Neutral Political Discussion

Julia said:

Would you consider voting for any of these minor parties, Danny?

Click to expand...

Yes.

I (think) have stated this on the first page of this thread (or another similar thread).

Either Q Society or 21st Century party will get my vote. I lean towards the right anyways and it looks like they will get in come the next election.

Not consider it a wasted vote? Will it matter to whom they direct preferences?

I'm likely to vote for an independent or a minor party too.

I don't consider it a wasted vote, rather I hope I am sending a message to the main parties that what they are offering is not appealing.

Don't know where to put this?

Here or in the 'Brilliant YT Vids' thread....enjoy!

This sums up Canberra

Like others in this thread I'm bitterly disappointed and disillusioned with the major parties these days.

About the only positive i can take from positives in this country is at least so far we still have 2 main parties fighting over the centre. I hate to think how far the country would fall should we get into the disgustingly divisive politics you see in the USA where each party seems to fight over the loony left or the bible bashing Gov'ment has not right to tax me far right.

Sigh, where's the politician that tells it without spin, that's not afraid to talk to the people, make the odd mistake because they interact with us outside carefully scripted events, and can actually bring the majority along with them on the positive vision they have for the country.

No one seems to have it. It just feels these days it's all about what vested interest you will pander to, what voting block you'll splash cash on, what commission you will ignore advice from because it either doesn't fit with your blinkered view or it's deemed too hard and may offend too many voters.

I'll take my hat off to the first politician in power who hears an idea from someone else, admits it's a good idea, and then implements the policy. Working in IT we have a saying - the 12 of us in the team makes 1 good tech. It's just about impossible for any one person to have all the knowledge and experience, just as it's impossible for one political party to have all the best ideas on how to keep this country rich and prosperous and alive with the hope every parent has for their children that they will live a better life than what they had.

Conversely, I'll take my hat off to an opposition that can bring itself to admit a Govt policy is good and not fight it just for spite. If our politicians behaved like they do in primary school, parents would be shocked. We revile the way politicians behave, yet seem to condone it. Thee never seems to be much punishment by voters on poor behaviour. Maybe it stems from the cheering you hear during a rubble at an Origin match, maybe we still let the old reptilian part of our brains enjoy the fight more than the journey?

I see parliament like the head quarters for company Australia. The Government may be the chairman of the board, but the opposition should be like the legal department that goes through what the company is doing and picks up anythign that can get you into trouble, but largely works with the chairman to get things done.

sydboy007 said:

I'll take my hat off to the first politician in power who hears an idea from someone else, admits it's a good idea, and then implements the policy.

Click to expand...

More than three quarters of the legislation passed during the term of this minority government has been passed with the assent of the opposition.
Don't make the mistake of assuming they disagree with everything from the entirely valid and stand out areas where they do absolutely disagree and are entirely within their rights to say so, labour the point even.

Conversely, I'll take my hat off to an opposition that can bring itself to admit a Govt policy is good and not fight it just for spite.

Click to expand...

As above.

That said, I don't think there would be too many Australians who are not disgusted by the recent parliamentary behaviour. That the government is setting the tone with their in-fighting would be difficult to dispute.
How they can expect the electorate to believe they can bring about unity in the general population when they themselves are so bitterly divided is beyond any reasonable person.

Julia said:

More than three quarters of the legislation passed during the term of this minority government has been passed with the assent of the opposition.
Don't make the mistake of assuming they disagree with everything from the entirely valid and stand out areas where they do absolutely disagree and are entirely within their rights to say so, labour the point even.


As above.

That said, I don't think there would be too many Australians who are not disgusted by the recent parliamentary behaviour. That the government is setting the tone with their in-fighting would be difficult to dispute.
How they can expect the electorate to believe they can bring about unity in the general population when they themselves are so bitterly divided is beyond any reasonable person.

Click to expand...

Very true, but then the Liberals and Nationals are barely a unified force either. The hope of getting their flabby butts on the treasury benches keeps it in check, but you only have to see the reaction to gay marriage or abortion in their ranks to know just how divided they are.

As for legislation passign with their assent, they might not have blocked the Govt, but they still harped on about a lot of it.

Look at the last budget. The Liberals pretty much complained about all the spending cuts, yet passed all of them and pretty much did not commit to reinstating any of the spending. It just seems petty and churlish. Either you support the spending cuts, enough said, or you don't and either block it, or since you think you'll be in power 6 months later, commit to reinstating those Govt programs.

Julia said:

How they can expect the electorate to believe they can bring about unity in the general population when they themselves are so bitterly divided is beyond any reasonable person.

