Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

The Gillard Government

Look at the way she's handling this, big bully, confrontaional, pushing and shoving, there's no other word for it Gillard is a bitch. She handles everything this way, just a smart **** cow really.



http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-02-21/gillard-threatens-to-bypass-states-on-health-funding/4532420

+1
Saw her on ABC news 24 , giving a conference on the Victorian Health issue. She certainly comes across as a nasty piece of work and the way she was laying down the law and issuing threats against the other state governments was far from stately for a PM. If she does get ousted in September she won't go nicely that's for sure.
 
+1
Saw her on ABC news 24 , giving a conference on the Victorian Health issue. She certainly comes across as a nasty piece of work and the way she was laying down the law and issuing threats against the other state governments was far from stately for a PM. If she does get ousted in September she won't go nicely that's for sure.

I think she'll get nastier as the time of her demise draws closer, thing is everyone is onto her now, her old tricks wont work any more.
 
I think she'll get nastier as the time of her demise draws closer, thing is everyone is onto her now, her old tricks wont work any more.

+ 1, but I just cannot see her lasting the distance to the 14th September especially if the polls go against her on the next occassion.

I am sure somthing will break before then.
 
+ 1, but I just cannot see her lasting the distance to the 14th September especially if the polls go against her on the next occassion.

I am sure somthing will break before then.

The question is which of the limp *icks would have the courage to front her. Remember the blubering and tears after the last Rudd attempt to overthrow her.

No they would nead someone with a really nasty streak, with no loyalty, no principles, no charisma and it would help if the person didn't mind using bad language when stabbing their leader in the back.
There's only two that come to mind and one doesn't count. :D
 
Actually he is not, he is one of the harder working politicians on policy in the lower house and talks a lot of sense.

Windsor is one of the traitors who put Gillard into power after she lost the election. No wonder you lefties sing his praises.
I live just a couple of hours down the road from his New England electorate. Some of my contacts in that area are less impressed than you are by his political performance – they tell me that his vote will substantially decline at the next election, even if he manages to hold on to his seat.



Unlikely given Labor has held spending growth well below Howards government and raised taxes less .
One of the most damning measures of incompetence against this government is the disgraceful waste in how they’ve spent the money. They’ve turned a healthy inherited surplus into a serious deficit. They’ve put our country heavily into debt by recklessly splashing money around on hair-brained schemes such as pink bats, unnecessary and grossly over-priced school buildings, not to mention the many thousands of millions of dollars frittered away on the boat people issue that was entirely of their own making. In spite of all this heavy expenditure, in spite of their new taxes designed to raise more government revenue, we have serious deterioration in education standards, health care, roads etc. And yet people like you keep singing their praises!




No its not massive and it could be lower then you could complain about lack of services once Abbott gets in he will give you every opportunity.
It’s people like you, not me, who are most likely to complain when Abbot is forced to tighten the belt to address the economic mess that Labor will leave him with.



Actually Howard was the one who stopped spending on infrastructure Labor have since increased it.
No, Howard did not stop spending on infrastructure, but like all governments he spent too little money where it was needed most. Just like your hero Gillard has done. It never ceases to amaze me that the regions that produce so much wealth are often sorely neglected when it comes to services and infrastructure. Mining areas in QLD are a good example.....awful roads and a lack of services are the norm in these areas. A modest portion of the scores of billions of dollars wasted by Labor could have made a real difference if it had been redirected to these areas.



States build ports?
Billions of dollars were poured into cash handouts, pink bats, school buildings, and various other ill-considered schemes that produced poor returns on dollars invested. There are dozens of ways in which a significant portion of this money could have been better invested, one of which is by improving port capacity so that coal and iron ore ships don’t have to spend up to a week sitting offshore before they can be loaded.



States are responsible for hospitals ?
600 million dollars of federal health funding earmarked for the states has been withdrawn. The 100 million dollars cut from Queensland's health funding is enough money to employ 2000 nurses. Hospital beds are closing down due to insufficient money to employ staff to look after patients who would otherwise fill those beds. The federal government bears a significant portion of the blame for long hospital waiting lists and a generally inadequate health care system.




Yep give you that one but the Coalition wont stop the boats unless they start sinking them.
Maybe, maybe not. You lefties didn’t think Howard could stop the boats either. Time will tell whether Abbot can do it, assuming he wins government in September. His efforts in that regard will almost certainly be an improvement on the immensely costly boat people debacle that Labor created.




Yep but Abbott will have to cut funding further to meet the surplus requirements.

Yes, Abbot will have to tighten up on expenditure to get on top of the economic mess that Labor will leave him. Just like QLD premier Campbell Newman has had to reduce expenditure to sort out the economic mess created by the Labor government that he ousted.
And you and your lefty red ragger mates will squeal like hell, just like the red raggers are doing in QLD because they lack the mental capacity to comprehend that the first step in solving an economic mess is to cut back on wasteful expenditure.
You can bet your life that Abbot won’t go berserk and waste scores of billions of dollars on hair-brained schemes like Labor has done.
 
The question is which of the limp *icks would have the courage to front her...
That's the state of play SpT. Shorten doesn't seem to have what it takes, he's no Paul Keating. I wonder if the marginal seat ALP members have twigged that they're now considered expendable.

The ship of state is adrift and hemorrhaging cash, one madcap scheme after another. Noblesse oblige? Not troubling the scorer. Just imagine hypothetically, if a GFC II came along now. This can get really bad.
 
SURELY THIS CANNOT BE TRUE!!!!!!!

