Rudd and the stockmarket

[Spaghetti]

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.

It actually is a government responsibility to ensure everyone has equal access to wealth. At the moment it is very easy to make money if you are a 30 year old white suit. Would not matter if technical and/or management skills are weaker than others, the young white suit will get the job. Discrimination is none more evident than in our own parliament. How do a bunch of middle aged and/or old white men represent Australia?

This is in fact a poor exploitation of our nation's greatest asset being the human resource, badly managed at the expense of greater productivity.

So yes, very much a government responsibility. If you had good management skills you would recognise that the most efficient and effective use of staff is the way to beat the competition. Makes staff happy through empowerment and has a flow on effect to the companies bottom line.

If you have companies whining about rewarding staff then it says to me, maybe the company should fire it's management.

 

[moXJO]

PAUL KEATING: First of all you take him on. Howard had the highest interest rates in Australian history - 21% bank rates in 1982. What did he leave? He gave us a huge recession and 11% inflation. We had interest rates peaking at 18 per cent but we came out of it with 1 per cent inflation.

Howard got the benefit of the hard decision taken in the Hawke and Keating era, things that were very unpopular at the time but serve us well now.

Howard is a populist politician with little future vision, I hope Rudd can do a better job future proofing Australia.

PS: Will not affect the market much either way

Hmmm the whole Hawke and Keating saved Australia is wearing a little thin. Labor got the boot for making a hell of a mess back then. Debt ,the good old payed to stay home (professional dole bludger)policies. Massive unemployment corruption left right and centre and strikes on a whim. How about that immortal promise “No child shall live in poverty". And who can forget Hawkes televised tears as that knife got twisted, even back then the labor party had massive internal blow ups and war in Iraqi part one,ahh good times .

Its a combination of the Hawke, Keating and Howard governments that were the build up to a stronger economy. Howard made a lot of hard decisions in the early years.
I'm sick of the whole poor labor victims to those nasty liberals arguments to support poor performance.
Maybe the pain caused by labor from the last time they were in is fading. And people think its time to change governments. Personally I would like to see something more solid from labor then just a 'work choices sux so vote us in' type campaign though.

Will the stock market be affect that depends on how much leash the unions are given

 

[rederob]

mox
You will be hard pressed to find Howard making any hard decisions that were announced to voters before an election, except there was a GST introduced without any guidance on how it would work (Howard learnt from the "birthday cake" explanation that the GST was a can of worms).
Unless Howard can invent yet another major distraction - perhaps joining the US in a fake "war" on Iran and its nuclear weapons - his government is likely to topple in the biggest landslide since Whitlam in 1972.
Our leaders make marginal differences to our economy, but have the capacity to be major influencers on certain sectors: As was John Button, and his legacy of a once thriving now barely surviving car industry.
Rudd has the capacity to influence in "clean energy" job creation and make investments in national infrastructure projects that Howard has avoided until push came to shove (probably out the back door in a few months time).
Outside of some fringe influences, our meagre economy will be at the beck and call of global giants that plunder our resources for a pittance.

 

[greggy]

Peter Laylor, generally a fervent Howard supporter has this to say in the Australian...

http://blogs.theaustralian.news.com...alian/comments/work_choices_recipe_for_abuse/

There are a growing number of nervous Coalition backbenchers in marginal seats worried about the impact of the IR laws on the electorate and indeed are probably regreting its introduction. IMO if it wasn't for the IR Laws, Mr Howard would probably be ahead in the polls. Many of the so-called Howard battlers are returning back to Labor due to the unfairness of the new laws. Whilst executive salaries are going through the roof, just ask Macquarie, there are many employees who are no longer geting a fair deal. As I've explained before, I know a number of Howard voting battlers who will be returning to the Labor fold because of this. IMO its all about fairness. There are a number of employers out ther who take care of their staff, but there area also some out there who've been very unfair to their staff.
I've never seen a federal govt so far behind in the polls despite delivering a popular budget and good economic conditions.
Still I wouldn't be surprised if the sharemarket, looking ahead as it already does, has already priced in a Rudd win. Once in govt, should Mr Rudd prove that he's a fiscal conservative then I think that the sharemarket will move even further ahead. Overseas factors (resources boom, Wall St, China etc) still have the greatest influence on our market.

 

[Smurf1976]

A theme that keeps coming up is that Labor supposedly inflicted a lot of pain through high interest rates. Apart from the fact that the ALP has never controlled the world's major central banks, it seems things are even worse now under Howard.

"In fact nationally the debt repayment burden now is higher than it was at the end of the 1980's when housing rates were much higher," he said.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200705/s1927481.htm

 

[Dink]

I think change has to occur but by this I only think that Johnny has to go. I, unlike a lot of people out there, am looking forward to Costello being PM. I think he will manage the economy well but have more compassion. And he is for an australian republic. Unfortunately we don't get to choose who leads the party. The only people who could force this to occur are those in Bennelong who could vote Johnny out while the coalition goes on to win the election. It is an interesting possibility that I am quietly hoping will occur. I imagine Johnny won't hang around for long into the next term anyway.

