Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

The Gillard Government

Jump to new
IFocus said:
Labor found a weakness in the Coalition and exploited it, this will hurt Abbott and again shows his leadership is not highly respected through out the Liberal parliamentary party....
Click to expand...

A poll in the article below suggests that Abbott is not doing too badly inspite of the negative article from the Courier Mail which reports it. I find it ironical that those who accuse Abbott of so much negativity are actually very negative themselves...:D

...In the latest Galaxy poll conducted for The Courier-Mail, about one in five LNP supporters agree with the proposition that Abbott is negative because "he has nothing constructive to say because he doesn't have any better ideas".
Click to expand...

So, the positive and flip side is that 80% of LNP supporters don't find Abbott too negative. And when Howard was in government, I do remember much negativity from the labor opposition.


Source: http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...-to-abbotts-lead/story-e6frerdf-1226204227064
 
sptrawler said:
Just watched it on the news a bit sad really, the speaker obviously didn't want to step down.
They really are a nasty bunch and I am not being party specific.
Click to expand...
Yes, I listened to the detailed report on "PM" this evening and felt quite sick at the viciousness all round. Really felt for Harry Jenkins who seems to have been respected by both sides for his impartiality.

Mr Abbott, interviewed on 7.30 was full of the moral high ground, but I don't think anyone has any doubt that he'd have done exactly as Labor has if he'd had the chance.

The idea of the grubby Slipper being in charge of the House is quite nauseating.
 
sails said:
Lots of money going in travel. I wonder if they ever consider how much co2 is belched out from the jets they use? And then tell us we should be paying for co2? Doesn't say much for the urgency of the carbon tax, imo.


From the AGE: Rudd tops PM on travel bill league table
Click to expand...

As my grandfather told me "when they get their heads in the trough it is really hard to get them out"
He owned a piggery.
 
It is very obvious from the timing of Harry Jenkins execution that Gillard and her party know more than they are letting on.

Does Gillard already know the outcome of the Craig Thomson saga and is proping up her numbers to stay in power? If he is about to be charged, you can bet your boots Gillard is in the 'know'.

The other problem for her is the Poker Machine saga which Andrew Wilkie is pursueing and which may not pass through parliament. So she could still finish up two short.

Interesting times ahead next year.
 
noco said:
More lies from this Government in attempting to have voters believe the Mining tax will pay for the increased super from 9 - 12 %. The only ones who will benefit will be the Canberra bureauracrats.
Private employers will be paying the extra 3% which will no doubt drive up the cost of living or will result in reduced wages.
Click to expand...
I'd have thought that if you are negotiating a position of employment with a prospective employer, the amount contributed to your super by that employer would simply be taken into consideration as part of your salary package, in the same way as the value of a company car being part of the package e.g.

So I don't see why employers are going to be especially disadvantaged over this increase. Effectively, they just take the appropriate amount out of the salary they intended to offer and switch it into Super. The employee still gets the money eventually.

I'm in favour of the increase to 12% in terms of the country taking responsibility for the aging population and the huge burden of paying for so many people to be on the age pension if they fail to accumulate enough Super to be self funded in retirement.
If that happens, then the taxpayer foots the bill.

Surely better for people to contribute more throughout their career?

My objection is that it's an extension of the nanny state. People should be able to take responsibility for their own retirement plans. But apparently they don't. So compulsory Super is better than placing the burden on successive generations imo.
 
Julia, I trust you read the link I posted with my remarks about how the Government has deceived the public.
I am not against the increase but how it will be funded and it would appear the employee will be the ones out of pocket.
I posted opinion some time back whereby with modern medical science and stem cell research we will be living to 120 and beyond. So will the 12% be enough for future retirees?
I should imagine there will be 2 people working for every one retiree. I believe the rate is already 4 to one.
 
Julia said:
I'd have thought that if you are negotiating a position of employment with a prospective employer, the amount contributed to your super by that employer would simply be taken into consideration as part of your salary package, in the same way as the value of a company car being part of the package e.g.

So I don't see why employers are going to be especially disadvantaged over this increase. Effectively, they just take the appropriate amount out of the salary they intended to offer and switch it into Super. The employee still gets the money eventually.

I'm in favour of the increase to 12% in terms of the country taking responsibility for the aging population and the huge burden of paying for so many people to be on the age pension if they fail to accumulate enough Super to be self funded in retirement.
If that happens, then the taxpayer foots the bill.

Surely better for people to contribute more throughout their career?

My objection is that it's an extension of the nanny state. People should be able to take responsibility for their own retirement plans. But apparently they don't. So compulsory Super is better than placing the burden on successive generations imo.
Click to expand...

Yes Julia, that would work out well if there was any accountability on the super funds.
If they linked management fees to fund earnings, rather than funds under management. There may be more due diligence on their part. At the moment money is being thrown down the gurgler.
 
sptrawler said:
Yes Julia, that would work out well if there was any accountability on the super funds.
If they linked management fees to fund earnings, rather than funds under management. There may be more due diligence on their part. At the moment money is being thrown down the gurgler.
Click to expand...
Not surprised at what you say. All the more reason for people to have a SMSF, perhaps.
 
noco said:
It is very obvious from the timing of Harry Jenkins execution that Gillard and her party know more than they are letting on.

Does Gillard already know the outcome of the Craig Thomson saga and is propping up her numbers to stay in power? If he is about to be charged, you can bet your boots Gillard is in the 'know'.

