's back, is continuing with what he originally said, who/what is wrong?

Good point, drsmith, on the passage of this through the Senate. Hard to see the Greens going for it.

It shows Labor was wrong, doesn't matter what Rudd would or wouldn't have done ........Labor, the party, was wrong.

- - - Updated - - -

But Labor frontbencher Tanya Plibersek said the advertisement would probably be more damaging for the opposition than for Mr Rudd because voters were sick of negativity.

The voters are sick of the Labor party and everyone associated with it, is a more correct statement.

 

[noco]

This is so so true !!!!!



Would The Real Australia Please Stand Up

Allan Essery for Menzies House - 9 July 2013



I have been a fan of Professor Thomas Sowell for quite some time and believe that his observations convey messages that need to be conveyed. There is much truth in his claim that, ''Much of the social history of the Western world, over the past three decades, has been a history of replacing what worked with what sounded good.''



Since the mid to late 60's we have seen our once vibrant manufacturing industry slowly fade away until it is but a shadow of its former self and we have become reliant on sub-standard goods manufactured in foreign factories.



We have seen our home grown product labels sold off to foreign interests, our education system take several backward steps from common sense. We have witnessed a welfare system that was supposed to be a safety net develop into an entitlements regime where those that have contributed absolutely nothing believe that it is their right to be supported by those that do



Back in the 60's Australia boasted an innovative and progressive iron and steel industry that provided employment at Port Kembla alone for thousands of workers. In addition there were those employed by the many off-shoots and support industries and an apprenticeship scheme that provided tradesmen of all kinds for the future.



There were some 14 vehicle manufacturers with around 28 manufacturing and assembly plants around Australia. Again there was a specialist network of supporting industries. Today we see Ford signalling its closure in Australia and Holden hanging on by the skin of its teeth and most of those supporting industries have long gone.



Clothing and shoe manufacture virtually does not exist in Australia today. This is in stark contrast to that which existed immediately following WWII. In Australia there was an influx of migrants from war torn Europe. The males were absorbed into iron and steel industries at Port Kembla, Newcastle, Whyalla and other avenues of employment. Industries sprang up taking advantage of a huge pool of migrant women and absorded this plethora of available and willing female workers.



In the Wollongong region alone there were 13 shoe and clothing manufacturers with multiple factories from Bellambi to Dapto. They no longer exist and again their supporting industries went with them and we haven't even considered the rest of the country.



What happened? Well, if we take into account the voting intelligence of a large portion of Australian voters we would find that they will, almost without fail, elect governments that promise the earth and provide little. They will vote in a government on little more than a few pre-elections short term sweeteners and promises laced with lies and deceipt that produce little more than broken promises and failed policies. They will accept the word of politicians who have an understanding of finances and economy that would be on par with the expertise of Donald Duck.



Robin P, who inspried this article said, ''I have seen our social secutiry system, which is great in principle, abused right left and centre by those it is meant to protect. What should be a safety net has become an albatross around our necks. Come hell or high water that system has to be returned to the ''Safety Net'' that it was supposed to be.''



What we need to do is to dump all of the procrastinators and wafflers. Get rid of the self professed ''experts'', the failed economists, consultants, psychologists, over paid bureaucrats, get rich quick lawyers, big government and vote buying talentless politicians and get back to the principle of production, value adding and the reignition of our national pride. What a change that would be from the do nothing, produce nothing and add nothing mentality that exists today.



Then there is the government sponsored lottery in which you don't even have to buy a ticket. Baby bonuses, carbon tax offsets, GFC handouts, never ending unemployment benefits for dole bludgers and immigrants who are still unemployed after five years in Australia. This is the way in which politicians seek to stay in office while they assure you they know what they are doing and that they are really looking after you.



Nothing will change, except to worsen, if Australians don't wake up and if they continue to elect into government talentless would be politicians who have nothing more to offer than a gigantic ego and the ability to yap while they reap from the politicians grab bag remuneration the worth of which far exceeds their contribution.

MY PERSONAL NOTE:

After reading the above, one has to think where will Australia be in 20 years time?

Our down fall started back in the 50's and 60's thanks to the Socialist Labor Party which have been dictated to by the Communist dominated Trade Unions demands for higher pay, longer annual leave (from 2 to 4 weeks), 17.5% leave loading, shorter and shorter working weeks, penalty rates, Labor Party regualtions of RED and GREEN tape applied to all business whether it be Manufacturing, Mining or Agriculture.