I wonder how the questioned was asked in the latest Galaxy poll?


http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...d-alp-leadership/story-e6freoof-1226583686587
Let's try asking Galaxy. I have just sent the following email to them:
I would be grateful if you could provide the wording of the question which prompted the result that showed reinstatement of Kevin Rudd would result in a Labor victory at the next election.
Will post the response, if any.

The result does not surprise me at all. This is what I have been alluding to in another thread where some of you seem impatient for a change of leadership for Labor and an early election.
Both you, noco, and drsmith, are clearly wanting a Coalition win. Isn't it surely far safer to go to the election with a Labor leader who is currently rating lower than Mr Abbott, than a martyred ex leader who obviously commands considerable support in the electorate, even if this is just romantically based on the thoroughly unpleasant way he was knifed out of office?

Sometimes the longer view is the more realistic and rational.
 
Let's try asking Galaxy. I have just sent the following email to them:

Will post the response, if any.

The result does not surprise me at all. This is what I have been alluding to in another thread where some of you seem impatient for a change of leadership for Labor and an early election.
Both you, noco, and drsmith, are clearly wanting a Coalition win. Isn't it surely far safer to go to the election with a Labor leader who is currently rating lower than Mr Abbott, than a martyred ex leader who obviously commands considerable support in the electorate, even if this is just romantically based on the thoroughly unpleasant way he was knifed out of office?

Sometimes the longer view is the more realistic and rational.

Julia, I don't think any of us has a say in what will really happen. It is all in the lap of the Gods of caucas and the Trade unions.

So expect the worst and hope for the best.
 
Let's try asking Galaxy. I have just sent the following email to them:
Will post the response, if any.
...Both you, noco, and drsmith, are clearly wanting a Coalition win...Sometimes the longer view is the more realistic and rational.
Go Julia:) Well at least you have brought those twin (as we know) scoundrels Dr Zacchary and Noco into line.
 
The result does not surprise me at all. This is what I have been alluding to in another thread where some of you seem impatient for a change of leadership for Labor and an early election.

Isn't it surely far safer to go to the election with a Labor leader who is currently rating lower than Mr Abbott, than a martyred ex leader who obviously commands considerable support in the electorate, even if this is just romantically based on the thoroughly unpleasant way he was knifed out of office?

Sometimes the longer view is the more realistic and rational.

My thoughts exactly, as I’ve said a number of times before. Even Abbot and his coalition mates have at various times called for a change of leadership in Labor.
That’s pretty silly in my view – they must have short memories if they can’t remember what happened to Labor’s vote after the last leadership change.
Gillard is so much ‘on the nose’ that the sensible thing to do would be to say nothing that will encourage her party to get rid of her.
With Gillard at the helm at the next election there’s a pretty decent chance that Labor will suffer the fate they so richly deserve. Change leadership to Rudd, or pretty much any of the other incompetents in the ALP, and there will be an immediate upsurge in their polling, which just might be enough to get them over the line in September.

My guess is that Rudd is odds on to launch a leadership challenge in the next few months, and will more than likely defeat Gillard.
People must have very short memories if they throw their support behind Rudd. He’s an arrogant bastard, not a team player according to his ALP colleagues, a bloke who is big on grandiose plans but small on common sense and practical ability. As PM he was just as much a disaster as Gillard has been.
It would be amusing to see Swan, Shorten etc trying to work with Rudd, given their strident criticism of him.
 
Agree Bunyip. Rudd started and still supports some of the unwanted policies Gillard continued on with:

- Pricing Carbon

- It was Rudd who abolished the pacific solution leading to an influx of people who may not be genuine refugees.

- It was Rudd who started the massive spending spree in labor
So I find it difficult to believe that the Aussie electorate would be so stupid as to give him the reigns back. Just because he wasn't as bad as Gillard doesn't mean he is competent either.

And when labor have used him yet again, will they knife him again? Pretty much a pump and dump?


The chart below shows clearly what happened to fiscal management when Rudd took over and then the same spending sprees have been continued under Gillard. Would they do this is if it were their own money?
 

Attachments

  • 2013 debt levels.jpg
    2013 debt levels.jpg
    67.6 KB · Views: 14
You can pencil this Queensland poll in as an aberration. Put it down to Qld parochialism. Anyone south of the Tweed is regarded with suspicion. I doubt that the ''good ole boy'' attitude to Rudd would hold up in a real election. He is so obviously a boofheaded pr*ck.
 
Both you, noco, and drsmith, are clearly wanting a Coalition win. Isn't it surely far safer to go to the election with a Labor leader who is currently rating lower than Mr Abbott, than a martyred ex leader who obviously commands considerable support in the electorate, even if this is just romantically based on the thoroughly unpleasant way he was knifed out of office?
With Labor, both the leader and the brand now stink. Another leader, whether it be Kevin Rudd or anyone doesn't change the odour of the brand.

Labor would lose regardless.
 
Question...How would you vote if Kevin Rudd was leader of the Labor Party and Tony Abbott leader of the Liberal Party?

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...-as-labor-leader/story-e6freoof-1226583879412
Thanks, Calliope. I have given up reading the Courier Mail.

You can pencil this Queensland poll in as an aberration. Put it down to Qld parochialism. Anyone south of the Tweed is regarded with suspicion. I doubt that the ''good ole boy'' attitude to Rudd would hold up in a real election. He is so obviously a boofheaded pr*ck.
Agree about the Queensland factor, but he still rates way higher than Gillard in all the national polls.
I would not like to see him reinstated for even a minute.
 
With Labor, both the leader and the brand now stink. Another leader, whether it be Kevin Rudd or anyone doesn't change the odour of the brand.

Labor would lose regardless.
That being said, it would be justice for the electorate for Julia to face our judgement.

I would prefer to see it happen sooner rather than later though.
 
Top