The other problem for her is the Poker Machine saga which Andrew Wilkie is pursueing and which may not pass through parliament. So she could still finish up two short.

Interesting times ahead next year.
Click to expand...

...and it appears Slipper was on the verge of being dumped, or at least disciplined by his own party... and jumped before he was pushed, into the open arms of the Gillard government. Another pretty shallow polly more concerned with getting a bigger share of the feed trough than the integrity of his position in reflecting his constituents.

In one way it's pleasing to see more independents in the parliament, BUT totally unpleasing to see that they are mostly elected as middle-of-the-road'ish but defected to the left in selfish self preservation circumstances.

All in all, with a couple of these types able to be bought by the gov to get key bills passed to avoid the greens if necessary, I can only say we are in for probably the most unpredictable and controversial time in our history in terms of what the public expects and gets from the gov.

What the hell will the protest vote do next time. A lot had gone with the Greens and Independents last time, but with the wheeling and dealing and proliferation of independents, will they all go for their true colors next time or is the country becoming a moralless cest pit of shallow, opportunistic turncoats!?
 
Peter Slipper is without a doubt a political coup for Labor. It may however prove a hollow victory in the longer run.

Firstly, how will it be viewed by the electorate. It is after all an arrangement that involved slaughtering their own speaker for someone of obviously dubious character. It's yet another example of anything for an extra 5-minutes in office.

Peter Slipper has also demonstrated over a long period that he is not a team player. This could be unfavourable for Labor as it was for the Coalition.

Another question is Kevin Rudd's next move. Is he hoping that the voting public take a dim view of this so it's easier for him to knife Julia Gillard ?
 
Whiskers said:
...and it appears Slipper was on the verge of being dumped, or at least disciplined by his own party... and jumped before he was pushed, into the open arms of the Gillard government. Another pretty shallow polly more concerned with getting a bigger share of the feed trough than the integrity of his position in reflecting his constituents.

In one way it's pleasing to see more independents in the parliament, BUT totally unpleasing to see that they are mostly elected as middle-of-the-road'ish but defected to the left in selfish self preservation circumstances.

All in all, with a couple of these types able to be bought by the gov to get key bills passed to avoid the greens if necessary, I can only say we are in for probably the most unpredictable and controversial time in our history in terms of what the public expects and gets from the gov.

What the hell will the protest vote do next time. A lot had gone with the Greens and Independents last time, but with the wheeling and dealing and proliferation of independents, will they all go for their true colors next time or is the country becoming a moralless cest pit of shallow, opportunistic turncoats!?
Click to expand...

Very well put, Whiskers
 
It is interesting to note Albanese denies knowing anything about Slipper "jumping ship", before yesterday. His facial expression gave absolutely no sign of embarrassment.

However Rudd has denied to comment. He was in the electorate a couple of weeks ago, so he would be" in the know."

Must be a office in Canberra: written on the door.
"Labor Liars School"
" Please visit regularly"
In small print "Tuition by masters Gillard & Swan"

It will be interesting to see the next Pol.
joea
 
It's called politics. In the scheme of things, what difference will it make, the Brown-Gillard government was going full term anyway.

Winners: the pubs and clubs industry, what price pokies reform now.:D
Losers: Andrew Wilkie. And Labor at the next election, having leaked even more moral authority.

Harry Jenkins was the best Speaker I've seen, a man of obvious integrity and fairness, but he'd probably had a gutful anyway. He would understand why the party wanted to go this way.
 
How can anyone say, including Ms Gillard, that this 'grubby' deal had not been planned weeks ahead.

The timing of it all on the last sitting day of parliament for 2011.

When it all hit the fan, Gillard sat there looking like the cat that swallowed the canary.

The mere fact that Peter Slipper's wife and family were in the gallery to watch him being dragged to the speakers chair.

SURPRISE!! SURPRISE!!! I DON'T THINK SO.
 
Anyone watch "Parliament Time" yesterday with the new speaker of the house? OMFG !!

It took 9 preselections and 3 no confidence votes to elect a new speaker of the house !!

We are in serious trouble here :banghead:
 
noco said:
How can anyone say, including Ms Gillard, that this 'grubby' deal had not been planned weeks ahead.

The timing of it all on the last sitting day of parliament for 2011.

When it all hit the fan, Gillard sat there looking like the cat that swallowed the canary.

The mere fact that Peter Slipper's wife and family were in the gallery to watch him being dragged to the speakers chair.

SURPRISE!! SURPRISE!!! I DON'T THINK SO.
Click to expand...

And pray tell, wouldn't Abbott do the same to save his skin.

And what about Malcolm Fraser and Murdock many years ago.

Grow up, this is politics, and yes it is greasy.

Anyway Abbott probably caused it by the way he marginalised his own member.

Anyway the libs are gone IMV. Labour will be the new right with the greens growing to be the new left.

Get used to it.
 

Similar threads

basilio
Ozempic: Magic Pill or Devils Bargain?
Replies
10
Views
2K
sptrawler
sptrawler
N
The Australian Human Rights Commission: A national disgrace
3 4 5
Replies
85
Views
15K
Tisme
Tisme
N
Kevin Rudd: The next UN Secretary General?
4 5 6
Replies
110
Views
16K
noco
N
sydboy007
State tax reform
Replies
0
Views
4K
sydboy007
sydboy007
Joe Blow
  • Sticky
How to identify an investment scam
3 4 5
Replies
98
Views
60K
farmerge
farmerge
Top