PS. To answer the original question - I think the stock market will be better under a coalition government. But in saying this a booming stockmarket and making money is not the only thing that makes happy people and people should not forget this... probably isn't the best forum to make a statement like this.

 

[Mofra]

Julia Gillard is the one thing which would stop me voting Labour - their policy of compulsory unionism by stealth (unions allowed to charge "negotiation fees" to non-union members that are higher than union fees) will be an absolute disaster for infrastructure investment & already they are "rolling back" their policies for the mining industry.

Once more policies are rolled out it will be easier to judge their overall impact.

 

[juiceman]

While the Labour Party may serve some purpose in opposition ( ie keep the bastards honest ) the thought of a Federal Labor Party, running with State Labor Party"s sends a chill down my spine.

Do you really think a Union!!!! can run this priviledged country?
Because that is what you will get!
Rudd is not the issue here, he is just the best face they could put forward, look behind,that smiling face and see the real picture.
Greg Combet has just entered Parliament to join his other Union Mates.
THIS IS FACT nearly half of Labors members in Parliament are former full-time Union Officials.
Another 36 are former staffers of ALP parliamentarians or full-time ALP officials.
Kevin Rudd"s real IR Policy is to hand a new monopoly to negotiate collective agreements through there unions and to charge all workers for their efforts.

Does any-body remember the union (no ticket no start policy) of the labor gang"s.
Be warned, you don"t know what you got until it"s gone

 

[nioka]

While the Labour Party may serve some purpose in opposition ( ie keep the bastards honest ) the thought of a Federal Labor Party, running with State Labor Party"s sends a chill down my spine.

Do you really think a Union!!!! can run this priviledged country?
Because that is what you will get!
Rudd is not the issue here, he is just the best face they could put forward, look behind,that smiling face and see the real picture.
Greg Combet has just entered Parliament to join his other Union Mates.
THIS IS FACT nearly half of Labors members in Parliament are former full-time Union Officials.
Another 36 are former staffers of ALP parliamentarians or full-time ALP officials.
Kevin Rudd"s real IR Policy is to hand a new monopoly to negotiate collective agreements through there unions and to charge all workers for their efforts.

Does any-body remember the union (no ticket no start policy) of the labor gang"s.
Be warned, you don"t know what you got until it"s gone

Labour certainly has strong union representation, so does society. They are no more dominant in the labour party these days than they are in our society.
They deserve a say and they don't get one now. They don't deserve to dominate and I'm sure they would not.
The libs are just as dominated by the other end of town.
I once wanted to fill a foremans position. I ended up offering a union organiser the job. He was a tough union organiser. He was a great foreman for the company and ended up in management.
I'll vote labour this time, my first time, because I believe the pendalum has swung too far one way.

 

[juiceman]

GST like it or lump it, all reciepts from gst is distributed to the now labor state"s and they still want more.
Remember when GST was first introduced by John Howard ? Labor was lying oop"s trying to convince their true believers that if GST was introduced they little johny and co would just increase it slowly?
The truth is it could never be increased unless each an every STATE agreed to an increase.
With a mixture of Liberal and Labor states we were all safe from that.
Now with all states being Labor. Kevin Rudd and co could increase GST if they wanted too.
Unless you totally trust Labor with that type of power think first.
Act in haste,repent at leisure
Don"t think it could happen? Just look at what happened in England with VAT.

 

[nioka]

Another angle to consider; Julia Gillard represents the union side of Labour. Kevin Rudd represents the middle to conservative side. Gillard couldn't get enough support to challenge Rudd as leader. Proof that the unions don't RUN the party?

 

[mime]

Another angle to consider; Julia Gillard represents the union side of Labour. Kevin Rudd represents the middle to conservative side. Gillard couldn't get enough support to challenge Rudd as leader. Proof that the unions don't RUN the party?

How about the millions of dollars in donations to the party.

 

[tech/a]

If you have companies whining about rewarding staff then it says to me, maybe the company should fire it's management.

In geberal terms I agree with the condition of course that staff earn those Rewards. They are however seen by most as a right rather than something earned.

 

[juiceman]

1. Honesty.
2. A swing away from being subserviant to George B
3. Capability or Rudd having a better relationship with China.
4. A fair go for those who sweat and toil and those who have sweated and toiled in the past, to make this a great country.
5. A new broom. The old one is tired and worn.
I doubt if I will be affected either way. I may die with a little more or a little less. I have seen a lot of life, good times and bad ones, but I have never seen it as hard on family life as general working conditions are at present.
We can't all sit around making money. Someone out there has to do some real work. They too deserve a reasonable standard of living.

Let"s Get It ON
1. Honesty hah! are you so nieve to think any politition will tell all the truth all of the time.
2. George B will pass in time as have others before him.
But consider what Indonesia might have told Australia to do when we asked them to leave East Timor , had America not been standing beside us.
3. Rudd and China; He speaks Chinese so what.
4 A fair go for those that sweat and toil.
Do you mean the farmers,they don"t vote labor
Or is it small to medium business"s who"s owners usually bet their houses to raise capitol, and if succesfull employ staff, now they really sweat and toil for this great country.
5. Re the broom, no wonder it"s worn out look at all the s**t that had to be swept away before we could really get back to sharing this country"s wealth.

