The Australian Greens party

[sinner]

Re: The Greens - The New Radical Socialists

A: So they can 'affect an economy' but not 'control an economy'. I'm not sure where you'd draw a dividing line between the two.

B: No, but they too have a significant effect, viz the multiple and rapid interest rate cuts to prevent economic stress. This was arguably as important or more important than the government's much lauded stimulus.

A, meet B.

6 panic interest rate cuts it was Julia, the first one happened in an "emergency meeting" 2 days before the scheduled rate meeting. Ratifies my point exactly though. A month before they were raising rates to supposedly combat inflation and then overnight it switched to combatting deflation. Therein is the difference between influence and control. The RBA does not control rates, it is beholden to global bond markets just like every other Central Bank. Governments and banks are beholden to international markets whether they like it (or deny it!) or not. They can at best introduce temporary inefficiencies to the system which will be rectified by supply/demand forces eventually anyway. See dot-com bubble as perfect example.

I was simply expressing my disquiet about the Greens ever having any significant say in how taxpayer dollars are spent and gave my reasons.

Yet you don't mind that Liberals or Labor get a significant say in how to spend our tax money? Like the billions that goes to Indonesia for counter terrorism, so they have a vested interest in keeping terrorists around else the money dries up? Or the billions in totally ineffectual subsidies given to companies like Toyota supposedly so they will stick around in our country?

I would like to see huge portions of the Australian Defence Force totally disbanded (or at the very least our overseas exposure reduced to a much less costly level), and that money saved placed in Indigenous education, health and homelessness. Yet Labor and Liberal get a significant say against this.

I'm sorry you feel I was patronising you. That wasn't my intention. Probably I indulged in a bit of hyperbole when describing life under the Greens, but that just reflects my fears about them.

Considering the Greens have yet to be in Federal power ever, what exactly are your fears founded on, other than the typical hyperbole above? Certainly not on a historical example. Certainly the hyperbole above does not reflect the policy documents from the greens that I have read.

I stand by my earlier comment that many of those will vote Greens as a protest against the two main parties will do so in ignorance of the potential ramifications of the Greens having the balance of power.

I stand by my earlier comment that those who continue to vote LiberalLabor or LaborLiberal are perpetuating the status quo, wherein big business runs the country for a profit and little guy is just a demographic to be manipulated once every 4 years.

One scenario I heard put up today was the Greens getting the Melbourne seat that Lindsay Tanner is vacating, giving them their first representation in the House of Reps. Not a heartwarming thought. There has been also suggestions of a hung parliament which would need one side or the other to have the support of the three Independents to govern.

I would be just as happy for Independents to have the balance of power as the Greens. If the Greens win in Melbourne it will be Labors own fault and they will have deserved it.

Does anyone know anything much about any of these three? I'm only familiar with Bob Katter, who, though a bit unusual, is reasonably sensible about many things. Seeing Tony Windsor interviewed, he seemed thoughtful and considered. Don't know anything about the other bloke.

Other bloke is a National Party blacksheep
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rob_Oakeshott

Also part of the re-established Parliamentarians Amnesty International Group, which I view as a good thing.

I'm in total agreement with you here.

Re Senate voting: I'd guess most people vote above the line because of the huge number of candidates standing most of whom we have no clue about.

Please see the above website "belowtheline", very useful.

 

[Calliope]

Re: The Greens - The New Radical Socialists

Rudd heads to Melbourne to head off the Green plague. Rudd is appealing to "working families" and the homeless, while Brown has more appeal for the wealthy and the indolent.

Mr Rudd accompanied Ms Bowtell as they met with the homeless, a constituency he embraced as a priority when Labor won government in November 2007.

But the seat, which was once dominated by blue-collar battlers in public housing estates, has been transformed as property values soar.

Labor insiders fear the Greens will sneak over the line in this former heartland on the city's fringe where increasing numbers of well educated and comfortably off voters can afford to embrace socially progressive policies such as climate change, gay marriage and the fate of asylum-seekers

(my bolds)

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...-head-off-greens/story-fn59niix-1225907498599

 

[Mofra]

Re: The Greens - The New Radical Socialists

A person gets judged by the company they keep.

That will make it difficult to pidgeon hole those of us that actually have the ability to mix with a wide range of people

 

[nioka]

Re: The Greens - The New Radical Socialists

That will make it difficult to pidgeon hole those of us that actually have the ability to mix with a wide range of people

Not necessarily. I judge someone like that as broadminded and definitely not one eyed. I'd like to think that I have done just that over a lifetime and continue to do so.

 

[Smurf1976]

Re: The Greens - The New Radical Socialists

I'm not gay but every time I hear the gay marriage issue mentioned, it does push me toward voting Green.

There's simply no excuse for continuing the hatred and discrimination against minorities that seems to be dominating this election campaign. Nor is there any excuse for allowing the church to hold influence over Australian politics.

Much as I'm not keen on socialists, there's no way I could vote Liberal this election whilst they remain stuck in the 1850's.

 

[drsmith]

Re: The Greens - The New Radical Socialists

I would argue the opposite - fear and ignorance is the modus operandi for political powerbrokers in the new era (especially the far right).

More so the Greens I feel.

Where's the forecasts of the budget/economic impact of their ideals ?

 

[springhill]

Re: The Greens - The New Radical Socialists

I'm not gay but every time I hear the gay marriage issue mentioned, it does push me toward voting Green.

There's simply no excuse for continuing the hatred and discrimination against minorities that seems to be dominating this election campaign. Nor is there any excuse for allowing the church to hold influence over Australian politics.

Much as I'm not keen on socialists, there's no way I could vote Liberal this election whilst they remain stuck in the 1850's.

Smurf, i don't think there is hatred and discrimination against minorities in this election, just policies to remind minorities that they are in fact minorities. After all isn't an election decided on majority vote, so why pander to minorities? In that area i think we have gone too far.

The church doesn't hold influence over Australian politics, i think you are putting the cart before the horse. Policies are a reflection of our society and where it is heading. Originally our society was formed based on Christian values, and from there policies evolved to suit our societal needs. Hence they were Christian value based.

You advocate gay marriage, which is inheritantly non-Christian. What next Sharia Law? All things progress to a line which should not be crossed, i think we are at that point now. Time to stop before we become a society that is unrecognisable to people from a generation preceeding ours.

 

[bellenuit]

Re: The Greens - The New Radical Socialists

You advocate gay marriage, which is inheritantly non-Christian. What next Sharia Law?

It seems the only people who want to marry nowadays are gays and priests....

 

[Julia]

Re: The Greens - The New Radical Socialists

The problem is the fact that they are not educated beyond that university degree. In fact a lot of them are still there or are dropouts and didn't even get that education completed. It is a harder world out there than it is in a sheltered university campas. Give most of them another 10 or 20 years real education and they will end up being useless like their idol or change their attitude.

I can relate to what you're saying here, Nioka, but think it applies to a pretty small minority of people who only feel secure within the cloisters of academia.
If they were forced to go and look for a job in the real world, perhaps some of their views would change, but some would be reinforced, e.g. the evil inequities of the capitalist system.

lol gotta love the stereotyping going on in this thread

Prawn, stereotypes are like cliches: They are born from essential truth.

You don't want to know how many Liberals and Labor members have been party hacks all their lives and never worked a normal job then Nioka.
I know some. One labor, one Liberal. i wouldn't let them run a toy electric train set much less the country.

Quite true, and we can see many examples of this in government. But at least they're earning a living of sorts and not just existing on various academic grants ad infinitum.
At the same time, I'm being a bit hypocritical here, because I'd hate to see a society without a strong academic focus.

A, meet B.

6 panic interest rate cuts it was Julia, the first one happened in an "emergency meeting" 2 days before the scheduled rate meeting. Ratifies my point exactly though. A month before they were raising rates to supposedly combat inflation and then overnight it switched to combatting deflation.

What? Can you outline where the RBA decided to 'combat deflation'?

Yet you don't mind that Liberals or Labor get a significant say in how to spend our tax money? Like the billions that goes to Indonesia for counter terrorism, so they have a vested interest in keeping terrorists around else the money dries up? Or the billions in totally ineffectual subsidies given to companies like Toyota supposedly so they will stick around in our country?

Where have I ever said that I am happy with Liberal or Labor spending our tax dollars like this? You are extrapolating from my nervousness about the Greens that I am ipso facto entirely thrilled about everything ever done by Liberal or Labor. I have repeatedly made clear that I'm very unhappy about both of them, and regard my choice at the ballot box tomorrow as one which represents the least damaging, absolutely not the party which I feel offers any genuine hope for the future of Australians.
So kindly don't misinterpret what I've said or put words into my mouth.

I would like to see huge portions of the Australian Defence Force totally disbanded (or at the very least our overseas exposure reduced to a much less costly level), and that money saved placed in Indigenous education, health and homelessness. Yet Labor and Liberal get a significant say against this.

I often feel the same way, but I honestly don't know what sort of defence forces are really required for Australia, so can't comment in any intelligent way. Re funds for indigenous interests, absolutely if we could see any positive outcomes from the very considerable outlay in that direction so far.
I'd be more than interested if you can show us where financial outlay has brought about definitive positive outcomes.

I'd happily hand over the entire indigenous spending to Noel Pearson who seems to understand his people in an objective and non-romantic way.
He is against the continuation of passive welfare which he feels is poisoning aboriginal people. I agree, and would like to see his ideas applied to welfare across Australia, not just limited to indigenous people.

Considering the Greens have yet to be in Federal power ever, what exactly are your fears founded on, other than the typical hyperbole above? Certainly not on a historical example. Certainly the hyperbole above does not reflect the policy documents from the greens that I have read.

Oh dear, sinner, give me a break! How can anyone produce an historical example of something which has never happened.
We can only anticipate what the Greens will want when they have the balance of power based on their policies and their current rhetoric, the latter including such phrases as "when we are in charge.......".

I stand by my earlier comment that those who continue to vote LiberalLabor or LaborLiberal are perpetuating the status quo, wherein big business runs the country for a profit and little guy is just a demographic to be manipulated once every 4 years.

True enough, no question. It's a sad thing that most of us will vote for what we consider the least worst option, on the basis of no plausible alternatives.

I would be just as happy for Independents to have the balance of power as the Greens. If the Greens win in Melbourne it will be Labors own fault and they will have deserved it.

So you are here confirming that you will vote Greens not at all out of any conviction about them and their policies, but simply as a protest against the two major parties.
This is what I'm unhappy about.

Pity the Democrats imploded. They once would have filled the slot you're looking for, if I'm understanding you correctly, but lacked the extreme, religious zealotry that attaches to the Greens.

More so the Greens I feel.

Where's the forecasts of the budget/economic impact of their ideals ?

I second this question. It's something the Greens fans refuse to address.

 

[gav]

Re: The Greens - The New Radical Socialists

If there was a truely capitalist party in favour of one flat tax and no restrictions on anything else (save for basic human rights), no lobbyists, no spin, no industries supported or not allowed, no layers of government etc etc A truely laisse faire party I would vote for it in a flash. But there isn't so i can't

Prawn, see Choice1's post:

I just did a quick look through all the registered political parties and it seems the Liberal democratic party fits nearly all of my views on Australia.

http://www.ldp.org.au/

In the same respect my vote may be better served with the coalition to stop the LaborSocialistGreens pushing policies down our throat.

 

[gav]

Re: The Greens - The New Radical Socialists

If you go to a university now days you'll be swamped by the socialist trying to push their magazines on you and posters saying 'CLOSE ALL DETENTION CENTRES, STOP THE RACISM' or 'Why Marxism works'... Yes I am the guy who argues with the people who approach me. It's fun to give them complex questions until you realise their whole opinion is summarised in the article they are handing out and that they have no original thoughts on the matter.

I am so glad I never went to uni...

 

[springhill]

Re: The Greens - The New Radical Socialists

I stand by my earlier comment that those who continue to vote LiberalLabor or LaborLiberal are perpetuating the status quo, wherein big business runs the country for a profit and little guy is just a demographic to be manipulated once every 4 years.

sinner, hate to intrude on the dialogue between yourself and Julia it's excellent reading, but just a small bone of contention. Yes, big business do run the country for a profit, but most of the big companies are publicly listed entities. The public is not merely a drone population, we ourselves, have the ability through investment to make our own money from these big businesses, hence why this forum exists in the first place. I have no problem with the status quo.

 

[drsmith]

Re: The Greens - The New Radical Socialists

http://www.ldp.org.au/

Sensible and simple income tax policy.

