Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

The Abbott Government

Jump to new
sptrawler said:
It was o.k to do it under the guise of a wages accord, when Hawke and Keating were in.

Why is it so outragous when the Coalition want to do it?
Click to expand...

Maybe because Hawke and Keating achieved wage restraint by consultation, Abbott wants it done by imposition.
 
sptrawler said:
And it always helps, when you have future Government ministers, deciding what is best for the worker.lol

I'm sure they had the workers interest at heart.:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

yeah that too ... you must have read the piece in the Courier Mail today about how we should admire PMs regardless of their degree of dickheadedness. :D Of course it was written to make us feel ashamed that some rednecks booed his LNP holiness Tony.
 
Tisme said:
yeah that too ... you must have read the piece in the Courier Mail today about how we should admire PMs regardless of their degree of dickheadedness. :D Of course it was written to make us feel ashamed that some rednecks booed his LNP holiness Tony.
Click to expand...

No I haven't read the Courier Mail, can't get access and not much in it to interest a sandgroper.

Getting back to the issue, if Abbott had control of the unions and could bring about a reduction of 18% in wages.
We wouldn't have a problem now.

There is nothing different with Abbott saying payrises should reflect inflation, or Hawke bringing in wage indexation which tied wage rises to inflation, which by the way they never matched.

The only difference being, the reporters association never worried about it and the union reps worked hand in glove with the Labor, to screw over the workers.

Any talk of a wildcat paystrike, was quickly quelled, by the union saying they would not back it, therefore the workers faced the prospect of civil action.

Also lets not forget the airline pilots and their push for a pay rise, Hawke and Keating did a real number on them.

But hey Abbott is real nasty lol. Hawke screwed over the workers and gets cheered.lol

I think people have short and very selective memories, or are blinded by their unwavering loyalty.

I personally don't give a rats behind who is in, just that they try and do the best for Australia.
 
sptrawler said:
.

I personally don't give a rats behind who is in, just that they try and do the best for Australia.
Click to expand...

Although I agree, I would need to caveat that the best would be my interpretation, which might run counter to others, the ABC and fabians (did I leave any clichés out?). :cool:
 
noco said:
Umm, didn't Howard come after Hawke?
Click to expand...

I think he is refering to Howard as treasurer, a bit selective, Howard had to sort out Gough's mess.lol

Now that was a real mess.

But from a workers point of view it wasn't bad, wages exploded. I was an apprentice at the time and the wage more than doubled in three years.
The downside, inflation took of to high teens and unemplyment followed it. Ah the good old days.
 
Tisme said:
Although I agree, I would need to caveat that the best would be my interpretation, which might run counter to others, the ABC and fabians (did I leave any clichés out?). :cool:
Click to expand...

That's true, but having lived in pre mineral boom Australia, and through both booms.
It kind of gives you an understanding of how bad it can get, unless the excesses are reigned in.

Sunshine and lollipops, can soon turn to thunderclouds and $hit butties.:D
 
dutchie said:
Time you took some history lessons

Hawke 1983 - 1991
Keating 1991 - 1996
Howard 1996 - 2007

umm doh
Click to expand...

Want another crack as repealing that? :D

Yes John Howard left a budget mess, unprecedented mismanagement it twas. It's one of the reasons Hawke was voted in.

He (Howard) was so good he managed double digit unemployment, double digit inflation, double digit interest rates all at the same time...that's three balls in the air simultaneously!!!! No one ever managed that feat before or since.

He left the budget deficit at 3.3% after inheriting 0.3% from Whitlam and it took the Labor years to get it down to 1% by 1997.

This kinda stuff must hurt one eyed people n'est pas?:D

ummm doh!

And I don't have a soft spot for Labor ...go figure.
 
sptrawler said:
That's true, but having lived in pre mineral boom Australia, and through both booms.
It kind of gives you an understanding of how bad it can get, unless the excesses are reigned in.

Sunshine and lollipops, can soon turn to thunderclouds and $hit butties.:D
Click to expand...

Yes the rubber band is going to hurt when it snaps back.

I notice Hockey has figured out how to solve the problem = de-educate the population, make them less knowledgeable and therefore cheaper to hire as paper shufflers in the PS:-

"We’ll find any way we can to take the money out of the universities,” Hockey told the Australian Financial Review on Tuesday.
 
sptrawler said:
Also lets not forget the airline pilots and their push for a pay rise, Hawke and Keating did a real number on them.

But hey Abbott is real nasty lol. Hawke screwed over the workers and gets cheered.lol

I think people have short and very selective memories, or are blinded by their unwavering loyalty.

I personally don't give a rats behind who is in, just that they try and do the best for Australia.
Click to expand...

There was a wage explosion when Hawke was elected, these days people are more restrained which is why they deserve to be compensated for their patience.

And yes, Abbott is real nasty, like bringing in self increasing taxes like the fuel excise indexation which will constantly erode the paypackets and increase itself due to the inflation it has helped to cause.
 
Fabians still spending to much when will they stop

Stephen Koukoulas



Rising joblessness and falling iron ore prices spell trouble for Joe Hockey

The economy is not strong enough to withstand the spending cuts and tax hikes to secure the treasurer’s promised surplus


Joe Hockey’s commitment at the National Press Club in 2012 that “we will achieve a surplus in our first year in office and we will achieve a surplus for every year of our first term” is long gone.

It is a distant memory with the outlook for the budget deficit this year, and in the next two years, much wider under the stewardship of the treasurer than the one he inherited from the Labor government in September 2013. What’s more, the path to budget surplus is at least two years behind what Labor was budgeting for when it framed its policy outlook ahead of the 2013 election.
Click to expand...

http://www.theguardian.com/commenti...s-falling-commodity-prices-trouble-joe-hockey
 
Top