Somebody has to pay for these greedy union demands and it is you and me.

Other ASF members might like to add to the impositions applied to our manufacturing sector in recent times.

Is it any wonder we can't compete with overseas manufactured goods?

Is it any wonder we now find ourselves in this postion of being noncompetitive?

Has anyone noticed the unions coming to the party to help companies going out of business or do they scream for more subsidies from the ruling Governments of the day?

 

[moXJO]

I assume then that you wish to continue the discussion. Let's pick up where we left off.



Are you able to agree with those statements? If not then please be concise with supporting information in stating why not.

I am almost certain of video of swan saying there would not be any tax in any form. The reporter was clear in asking that it would not be hidden under another name and swan was adamant that the labor party would not.

 

[springhill]

But it does speak to your opinion about betrayal as you put it. Anyone who took notice would know that allusions about "betrayal" do not comport with their voting record and are more likely reflective of people's disappointment with them not doing what they wanted them to do.

That is your interpretation

You are splitting hairs and attempting to change the scope of the conversation.

Debating 'betrayal' and 'disappointment' and/or differences between.

Others may allow you to do this, I won't.

I am not interested in pre 2010 nor in technical nuances of specific wording.

I am interested in Windsor's conduct during his current term, voter reaction during it and his reluctance to test his conduct during the minority Government term.

 

[Some Dude]

I am almost certain of video of swan saying there would not be any tax in any form. The reporter was clear in asking that it would not be hidden under another name and swan was adamant that the labor party would not.

Already discussed but feel free to continue. Perhaps you can do what only one other person has had the honesty to acknowledge.

Again, I'm not trying to change anyone's mind's about the ALP, Julia Gillard, their dislike of "any" cost associated with carbon, etc. It's just fundamentally dishonest (and irony given the topic) to say that what was implemented "is a tax" and that Julia Gillard did not indicate that she wanted to implement a pricing scheme. It's there from both Julia Gillard stating it to Tony Abbott discussing the differences between a tax and a property right i.e. trading mechanism.

That the result was a significant part of Julia Gillard's downfall, the compromise did involve dropping the consultative assembly, the fixed period acts "like a tax", it should have been announced earlier, Wayne Swan was being evasive, etc. These are not the issue I am banging on about. But words have meanings and when we start reading about "removing the carbon tax", all that has happened is that the people who insisted on the "carbon tax lie" have simply facilitated someone else (Rudd or Abbott) to play a shell game.

 

[sptrawler]

That is your interpretation

You are splitting hairs and attempting to change the scope of the conversation.

Debating 'betrayal' and 'disappointment' and/or differences between.

Others may allow you to do this, I won't.

I am not interested in pre 2010 nor in technical nuances of specific wording.

I am interested in Windsor's conduct during his current term, voter reaction during it and his reluctance to test his conduct during the minority Government term.

To put it simply, if Windsor and Oakeshot, thought they had any chance of retaining their seats, they would still be in the game.

 

[Smurf1976]

Since the mid to late 60's we have seen our once vibrant manufacturing industry slowly fade away until it is but a shadow of its former self and we have become reliant on sub-standard goods manufactured in foreign factories.

.....

Is it any wonder we can't compete with overseas manufactured goods?

Trying to compete against wages close to zero, no safety standards and minimal environmental standards is the real problem in the first place.

Australia isn't going to be competitive at manufacturing unless we're prepared to go back to considering deaths on the job as "just a consequence of progress", foam rolling up the beaches and multi-coloured water in the sea and acid mist falling from the sky rusting everything in sight. Those under 35 - 40 or thereabouts probably don't realise just how common such things were in the past, indeed you could find all of that and more not by travelling around the country but in the same town.

If we want to have safety, environment etc protections then we're never going to compete against those that don't. Like it or not, at some point the "western" nations will end up going back to tariffs or import quotas, the only question being which country does it first.

 

[drsmith]

Julia Gillard's downfall

You drown in your own words,

I am not defending Julia Gillard here because I believe that her government deserved to lose because of how issues like this were handled.

 

[dutchie]

Henry Ergas sums up Rudd:



Super Kevin is the I of the storm

by: Henry Ergas
From: The Australian
July 01, 2013 12:00AM

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...e-i-of-the-storm/story-fn7078da-1226672214485

THE trouble with Kevin is that he's unfit to govern. On that his former colleagues are right. And when no less an authority than Stephen Conroy thinks you're certifiable, the home for the bewildered surely beckons.