Click to expand...

The big difference is that Julia is Gone...the other contender is no more, Labor will be going into the election without Julia and the bulk of her front bench team, Swannie etc...its a different picture, one a lot closer to the Kevin 07 presentation.

So_Cynical said:

The big difference is that Julia is Gone...the other contender is no more, Labor will be going into the election without Julia and the bulk of her front bench team, Swannie etc...its a different picture, one a lot closer to the Kevin 07 presentation.

Click to expand...

That's all true. The downside for them will be the number of inexperienced new ministers.

sydboy007 said:

Very true, but then the Liberals and Nationals are barely a unified force either. The hope of getting their flabby butts on the treasury benches keeps it in check, but you only have to see the reaction to gay marriage or abortion in their ranks to know just how divided they are.

Click to expand...

I thought this was neutral political discussion. You raise two minor issues that only affect vocal minorities.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...europe-for-crean/story-fn59niix-1226676805285

Cook's tour of Europe for Simon Crean

by: Cameron Stewart
From: The Australian
July 10, 2013 12:00AM


OUTGOING Labor veteran and Rudd supporter Simon Crean and his wife have taken a taxpayer-funded parliamentary trip to Europe just months before he leaves his job.

It is understood the study trip could include Italian cooking lessons for the couple in Rome as well as a sojourn on the canals of Venice.

Department of Foreign Affairs sources have told The Australian that instructions were recently sent to Australia's embassy in Rome to look into organising cooking classes for Mr Crean and his wife, Carole.

The former Labor leader is believed to be in the Swiss city of Geneva on a visit that will also take him to Rome, the fashion capital of Milan and the tourist mecca of Venice - all paid for by his parliamentary entitlements for overseas study travel.

Just days after backing Kevin Rudd in the leadership ballot over Julia Gillard last month, the former minister announced he would retire from politics in the coming election, ending a 23-year parliamentary career.

Sources said Mr Crean had a full schedule and a detailed itinerary for his European study tour, but Mr Crean's office declined to provide further details last night.

A spokesman for Mr Crean said only that the study trip was "being undertaken in accordance with the senators and members' entitlements".

Mr Crean was unavailable to respond before deadline to The Australian's questions about why such a taxpayer-funded study trip was justified when a federal election is due sometime in the next three months, severing his connection with politics.

Unless the Prime Minister decides to set an election after Ms Gillard's nominated September 14, parliament will not be recalled before the poll.

Politicians must apply for, and have their study trip approved, before they can take them. It is unclear when Mr Crean's European trip was approved.

Mr Crean, 64, decided to retire from politics at the coming election after he was defeated by Anthony Albanese in a ballot for deputy leader during the Labor leadership showdown late last month. He then turned down an offer from Mr Rudd for a cabinet position.

In March, Mr Crean was sacked as minister for the arts and regional Australia by Ms Gillard after he came out publicly in support of Mr Rudd as leader during an abortive attempt to persuade the then backbencher to challenge for the party leadership.

The Remuneration Tribunal last year announced the gradual abolition of the entitlement for parliamentarians to take overseas study trips at taxpayer expense. MPs no longer accrue an entitlement for overseas study travel, worth about $23,000, but MPs who have an entitlement will be able to access it.

The perk is being axed this year because of concerns that politicians are exploiting the generous travel allowance for their own enjoyment

In last week's press conference to announce his forthcoming retirement, Mr Crean said the past three years in politics had been the hardest of his 23 years in parliament. He said to his wife: "To you, Caz - you know these are hard days but we will have a good time together, I'm sure."

Since his decision to retire Mr Crean has been lauded by both sides of politics for his service to the country, which saw him serve as a cabinet minister in the Hawke, Keating, Rudd and Gillard governments. His late father, Frank, was a Whitlam minister and a state and federal MP for 33 years.






What benefit to Australian taxpayers do these very expensive trips have? (In this case cooking classes in Italy for example).

I stress that this sort of rort is routinely undertaken by all side's of politics. So I am not just picking on Labor.

I'm sick and tired of all political rort's and retirement entitlements (cars, secretaries, golden passes etc etc).

No other job gets these sort of perk's - why politicians?

I say: Ban the perks! Ban the perks!

dutchie said:

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...europe-for-crean/story-fn59niix-1226676805285

Cook's tour of Europe for Simon Crean

!

Click to expand...

Disgraceful

An analysis about Australia and politics.

In February of this year we asked a representative sample of 1,377 Australians to consider various issues regarding Australian politics and their role in making democracy work. Our findings should give all democrats pause for thought.

