The Albanese government

[sptrawler]

Well time will tell how it all pans out, but something has to happen to slow the slide, ATM it seems to be accelerating.
Pandering to small segments of the economy, while the large middle sector crashes and burns, isn't going to work either.
When all is said and done, nothing is happening, other than a lot of rhetoric on all fronts.

 

[SirRumpole]

Well time will tell how it all pans out, but something has to happen to slow the slide, ATM it seems to be accelerating.
Pandering to small segments of the economy, while the large middle sector crashes and burns, isn't going to work either.
When all is said and done, nothing is happening, other than a lot of rhetoric on all fronts.

Absolutely, it's the middle class that always swings elections, trouble is the major parties are aligned with either unions or business, both don't necessarily have the interests of the consumers in mind.

 

[qldfrog]

That is going to need re-evaluation of globalisation, the outsourcing economy, secure employment, reduced immigration, better education, higher tariffs and much more besides.

(Snip)

Interesting that Trump had his chance too and didn't do a lot that was meaningful.

Really: Trump didn't do a lot?
Tariff on China checked,
reduced immigration checked as much as the rabids let him, insourcing, etc
He honestly did as much as possible, but remember he should have been impeached as not fit to be president and they then got Biden.
The democrats were relentless..and will be again
He tried to aim in the right direction
A real question in the us is,: who has the power, who is actually in charge..i now believe it's not the president nor the representatives..

 

[sptrawler]

Absolutely, it's the middle class that always swings elections, trouble is the major parties are aligned with either unions or business, both don't necessarily have the interests of the consumers in mind.

The problem is both parties are aligned with business and neither party takes responsibility for how it spends taxpayers money, meanwhile the worker is getting fed up, they are working to house everyone else while they cant afford to buy one themselves.

So basically they go to work to provide taxes for the Govt to throw around and then if the worker has any left they have to use that to pay for what the non worker gets for free.

Eventually the Govt will run out of other peoples money to give away, then we turn into another Argentina, some laugh but we are steadily running out of things to trade and support our economy.

Interesting times, the writing is on the wall IMO and it wont be long before everyone can see it. Lol

 

[Smurf1976]

A future for their grandkids, that has opportunities similar to what they had, where if you worked and saved there was a possibility to get ahead.

A lot of this in my view comes down to the parliament having a basic flaw in terms of who's there in the first place. We'd benefit enormously by having a lot more who meet at least one of these criteria:

Has run a successful business.

Has worked in the public service in a front line role that has no say in policy.

A background in any STEM career, having worked in that profession for at least a decade prior to entering politics.

Trades, military, emergency services, utilities, farmers and other practical "hands on" people doing work that must be done there and then no matter what the circumstances.

Any job that involves being on-call 24 hours per day with prompt response and fitness for immediate work mandatory.

Jobs where failure can't be hidden and bring serious consequences.

Anything that involves working at 3am.

Jobs where physical danger is inherent and can only be managed, not eliminated.

Because any of those teaches you things that have far broader application. They teach you things that can't be learned without first hand experience. Skills and knowledge that are clearly lacking among present politicians since, if they did have those skills, they just wouldn't have made the mistakes they have.

One of the key points being the unionists and lawyers will say those circumstances shouldn't exist. They'll say nobody should be on-call 24 hours per day, that nobody should be in danger, that nobody should work outside in a storm, that failure must be management's fault, and so on, in doing so displaying their ignorance of the reality faced by much of the population which is my point.

 

[PZ99]

If you work and save you can get ahead in Australia even today. That has never changed. Come and work in Western Sydney if ya'll don't believe me

 

[wayneL]

A lot of this in my view comes down to the parliament having a basic flaw in terms of who's there in the first place. We'd benefit enormously by having a lot more who meet at least one of these criteria:

Has run a successful business.

Has worked in the public service in a front line role that has no say in policy.

A background in any STEM career, having worked in that profession for at least a decade prior to entering politics.

Trades, military, emergency services, utilities, farmers and other practical "hands on" people doing work that must be done there and then no matter what the circumstances.

Any job that involves being on-call 24 hours per day with prompt response and fitness for immediate work mandatory.

Jobs where failure can't be hidden and bring serious consequences.

Anything that involves working at 3am.

Jobs where physical danger is inherent and can only be managed, not eliminated.

Because any of those teaches you things that have far broader application. They teach you things that can't be learned without first hand experience. Skills and knowledge that are clearly lacking among present politicians since, if they did have those skills, they just wouldn't have made the mistakes they have.

One of the key points being the unionists and lawyers will say those circumstances shouldn't exist. They'll say nobody should be on-call 24 hours per day, that nobody should be in danger, that nobody should work outside in a storm, that failure must be management's fault, and so on, in doing so displaying their ignorance of the reality faced by much of the population which is my point.

Pragmatism vs ideology

 

[Country Lad]

A lot of this in my view comes down to the parliament having a basic flaw in terms of who's there in the first place. We'd benefit enormously by having a lot more who meet at least one of these criteria:

Yes all those are good criteria instead of many of those we have at the moment - background as a party hack. Rose through the ranks of the various parties, many of them with very little life experience.

The problem is two-fold. Firstly the preselection process of the parties where the dumbbells are selected and secondly the fact that the voting public goes with a particular stooge from whichever party they support. It would be better if the success the Teal had will catch on and votes start going to the individual candidate and not the party.

Was that the proverbial pig that just flew past/

 

[Macquack]

A real question in the us is,: who has the power, who is actually in charge..i now believe it's not the president nor the representatives..

Benjamin Netanyahu

 

[JohnDe]

It all starts here...