Yet he's back. Why is clear enough. Virtually everywhere, democratic politics is more competitive than it has ever been. With social class and ideology weakening as determinants of voting patterns, fewer and fewer voters are rusted on to particular parties. The mistakes parties make are therefore punished more quickly and harshly, with electoral wipe-outs becoming common in the advanced democracies.

But it was not only the threat of decimation that unnerved federal Labor: it was the prospect of having to rebuild, for the first time in living memory, without control over any major state or a strong union movement to cushion the fall.

Yes, changing leader might not prevent Labor losing the election. It would, however, avoid Coalition control of the Senate, giving an obstructionist opposition a chance to condemn an Abbott government to a short, unhappy life.

Dumping Julia Gillard was therefore rational. But the difficulty is that Rudd has form. This is the man who converted a stunning victory in 2007 into virtual defeat three years later. Incapable of setting priorities, reckless when caution was called for and paralysed when decisiveness was required, his administration was a lesson in disaster.

Instead of a consistent approach to asylum-seekers, he flip-flopped between compassion and harshness. Instead of pursuing his emissions trading scheme, he panicked, shifting to a poorly judged blitz at hospital funding. Instead of tax reform, he sat on the Henry report and then tried to ram through its most questionable recommendation.

And instead of prudent economic management, he presided over an unprecedented increase in spending for no measureable improvement in outcomes, while unleashing a stimulus package that was disproportionate, inflexible and riddled with poor quality programs.

All that is unsurprising. For unlike successful prime ministers, Rudd lacks any coherent view of the world. Cast in terms of excruciating difficulty, his replies to questions wrap the vacuous in the impenetrable. As for his essays, which have never risen above irritable mental scratchings masquerading as insights, they make reading the logically structured telephone directory a relief.

That is not to suggest ideas are the grappling hooks of politics; but without a disciplined intellectual framework, no prime minister can steer through the whirlwind of events. It was not because Rudd disdained proper process that his policies made no sense; he disdained proper process because he invariably championed policies any sensible process would rule out.

But these seem mere symptoms of Rudd's underlying persona, whatever that may be. Gillard never succeeded in achieving sincerity, much less authenticity, in her presentation of self; but with Rudd, it has always been uncertain whether there really is a self there.

Rather, lurching between incomprehensible jargon and theatrical ockerisms, he is reminiscent of Nietzsche's description of a man who is just a succession of masks, doomed to an "irreconcilable antithesis between an interior which corresponds to no exterior and an exterior to which no interior corresponds".

And Nietzschean too is his "will to power" with its passion for vengeance and hunger for crises, as only "dancing beside abysses" allows the Ubermensch to transcend the "mechanistic stupidity" of everyday necessity.

Little wonder then that, pressed by Tony Abbott to apologise for the deaths caused by the pink batts program, he refused: as Dostoevsky's Raskolnikov said, it is beneath the Napoleons of this world to admit regret for their deeds. The furthest they can go is to express collective remorse for the sins of the fathers, thereby highlighting their own moral superiority.

And little wonder too that Rudd shows no sign of having changed. On the contrary, in merely four days, he has been as erratic as ever: one moment he recognises that the end of the resources boom makes competitiveness paramount; the next, he imposes punitive restrictions on 457 visas. Back also is the uncontrollable exaggeration, claiming a policy he once advocated would trigger war with our largest neighbour. And so is the utter disregard for the facts, justifying the National Broadband Network on the basis that "a bunch of Chinese students in Brissy said to me 'what is it about your local broadband speeds Kevin?' ", despite Brisbane's broadband speeds being multiples of those in China.

Yet whatever honeymoon Rudd enjoys in the polls cannot disguise the circumstances he faces. The constraints are obvious: a dangerously volatile world economy; slowing domestic growth; a precarious fiscal position; and promissory notes issued to a slew of programs funded to barely half their costs.

The longer he postpones an election, the more those constraints will close in on him. And to navigate them, he will have to swim through waters he has poisoned. The predators he will meet there are hardly insubstantial; rather, they include his party's most senior members. True, his proven reputation for payback may slow their pace; sooner or later, however, they will do to him what he did to them.