Australian Survey of Political Engagement Findings, 2013. Mark Evans, Gerry Stoker and Jamal Nasir.
Australians feel they are observers rather than participants in formal politics. Nine in ten of those interviewed regard themselves as without influence over the federal government and seven in ten feel the same about other levels of government. There is widespread evidence of negative attitudes towards politics and politicians.

Click to expand...

My interest in the election is demonstrated by the fact I didn't watch the debate, couldn't care less who "won" and don't have any interest in the election campaign as it is all spin and BS.

The mostly biased and predictable comments by a few in the so called discussions here are no different to what is being dished out by the candidates - partisan party politics. As in other matters, I do my own research and don't waste time on such orchestrated nonsense as the campaign or the debate.

It would be interesting to see how many voters actually watched the debate, and I would not be surprised if most would be glued on party supporters whose minds are closed anyway.

Cheers
Country Lad

I'm with you Country Lad. Didn't want to waste 60 minutes of my life watching a so called "debate".

I'm sure its only the rusted on voters who bothered.

Country Lad said:

My interest in the election is demonstrated by the fact I didn't watch the debate, couldn't care less who "won" and don't have any interest in the election campaign as it is all spin and BS.

The mostly biased and predictable comments by a few in the so called discussions here are no different to what is being dished out by the candidates - partisan party politics. As in other matters, I do my own research and don't waste time on such orchestrated nonsense as the campaign or the debate.

It would be interesting to see how many voters actually watched the debate, and I would not be surprised if most would be glued on party supporters whose minds are closed anyway.

Click to expand...

Thanks CL - I'm in pretty much the same boat as you and agree with most of what you have said.

Lots of the political discussions on forums and in the media remind me of crowds barracking "one-eyed" for their football teams. Lots of fact presenting, but only when it conforms to a previously held bias.

The worms during the debate are nonsense.

How would the worm go if it only showed General Chat contributors. Abbott would win easily.

The whole "debate" thing is a lot of nonsense too. It's just a platform for the leader's to regurgitate what they have been saying in the past.

Until we know all the policies and their costing's there can be no "debate".

And we will have to wait until the last minute before we get those from either party.

Knobby22 said:

I'm with you Country Lad. Didn't want to waste 60 minutes of my life watching a so called "debate".

I'm sure its only the rusted on voters who bothered.

Click to expand...

Do you mean only voters who are, as you put it, rusted on to a party, regardless of policy or personality?

Yes, people who always vote a certain way without really being interested in policy. It becomes like barracking for a football side. Country Lad expressed it well.

I love a good debate discussing details of policy and how issues should be handled. A real debate of ideas.
Wish we could have one.

from macrobusiness today commenting on an AFR article over the weekend

…the tax system is badly broken. It can’t generate enough revenue to deliver long-term structural surpluses that underpin a successful society. While there are good opportunities for targeted spending cuts that don’t damage the economy’s productive base or the basic social safety net, solid demographic figures suggest this is unlikely to be enough to restore a viable surplus.

In 1970, the ratio of Australians of working age able to support services and subsidies to those 65 or older was 7 to 5. Today, the ratio is 5 to 1. By 2050, it will drop to 2.7 to 1, placing an unconscionable burden on the workforce. Simply boosting labour market productivity can’t offset the big increase in the cost of services and subsidies for older people.

Perversely, the present arrangements will let a lot more people spend as long in retirement as they did in the workforce. Yet, thanks to former treasurer Peter Costello, the existing tax system will allow more people to retire at 60 and pay no income tax for another 30 or more years. Many will be better off financially than those slogging away in a workforce that is far smaller proportionally than it is now, let alone in 1970.

…growth will run into stiff headwinds as more baby boomers retire. Neither Labor nor the Coalition shows any inclination to tackle this looming fiscal tsunami. Both are preoccupied with patching up the existing budget structure and defending components that make it harder to achieve a surplus…

A glance at Australia’s long-term demographic data and projections from the United Nations shows that the proportion of workers to retirees is set to plummet over coming decades as the large Baby Boomer cohort shifts into retirement (see below chart).

The implications for Australian government finances are immense. Not only will governments have a much smaller pool of workers with whom to collect taxes from, making it much more difficult for the Government to raise the required amount of tax revenue. But they will also have to contend with rising health and aged-care expenditures, significantly increasing overall Budget outlays.

So far our political "leaders" have their heads in the sand (or is that up their A$$es?) that they will leave any adjustment till the last minute, which will cost us dearly.

How tax free super is viable with the halving of workers per retiree over the next few decades is beyond me