I didn’t think that Albanese would be a one term PM, but it’s not looking good at the moment. Maybe you picked it.

Anthony Albanese potentially in breach of ministerial code over Qantas ...​

Push to upgrade freebie Anthony Albanese to corruption watchdog ... Prime Minister received free flight ...​

 

[mullokintyre]

Something else has popped up that may add to the pain for the Albanese government.
It seems that a LNP linked joint venture that was awarded contracts to produce 150 MM shells has been snubbed in favour of French contractor with a bit of dodgy insider trading history.
It follows standard practice in government circles where public servants involved in contract selection end up working at the establishment that wins the contract.
From Evil Murdoch News
Mick

 

[sptrawler]

I wonder if there will be as much criticism by the left of Greg Combet getting the bosses job at the future fund, as there was of Costello getting it.
Probably not IMO.
Hopefully he does as good a job as Costello did and doesn't just make the future fund a Govt project slush funding dept.
Time will tell.

 

[JohnDe]

Something else has popped up that may add to the pain for the Albanese government.
It seems that a LNP linked joint venture that was awarded contracts to produce 150 MM shells has been snubbed in favour of French contractor with a bit of dodgy insider trading history.
It follows standard practice in government circles where public servants involved in contract selection end up working at the establishment that wins the contract.
From Evil Murdoch News
Mick
View attachment 186893
View attachment 186894

And more questions, now about the decision to stop Qatar Airlines.

“Here’s a question Anthony Albanese should answer today – did he or his office ever engage with the Transport Minister or her office on the Qatar flights decision?”​

PM must reveal if he ‘acted on behalf of Qantas’ in Qatar decision

Opposition Senate Leader Simon Birmingham says Anthony Albanese must declare whether he acted “on behalf of Qantas” during the government’s recent decision not to allow more Qatar Airways flights into Australia.

This comes amid mounting pressure on the Prime Minister about his relationship with former Qantas chief executive Alan Joyce. Mr Albanese has repeatedly dodged questions on whether he solicited free flight upgrades in direct communications with Mr Joyce.

“Here’s a question Anthony Albanese should answer today – did he or his office ever engage with the Transport Minister or her office on the Qatar flights decision?” Senator Birmingham told Sky News.

“Did, in fact, he exercise his prime ministerial authority or his office do so on his behalf to interfere to protect Qantas and to ensure that Australian aviation customers were given less choice and greater costs?

“Because that’s what this all comes down to.

“If you’re having a debate about indeed the influence, it is also whether that influence was used and exerted by the Prime Minister in terms of protecting, potentially, Qantas’ interests and he’s never given a straight answer on that. That’s really where he should be pressed to give a direct answer. Did he ever actually act, as Prime Minister, recently on behalf of Qantas?”

 

[SirRumpole]

So when will Dutton explain what he did for Gina Reinhart to earn free flights in her aircraft?

 

[Sean K]

So when will Dutton explain what he did for Gina Reinhart to earn free flights in her aircraft?

Good question. Is it the same situation?

 

[SirRumpole]

Good question. Is it the same situation?

Not quite. If Albo did favours for Qantas, it's a public company that benefits its shareholders( quite a few in this forum I suggest), Gina Reinhart owns a private company and favours to her benefit basically her.

 

[Sean K]

Not quite. If Albo did favours for Qantas, it's a public company that benefits its shareholders( quite a few in this forum I suggest), Gina Reinhart owns a private company and favours to her benefit basically her.

Yeah, also the gray area in that case is did getting upgrades influence government decision making about a public company. eg, Qatar. But, Dutton getting picked up by a private plane could also influence decisions on national policies on resource exploration and extraction - if that's possible - I think it's State controlled.

Has Albo done something different though? Has he (or his staff) gone out of their way to solicit upgrades for he and his family, or is it just a random upgrade initiated by the company?

The Gina situation is different to that in that she has said - I'm sending you a plane. Dutton didn't get an invite to a party and say - send me a plane. Surely.

The way Albo fumbled his way through the presser yesterday trying to explain it was embarrassing. Surely his media staff had tested him on it beforehand.

 

[mullokintyre]

Not quite. If Albo did favours for Qantas, it's a public company that benefits its shareholders( quite a few in this forum I suggest), Gina Reinhart owns a private company and favours to her benefit basically her.

The difference is that the Government made a number of decision favourable to Qantas, and Albanese is accused of lobbying for free upgrades with Qantas when he was Transport minister, and thus directly in charge of the department that controls Qantas main business.
His main sin is that he did not declare these upgrades.
It is also instructive to point out that according to Alson, the Feds spent 80% of their airline travel costs with QANTAS.
I searched for references to Dutton getting free flights from Reinhart, but the only reference I could get was this one from ABC News

It does not say when the flights were taken, so we cannot determine if Dutton was then in charge of anything that may have affected Reinharts business.
And he did declare those flights.
Dutton has held ministerial roles as Minister for Workforce participation, Assistant Treasurer and Minister for Revenue, Minister for Health and Ageing, then Minister for Health and Sport, Minister for Immigration and Border Protection , then minister for home affairs and finally minister for defence in the last coalition government.
It may be possible to create a case where Dutton may have provided some benefit to Reinhart or her companies, but something a little more concrete would need to be supplied.
Mick

 

[SirRumpole]

His main sin is that he did not declare these upgrades.

He says he did declare them, why do you think he did not?

 

[mullokintyre]

He says he did declare them, why do you think he did not?

It was not the declaration about free flights , it was the lobbying for upgrades in private flights that is the issue.
According to the author, these were not declared.
Mick