But in Rudd's internal visions, that is not what lies ahead. Instead, he sees himself as the reincarnation of Andrew Fisher, the great Labor prime minister who led three governments (1908-09, 1910-1913, 1914-15) and whose gold pen he owns. His triumph over Gillard will only strengthen his conviction that he is ordained to replicate Fisher's glory.

But the unassuming Fisher, meticulous about fact and process, is as removed from Rudd as the Australia of a century ago is from today's. Nor can any amount of messianic delusion bridge that gap. Always the I of the storm, the future of the Nambour Overman promises to be no less troubled than his past.

 

[Some Dude]

You drown in your own words,

Your point being? Sometimes, more words are needed.

 

[Knobby22]

That article is an obscurest attempt at hurling abuse while attempting to sound intellectual.
Didn't deserve to be published.

 

[sptrawler]

That article is an obscurest attempt at hurling abuse while attempting to sound intellectual.
Didn't deserve to be published.

Well, that just shows how everyone sees the same thing differently, I thought it was a terrific discription of Rudd. Also a great summation of his policy development, but as I said that is only my opinion.

It would be great if the author could do a similar article on Abbott.

 

[noco]

Dutchie, That article you posted about Kevin Rudd by Henry Ergas describes Rudd in detail.

As I have said before, Rudd is a real circus show pony.

 

[dutchie]

Dutchie, That article you posted about Kevin Rudd by Henry Ergas describes Rudd in detail.

As I have said before, Rudd is a real circus show pony.

We can see that but how does he fool so many other Australians?

 

[explod]

As I have said before, Rudd is a real circus show pony.

Yes and very a big show it is too.

On the news tonight we see our Chief shaking the hands of the Indonesian President and also the leaders of New Guinea. This is the sort of fluff that the sheeple love to see, it makes them feel good and secure. Subconsciously people fear the teeming millions just across our northern borders, so to see the leaders from these lands shaking hands with Krudd and smiles all round we do indeed have a positive circus.

Getting closer by the day now to ALP 55% Lib/nat 45%

Election will be called sooner because the Libs are losing the plot. Even the negative advert on TV about Rudd shows a good photo of him, which is of course the main imprint on minds. So the Libs cannot even pull off a paid add against him. Prolley some of your money down the tubes there noco.

Ruddies change on carbon may now see Green vote increase. This is another area underestimated by the right wing.

And if anyone wants to see a real loser they only have to glance at the large photo of a worried looking man on front page of todays Age.

 

[drsmith]

Labor's poll rise post Kevin Rudd's 2nd coming has levelled off short of stable orbit on the latest Essential Media poll. 2PP still 52% in favour of the Coalition.

Also of note, the Greens voter base has already become a victim of political gravity and smashed when compared to the last election.

http://essentialvision.com.au/federal-politics-–-voting-intention-172

 

[drsmith]

While I'm of the view that tax minimisation for vehicle usage from salary income should not be allowed, I also note the usual collateral damage from another not-so-precise knee jerk by Labor.

http://www.asx.com.au/asxpdf/20130716/pdf/42h2clph915tzz.pdf

 

[sptrawler]

While I'm of the view that tax minimisation for vehicle usage from salary income should not be allowed, I also note the usual collateral damage from another not-so-precise knee jerk by Labor.

http://www.asx.com.au/asxpdf/20130716/pdf/42h2clph915tzz.pdf

It is ironic, that companies are hammered, while Labor try to fix up something they introduced.

Just have to add these companies to the list of companies, that went under when the tax was introduced.

Yep, this is the way to run a country, let's all gather round for a chorus of kum by yah, Kevs back.:1zhelp:

 

[Julia]

While I'm of the view that tax minimisation for vehicle usage from salary income should not be allowed, I also note the usual collateral damage from another not-so-precise knee jerk by Labor.

http://www.asx.com.au/asxpdf/20130716/pdf/42h2clph915tzz.pdf

That's a very realistic precaution.
I might be misunderstanding the change, but can't companies still provide the same car benefits to employees, eg sales people, but just require them to actually document the use, in contrast to up to now being able to just arbitrarily claim 20% deduction?

Happy to be corrected if I'm wrong.

Whatever, it seems a vast overreaction for Ray Hadley to claim that "this is the end of the new car industry".

 

[Knobby22]

It will hurt people such as a person I know who is on a huge salary and gets a new car every 2 years. He doesn't need it for work so how will he be able to claim it anymore?