 

[greggy]

In geberal terms I agree with the condition of course that staff earn those Rewards. They are however seen by most as a right rather than something earned.

Good point there tech/a. Rewards should be provided as an incentive to staff that go the extra mile, not just for turning up. Suych incentives often lead to considerable increases in productivity and leads to nicreased morale.
A harmonious workplace provides a win-win situation for both employees and employers.

 

[Smurf1976]

Interest rates, unions, working conditions...

All rather easy compared to:

1. Peak oil. It will happen, the debate is only as to the timing with even the optimists suggesting it's time to start planning.

2. Real effects of climate change. The actual flooding of major cities, lack of water, violent storms etc is potentially a truly massive crisis (assuming the science is right - I acknowledge the lack of absolute proof on the subject either way).

3. Terrorism.

4. US Dollar situation if it eventuates as many suggest.

5. Human disease resistance to antibiotics.

Whilst they are all "doom" issues, they're all to some extent real and could well end in a crisis.

Who's the best if things actually get tough and we have a REAL problem? Sorting out how to pay and employ workers or how much interest to pay on a loan is pretty trivial and ought to be outright simple compared to any of these or other serious issues.

 

[Julia]

Labour certainly has strong union representation, so does society. They are no more dominant in the labour party these days than they are in our society.
They deserve a say and they don't get one now. They don't deserve to dominate and I'm sure they would not.

I would question that union representation is no more dominant in the labour party than in society in general. I don't have the figures, but I understand union membership is consistently falling.

Nioka, You appear to have made up your mind about voting Labor.
How do you reconcile the concern about the country being wall to wall Labor with both Federal and all the State governments? Doesn't seem too balanced to me. Why are you so sure the Unions would not dominate under a scenario like this? You will have Greg Combet actually in the government.
How many favours do you think he will be needing to pay back to all his Union mates and Labor party stalwarts who have shoved the previous member out to make way for him?

I do agree that there is too great a divide in our society between those who have done extremely well in recent years and those who have been left behind. But on the other hand, the opportunities have been there. There will always be a portion of the population who nurse a victim mindset and will never make the effort to change their circumstances.

I'd like to see some social changes, but I am not convinced that country-wide Labor will bring any sort of cohesion to the problems we presently experience.

 

[Smurf1976]

How do you reconcile the concern about the country being wall to wall Labor with both Federal and all the State governments? Doesn't seem too balanced to me.

Balance in everything.

Unions and business interests. Greens and pro-development people. Not one or the other but both.

IMO one of the keys to success in recent years has been having a different party for the Federal and State governments. To much of any one thing generally leads, at best, to stagnation.

All things considered, I'd rather see Labor running the states as the Liberals will just run up debt and sell everything. Whoever gets the outsourcing and consultancy contracts will be smiling but I'm more concerned about services to the public and keeping taxes down than profits for selected companies.

So I'm leaning towards the Liberals for the Federal government unless there becomes a clear probability of the Liberals also winning State elections.

No chance though of me voting for whoever seems likely to form government to also control the Senate. Balance is needed and regardless of who I want to be in government, I don't want them also controlling the Senate. To do so is, if nothing else, sowing the seeds of their own demise as reasoned debate gives way to outright greed.

This might shock a few, but the Greens are actually quite high on my list as far as the Senate is concerned despite my strong disagreement with several of their policies. We need balance and they're another voice if nothing else and are the only real counter opinion to the great bulk of policy that is common to both Labor and Liberal. Incredibly strange as it feels, Bob Brown isn't anywhere near the bottom of my list for the Senate for this very reason.

 

[It's Snake Pliskin]

In geberal terms I agree with the condition of course that staff earn those Rewards. They are however seen by most as a right rather than something earned.

I totally agree.

 

[spartn]

Listen it doesn't matter who gets into power, Howard or Rudd, or even what happens with the share market, 'Go through life relying entirely on our working income, as your only financial support, you are stuffed regardless who is in power’.

John Howard said one year after he came into power that he would more than likely change the work place relations law, people have had ‘10’ fricken’ years to try and help their financial situations, and in those ten years look what has happened, 2 stock market booms and 1 massive real estate boom, if people had bothered to notice these things happening earlier on with some research, they most definitely would not be complaining about the money they are losing with the work place relations laws today.
And anyway where would most people be for their retirement years now if it wasn’t for the superannuation in 1996 which I think Paul Keating was responsible, the outlook financially for this country would be a hell of a lot worse.

And with the major superannuation schemes that are happening this year less than 30% have actually done anything about it.

In the end, the major people who are going to loss a lot with the wok place relation laws, are the same people that said investing in the share market and real estate were to risky, when all the time relying entirely on your job as your only source of income, was by far the most riskiest investment of all.

In the end all I will say is "stop whinging', a large reason to most peoples financial problems today, are due to their own laziness, just imagine if you had spent all those year's you spent watching TV and reading about celebrities who live in a country you more than likely won't ever visit in your life time, just imagine if you spent even a quarter of that time tring to help your own financial future, where in god's name would you be today??

SPARTN

:viking: