Rudd and the stockmarket

[mime]

Read about the case where three miners died in a NSW mine because of bad infomation provided by the NSW govt department. The mine was found liable for damages for their deaths even though they died by a mistake by the govt because of a statue written up by the Carr govt that protected the govt for negligence. I'm sure Carr is still happy now working at the Mac bank.

Under the old system unions could call a strike when ever they wanted and not be liable for the damages they inccured on the business because of statues written in by Labor govt to protect them. They could also fine companies and collect half of it. I read a story where they demanded 50000 documents from a medium sized business and the business had to pay for the copies.

This stuff doesn't really happen anymore because of changes made but it may come back if Labor wins power.

 

[nioka]

Why on earth would you swing.
People have short memories.
Highest interest rates seen to the lowest in 30yrs.
Fullest employment for the same period.
Budget surpluses.
Booming economies.

Yeh makes sence give it to someone to stuff up!

I've seen just as many bad times, high interest rates,etc under libs as with labour. Remember Costello's "core promises". Howard going from "honest John"
to an unbelievable stooge.
Why on earth wouldn't you swing.
Politics and religion certainly are good subjects for argument.

 

[The Mint Man]

Only one person has referred to the concern of having both Federal and all State Governments as Labor. The idea horrifies me almost as much as the fear of hearing Julia Gillard's voice even more than I do now.

Cant agree more.

EDIT: thought I would post it here, I found it quite funny..... but true!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kUx0UK0e05c

 

[Shane Baker]

Thanks for the paper Nick

For those who are interested the link is

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=982691#PaperDownload

Cheers

Shane

 

[happytown]

mime,

i couldn't help but notice that you replied twice,

does this mean that you are

'all talk and no action'; or

'no talk and all action'

you originally stated, inter alia,

I've read numerous stories of unions bullying companies and the companies can't do anything because the unions are protect by statue law.

and i asked, of you, inter alia,

could you elaborate on the statute law in aust that protects the unions in the way you claim, ie provide the name/s of the act/s and/or regulation/s and their relevant sections and/or regulations

you subsequently responded, inter alia,

Read about the case where three miners died in a NSW mine because of bad infomation provided by the NSW govt department. The mine was found liable for damages for their deaths even though they died by a mistake by the govt because of a statue written up by the Carr govt that protected the govt for negligence. I'm sure Carr is still happy now working at the Mac bank.

are you simply saying that you have 'read about the case' or are you suggesting that i 'read about the case' - if it is the latter, please be so kind as to provide me with the case citation, as i currently have neither the time nor inclination to trawl through the Aust Tort Reports, or the NSW Law Reports, or indeed the Commonwealth Law reports, or any other law reports in search of this case, which of course assumes it is a reported judgment as opposed to an unreported judgment

but of more significance here, you yourself have indicated it deals with govt negligence, so it would appear to be a case about negligence and govt/crown immunity from litigation, and nought at all to do with, as you assert, 'unions bullying companies and the companies can't do anything because the unions are protect by statue law'

you then continue,

Under the old system unions could call a strike when ever they wanted and not be liable for the damages they inccured on the business because of statues written in by Labor govt to protect them.

are you stating that the alleged legislation explicitly authorised strike action and further explicitly authorised that damages caused by the explicitly authorised strike action could not be remedied

or are you stating that the alleged legislation was silent as to explicitly authorising strike action and damages remedies and that this silence was interpreted therfore that by not prohibiting such action there was indeed an implied permissibility to carry out such strike action

irrespective of whether it is the former or latter, or a combination of the two, again please be so kind as to provide the legislative details, even if the legislation has been subsequently repealed, amended or substituted, and further, is the legislation you refer to state or commonwealth

and then,

They could also fine companies and collect half of it.

as per above please provide the legislative details to support your assertion

further still,

I read a story where they demanded 50000 documents from a medium sized business and the business had to pay for the copies.

this sounds like it may be more likely a legal issue dealing with discovery and costs, as opposed to legislation regarding 'unions [that] are protect by statue law', but nonetheless, giving you the benefit of the doubt, i simply reiterate, show me the legislation (in my best castro gooding jr)

and finishing with,

This stuff doesn't really happen anymore because of changes made but it may come back if Labor wins power.

your use of 'are protect' indicated to me that it was present tense, as opposed to 'were protect' indicating past tense, thus my original line of questioning as to your assertion of statute law, ie law created by legislation, ie by parliament, that 'protect' unions

nonetheless for my own legal research and to further back up your 'stories' i invite you to provide the legislative details regarding the 'protect'[ion] of unions by 'statu[t]e laws'

cheers

 

[Julia]

Why on earth wouldn't you swing.

