Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

The Abbott Government

Jump to new
Logique said:
I wonder what Professor Triggs is in it for? Wiki says she was born in 1945, making her 70 years old. Clinging tenaciously to her public sector sinecure or 'suitable alternative'.
Click to expand...

Not everyone wants to play lawn bowls.

She may see herself as the praetorian guard, protecting the organisation against patently partisan political seat stacking (e.g. Tim the "Freedom Commissioner" Wilson). This appears to be an LNP Greek Tragedy playing out, to me.
 
SirRumpole said:
Some of Labor's policies are good, but if they keep the stupid rule that you an only be a union member to belong to the party, that lets me out and a lot of other people as well.

Labor has to modernise itself and prove that they are not just a union party , as the Libs have to prove that they are not just a big business party. Neither has done so to my satisfaction yet.
Click to expand...

Orr posted a link in the Abbott is Gorne thread to an interesting article which might find a better context here:

orr said:
The attached link will test the attention span, it a few thousand words, of one or maybe two of the contributors to this thread, but for those capable of digesting the ideas presented in 'Fixing Politics', I'd be interested in critiques.

http://www.themonthly.com.au/issue/...flannery-and-catriona-wallace/fixing-politics
Click to expand...

I've read it but still thinking about it. Might read it a second time before daring to comment. It's definitely interesting.
 
Tisme said:
Not everyone wants to play lawn bowls.

She may see herself as the praetorian guard, protecting the organisation against patently partisan political seat stacking (e.g. Tim the "Freedom Commissioner" Wilson). This appears to be an LNP Greek Tragedy playing out, to me.
Click to expand...

Maybe she intends to fulfill Joe Hockey's prediction of living to 150 and therefore wants to top up her pension a bit more.

PS: that aside $500k a year is a pretty good inducement not to take up lawn bowls.
 
Logique said:
I too doubt that Malcolm Turnbull is in it for the money. But his moment may have come and gone.

I wonder what Professor Triggs is in it for? Wiki says she was born in 1945, making her 70 years old.

Of course we've diagnosed this all wrong, Clementine Ford has the answer.
Click to expand...

Not sure if Tbull panicked when he saw that Abbott put in a good week and thought his leadership aspirations would be over as time went by. But he put a lot of liberal voters offside with his speech. His political timing is still out which is a shame.

Hey I love work and would go till 80 if the body held out.

That fairfax would give that twit Clementine Ford speaks volumes.
 
Logique said:
I too doubt that Malcolm Turnbull is in it for the money. But his moment may have come and gone. Tony Abbott looked much better this week, and Scott Morrison is doing splendidly. Caucus need to think long and hard before reinstalling the dear chap.
Click to expand...


Tink said:
Well said, Logique.
Click to expand...
+1. (Though, of course, according to the ABC, Mr Abbott has had a terrible week.)

Malcolm was quick to jump on the ABC and discredit Abbott and co, regarding Triggs.
Click to expand...
He has form in this regard. When the referendum on the republic failed, Mr Turnbull said of John Howard:

"History will remember him for one thing. He was the prime minister who broke this nation's heart."

He also declared that " 'I will not lead a party that is not as committed to effective action on climate change as I am"

It does feel like the media is pushing this.
Click to expand...
Certainly does. Presumably for the same reason Labor voters want Mr Turnbull, ie his world view aligns with theirs.
 
SirRumpole said:
Continual criticism of Labor is pointless,....... .
Click to expand...

No its not, it's great fun.

I figure that since they were pathetic for six long years then they deserve to be continuously criticised for six years.

So they have another 4 1/2 years or so to go. Even longer if they persist with previously failed policies (carbon tax, not stopping the boats etc.)
 
I disagree with one statement from the West Australian, the longer this goes, the stronger the position for MT imo.

All the far right dragging out quotes about climate change etc. just don't get it. To win elections you have to win the middle ground. Climate change is an unfortunate truth. Hottest year ever last year and people are worried about it. people are worried as to whether their kids can go to Uni if they do well at school, people are worrying about the death of manufacturing.

But in the end as quoted by an MP to Mark Kenny of the Age it is simple.
"There is a motive problem with voters"
"Any change would need to convince voters that our intentions are sound, and are not ideological"

Hear Hear. Dinosaurs get out of the way or NSW will fall next.
 
dutchie said:
No its not, it's great fun.

I figure that since they were pathetic for six long years then they deserve to be continuously criticised for six years.

So they have another 4 1/2 years or so to go. Even longer if they persist with previously failed policies (carbon tax, not stopping the boats etc.)
Click to expand...

See how much fun it is when the Libs turn out to be a one term government.

Campbell who ?
 
SirRumpole said:
See how much fun it is when the Libs turn out to be a one term government.

Campbell who ?
Click to expand...

You might be right. They will get their share of criticism (from me) too if they are as hopeless as Labor was.

For Australia's sake I hope your wrong. We won't survive another term of current Labor.
 