From a political standpoint though, some compromise may be required to gain mainstream support. A sudden reduction in benefits from the poorest to fund tax cuts higher up the scale though may be a difficult concept to sell.

Perhaps a tax rate of 35% on incomes above $30k with welfare cutting in at the same rate for incomes below that amount. This would in effect be a middle ground between their current proposal and Henry's proposed income tax rates.

 

[gav]

Re: The Greens - The New Radical Socialists

http://www.ldp.org.au/

Sensible and simple income tax policy.

From a political standpoint though, some compromise may be required to gain mainstream support. A sudden reduction in benefits from the poorest to fund tax cuts higher up the scale though may be a difficult concept to sell.

Perhaps a tax rate of 35% on incomes above $30k with welfare cutting in at the same rate for incomes below that amount. This would in effect be a middle ground between their current proposal and Henry's proposed income tax rates.

This is who I'll be voting for.

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

Re: The Greens - The New Radical Socialists

I myself have never met a Green. What do they look like?

gg

 

[Calliope]

Re: The Greens - The New Radical Socialists

I myself have never met a Green. What do they look like?

gg

What! You described them on your "Nationalise the ABC" thread.

 

[Smurf1976]

Re: The Greens - The New Radical Socialists

You advocate gay marriage, which is inheritantly non-Christian.

I am not necessarily advocating gay marriage. What I am against however is the constant use of that particular issue as a form of scare campaign for purely political purposes. A classic case of victimising a minority in order to appeal to the mob.

Nowhere have I seen a truly rational debate on the subject. It simply ends up as a scare campaign - vote for x and they'll legalise gay marriage. The situation is very similar with the asylum seeker and climate change issues which have been dominant themes this election. Very little rational debate, just a lot of dubious claims and a scare campaign.

As for the influence of religion in general, I would agree that it is an unproven point but there are many who suggest that Liberal leader Tony Abbott may indeed be influenced by his religious beliefs should he become PM. I may well be wrong, but indications are that he may turn out to be the stereotypical anti-abortion, anti-gay, no sex before marriage type. Fair enough if he chooses to follow that personally, but it is very clear that a large portion of the Australian population doesn't agree.

In short, I'm simply aginst the incitement of fear and hatred based on race, physical characteristics, gender and the like. The world has seen more than enough of that over the years and it's time to move on.

 

[Calliope]

Re: The Greens - The New Radical Socialists

I am not necessarily advocating gay marriage. What I am against however is the constant use of that particular issue as a form of scare campaign for purely political purposes. A classic case of victimising a minority in order to appeal to the mob.

Who is doing the victimising? And what is the "mob"?

What mob is this appealing to?

I may well be wrong, but indications are that he may turn out to be the stereotypical anti-abortion, anti-gay, no sex before marriage type

 

[noco]

Re: The Greens - The New Radical Socialists

I myself have never met a Green. What do they look like?

gg

GG they are green outside and red inside and offer plenty of verbal diarrhoea. They will often cause nausea if you swallow too much of their contents, particualrly relating to too much solar exposure as it can turn the inside quite vile.
Avoid them at all costs if you prefer the better side life.

 

[IFocus]

Re: The Greens - The New Radical Socialists

I am not necessarily advocating gay marriage. What I am against however is the constant use of that particular issue as a form of scare campaign for purely political purposes. A classic case of victimising a minority in order to appeal to the mob.

Nowhere have I seen a truly rational debate on the subject. It simply ends up as a scare campaign - vote for x and they'll legalise gay marriage. The situation is very similar with the asylum seeker and climate change issues which have been dominant themes this election. Very little rational debate, just a lot of dubious claims and a scare campaign.

As for the influence of religion in general, I would agree that it is an unproven point but there are many who suggest that Liberal leader Tony Abbott may indeed be influenced by his religious beliefs should he become PM. I may well be wrong, but indications are that he may turn out to be the stereotypical anti-abortion, anti-gay, no sex before marriage type. Fair enough if he chooses to follow that personally, but it is very clear that a large portion of the Australian population doesn't agree.

In short, I'm simply aginst the incitement of fear and hatred based on race, physical characteristics, gender and the like. The world has seen more than enough of that over the years and it's time to move on.

I would vote for you Smurf nice post