Nioka,

Could you outline exactly (a) what you feel would be the advantages to us of a Rudd led government, and (b) what you feel are the current disadvantages of the present government, in general, and as it affects you personally.

 

[tech/a]

Yes I'm interested as well.

I cant see any benifits from a change in government.
If anyone could suggest some we/I could make a list.

 

[The Mint Man]

Me three!
I cant possibly see how you could vote in someone with no track record... or should I say a Party with a bad track record. Not to mention most of his make up is a lot of sunrise spin, I have heared people say they like him just because he 'seems like a nice guy', because he was on sunrise.
Heres one good reason not to vote labor in.... I must warn, this may bring back painful memories to older ASF members
Monetary Policy Changes:
23-Jan-1990 17.50
15-Feb-1990 17.00
4-Apr-1990 15.50
2-Aug-1990 14.00
15-Oct-1990 13.00
18-Dec-1990 12.00
4-Apr-1991 11.50
16-May-1991 10.50
3-Sep-1991 9.50
6-Nov-1991 8.50
8-Jan-1992 7.50
6-May-1992 6.50
8-Jul-1992 5.75
23-Mar-1993 5.25
30-Jul-1993 4.75
17-Aug-1994 5.50
24-Oct-1994 6.50
14-Dec-1994 7.50
31-Jul-1996 7.00
6-Nov-1996 6.50
11-Dec-1996 6.00
23-May-1997 5.50
30-Jul-1997 5.00
2-Dec-1998 4.75
3-Nov-1999 5.00
2-Feb-2000 5.50
5-Apr-2000 5.75
3-May-2000 6.00
2-Aug-2000 6.25
7-Feb-2001 5.75
7-Mar-2001 5.50
4-Apr-2001 5.00
5-Sep-2001 4.75
3-Oct-2001 4.50
5-Dec-2001 4.25
8-May-2002 4.50
5-Jun-2002 4.75
5-Nov-2003 5.00
3-Dec-2003 5.25
2-Mar-2005 5.50
3-May-2006 5.75
2-Aug-2006 6.00
8-Nov-2006 6.25

While labor was in they only managed to get below 5% once, at 4.75% after which it jumped to straight back to 5.5% (0.75% in one hit, if that happened these days there would be murder!), with a high of 17.5% not to mention the above only goes back to 1990.
C'mon people lets face it, Labor has a **** record when it comes to running Australia. There have only been a handfull of things that they have done which majority Australians thought were good for our country.
On the other hand the Liberal party, over the last 10 years has done a damn good job in comparison. Why would you change?
If your thinking of changing (out of spite) because of one or two policies that you dont like then IMO that would be foolish, because Labor has a proven track record of F*@king things up worse then Liberal ever have.

Cheers

 

[chops_a_must]

Mint Man. Can you please post me the details of the interest rates in 1982 and then also tell me who was the treasurer then?

Cheers,
Chops.

 

[petervan]

Looking at opion polls it seems like labour will win in a landslide. I own a deli and talk to alot of people and the general feeling amongst the battlers is its getting harder and harder out there.I personally think the stockmarket will not be affectted by a Rudd win.While theres world growth our market will continue to grow.Doesnt really matter who wins, the sun will come up the next day and all the companys your trading in will still be there

 

[happytown]

julia, tech/a and the mint man,

with respect

that's the beauty of voting in aust, it is literally a tick-the-box exercise with no justification required

gotta love those polls

have noticed how these political threads are getting more and more chicken little, the more the majority appears to be indicating a complete and utter demolition of the current govt is inevitable

imaginary nightmares of a leftist, socialist, commie pinko, economy wrecking, job destroying, wealth eliminating labour party just ain't cutting it with a sophisiticated[?] electorate

howard's scare campaigns have thusfar failed miserably

again gotta love those polls

and whilst it is still early days

you all appear to be well and truly in the minority

i hear a change a comin'

and mint man i noticed you did not include the interest rate from when howard was treasurer in the early days [see chops supra]

cheers

disclaimer: recognition that it is early days and power hungry megalomaniacs never give up without a dirty fight

 

[Spaghetti]

Mint Man

I remember high interest rates. I was better off at that time. Go figure. Maybe having a mortgage of $20,000 on an Sydney inner city terrace in my 20,s when earning only a little less than today offset the higher rates. Also getting huge interest on savings (as you could save easily) offset also. You could actually save and buy a house outright if you still lived at home. Not that we stayed at home back then. Still I was single and could do it but my married friends at that time could easily save one income, doing even better.