Knobby22 said:
All the far right dragging out quotes about climate change etc. just don't get it. To win elections you have to win the middle ground. Climate change is an unfortunate truth. Hottest year ever last year and people are worried about it.
Click to expand...
I think I'm the only one who has 'dragged out quotes about climate change'. It was to illustrate how distant Malcolm Turnbull was from his colleagues at the time, a situation that I don't believe will have changed. He had so little sense of unity with his party that he was prepared to cross the floor to vote with Labor.

Is there any reason to think that he would not be similarly autocratic when leader again?
Mr Turnbull is of the 'born to rule' class.

And, Knobby, I don't think I'm aligned with the 'far Right': plenty of people who take no stand on AGW are simply against Australia disadvantaging herself as occurred when we had a carbon tax that was not replicated across the world.

If eventually global agreement is reached in which participation does not unfairly disadvantage any single country, objections to either a carbon tax or an ETS would, imo, largely disappear.
 
When the choice is between certain defeat and MT the Liberals will choose the latter. Meanwhile Dr Smith etc. will be to Abbott what Anne Summers is to Gillard.
 
Headlines from The Age newspaper today

- Abbott's leadership enters the death zone
- The Death Stare Strikes Back
- 'Abbott should go': ex News boss
- Llama chase covered live on US TV

Memo to The Age: Could we please have more stories about llamas?
 
Julia said:
I think I'm the only one who has 'dragged out quotes about climate change'. It was to illustrate how distant Malcolm Turnbull was from his colleagues at the time, a situation that I don't believe will have changed. He had so little sense of unity with his party that he was prepared to cross the floor to vote with Labor.
Click to expand...

And how far distant some in the Coalition are from the public?
Why is it in that in Britain the Conservatives are doing something about emissions etc. while we will be seeking to stop agreement at the conference?
Some in the party align themselves with the Republicans who are libertarians. As does that Liberal Democrat guy. I completely along with many of the public reject this philosophy.

If they want to be voted back in they better act like Conservatives.
 
If there is a spill next week, I believe the rank outsider Scott Morrison will throw his hat in the ring with good prospects of winning with perhaps Turnbull as Treasurer....If that does happen, I can't see Tony Abbott staying in politics too much longer.
 
Just watching Tony now being interviewed in NZ.

"We are gerring on with the job" nods the head

"we are doing what we were elected to do" looks around, drops lip

"yeh that's what we are doing, ballancing the budget and getting jobs for the people"

But there is absolutely no content, HOW, no detail on companies spoken to and plans made with them to enhance production, or can we work together to do this(an actual project) or should we look at protection against overseas competition for this. No, he has no idea like previous leaders. And that includes the last two of labour, they had content, even if it was not what you wanted, they were at least saying somerhing that we could engage with and discuss.
 
Julia said:
I don't think I'm aligned with the 'far Right': plenty of people who take no stand on AGW are simply against Australia disadvantaging herself as occurred when we had a carbon tax that was not replicated across the world.

If eventually global agreement is reached in which participation does not unfairly disadvantage any single country, objections to either a carbon tax or an ETS would, imo, largely disappear.
Click to expand...

I consider myself to be in that category. Politically, I've slowly drifted away from the Right over the years as I've seen serious flaws in the rationality of such thinking. I'd describe myself as slightly to the Left these days although I do see a need for proper financial management.

But I'm against an Australia-only carbon tax for the simple reason that it doesn't well serve any particular outcome. It's not particularly effective at reducing emissions, it simply aids their offshoring rather than removal as such, and it harms those needing employment. Socially, the cost is too high for what it achieves in my view.

Something I've never understood is the apparent linkage between unrelated issues. It seems to be that to the Right we've got religion, good financial management, an incredible faith in coal and support for corporate welfare. To the Left we've got still some support for the existence of a god, overspending, support for clean energy and support for human welfare.

So who is someone who doesn't believe there's any such thing as a god, who supports responsible financial management, supports a shift to sustainability and believes welfare should be there for those actually in need vote for? I'd expect that's a fairly common line of thinking, and yet it's not well supported by any of the major parties.

Back to Tony Abbott, like many I'm just over the whole thing. It's like any situation where something is clearly "over" and is just being prolonged for the sake of it. Failing relationships, animals suffering in pain, old cars falling apart, whatever. In most situations the best thing to do is put an end to it once the point of no return has passed rather than delaying the inevitable.:2twocents
 
But I'm against an Australia-only carbon tax for the simple reason that it doesn't well serve any particular outcome. It's not particularly effective at reducing emissions, it simply aids their offshoring rather than removal as such, and it harms those needing employment. Socially, the cost is too high for what it achieves in my view.
Click to expand...

Fair enough , but some of the revenue went into clean energy subsidies which reduced the load on the grid and reduced the need for building more expensive power stations.

A lot more of the energy infrastructure is on people's roofs and less in wasteful coal powered stations due to the carbon tax.

Why is that a high social cost ?
 
Top