So high nterest rates have made housing out of reach for many, so not such a bargain afterall.

 

[The Mint Man]

Chops I'm sure you can post them yourself, you wouldn't be asking if you didnt know.

Looking at opion polls it seems like labour will win in a landslide. I own a deli and talk to alot of people and the general feeling amongst the battlers is its getting harder and harder out there.I personally think the stockmarket will not be affectted by a Rudd win.While theres world growth our market will continue to grow.Doesnt really matter who wins, the sun will come up the next day and all the companys your trading in will still be there

yes your right on the sun coming up
In my opinion, opinion polls mean very little. An article in the sunday tele was proof of that. I have had one of these polls ring me up and let me tell you, they can be quite bias!
Also Im interested to know what you think a 'battler' is? Kevin Rudd thinks you can be a battler while earning $250000 a year.

Cheers

 

[chops_a_must]

Chops I'm sure you can post them yourself, you wouldn't be asking if you didnt know.

It's just I find self-refutation so much more enjoyable.

And no, I don't know. I'm just a retarded no nothing pinko that lives under your bed. Lol!

And I think it's important you put the figures alongside these statements:

"I cant possibly see how you could vote in someone with no track record... or should I say a Party with a bad track record."

"If your thinking of changing (out of spite) because of one or two policies that you dont like then IMO that would be foolish, because Labor has a proven track record of F*@king things up worse then Liberal ever have."

If not for your own education, then for the education of other people here as well.

But I pose these questions... what track record did Howard have before he was elected?

And;

if we made every decision in our lives based on people's track record, what would anybody be able to achieve?

Cheers,
Chops.

 

[Rafa]

let me tell you, they can be quite bias!

pretty ironic, that statement coming from you....

 

[petervan]

Battlers. My view may be different from Rudd,s but battlers I see everyday include drink ,drug and pokie addicts. Grandmothers looking after sexually abused children,pensioners struggling to keep there heads above water,chilren with no guidance as parents are both working long hours to make end meets.Eveyone of them has an interesting story and when there a bit short of cash and I give them credit 95% payback within a week.It,s the suits that you never see again.Seems to be the way of the world

 

[macca]

I would also be interested in differences in state by state attitudes.

For example, NSW is a stuff up, everyone in NSW knows that, but the NSW Libs lost the unlosable election by being completely disorganised.

I can readily believe that anyone in Sydney subs would be doing it tough, the cost of fares or tollways would send anyone broke.

Lack of land and huge govt charges have pushed the cost of houses way out of reach for the average wage earner in anything but the lower subs.

Schools and hospitals have had a number of consultants look at them but not much has been spent, again a state issue.

These are a all state issues, not federal, but I don't blame the average Joe for not knowing that.

I think loss of working conditions and the Labor state stuff up will cost the Libs a few seats in NSW.

That and the huge spend by the unions, should be enough to see the Fed Labor Party get home IMO.

 

[The Mint Man]

Battlers. My view may be different from Rudd,s but battlers I see everyday include drink ,drug and pokie addicts. Grandmothers looking after sexually abused children,pensioners struggling to keep there heads above water,chilren with no guidance as parents are both working long hours to make end meets.Eveyone of them has an interesting story and when there a bit short of cash and I give them credit 95% payback within a week.It,s the suits that you never see again.Seems to be the way of the world

I mostly agree with your view on this. People that get themself into huge debt and cant pay their foxtel bill are not battlers, just stupid.
Good to see that you give people a fair go with the credit.

 

[greggy]

The Howard Government, after 11 years, is looking a little tired. I personally feel the good times will continue to roll on no matter who's in government. Mr Rudd belongs to the ALP's Right Faction and is fairly conservative. My reading of history is that previous Labor Governments haven't been that bad for the stockmarket with the exception of Whitlam. Whitlam's Labor Government spent too much, too quickly. At the last federal election I voted for Mr Howard and at the following state election I backed Mr Bracks (Labor). At this stage I'm still undecided about who to vote for at the next federal election. I would pretty happy having either of them in charge. Finally, Labor has finally elected a leader that is electable and is unlikely to scare away the horses unlike the Latham debacle.

 

[tech/a]

Well nothing so far.

Battlers ALWAYS find life hard.
Thats why they're Battlers.
It wont get any easier for ANY Battlers unless they (The Battlers) do something to alter their circumstances. Its not a governments job to make it easier for Battlers. Labor OR Liberal.
These people arent Battlers either. Go to Sudan or Ethiopia and get a grip on what poverty REALLY is.