Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

Tony Abbott for PM

Jump to new
sptrawler said:
That also poses the question why don't workers leave their jobs in droves and become millionaires. I asked myself that, maybe you can enlighten me so I can pass it on to my children.
Click to expand...

I'm unsure what you are asking here. Could you restate it as I don't get the point.
 
sydboy007 said:
Most CEOs are so caught up in what's best for them that they rarely do what's best for the true company owner - the shareholders!
Click to expand...
I'll try to put you on the right track with a couple of important amendments sydboy.;)


Most union leaders and union dominated Labor governments are so caught up in what's best for them that they rarely do what's best for the true company owner - the taxpayers!
 
I've been reading my regular dose of Taki Magazine, a splendid online publication and came across this article.

So pertinent to the effete Australia that we have become.

http://takimag.com/article/never_trust_anyone_who_hasnt_been_punched_in_the_face#axzz2Gh6YdPrZ

Never Trust Anyone Who Hasn’t Been Punched in the Face

Please share this article by using the link below. When you cut and paste an article, Taki's Magazine misses out on traffic, and our writers don't get paid for their work. Email editors@takimag.com to buy additional rights. http://takimag.com/article/never_trust_anyone_who_hasnt_been_punched_in_the_face/print#ixzz2Gh7qpEdN
Click to expand...

Some quotes bear pasting in this thread.

Walter Bagehot said it well almost 150 years ago:

History is strewn with the wrecks of nations which have gained a little progressiveness at the cost of a great deal of hard manliness, and have thus prepared themselves for destruction as soon as the movements of the world gave a chance for it.
Click to expand...

Every great civilization reaches a point of prosperity where it is possible to live your entire life as a pacifist without any serious consequences. Many civilizations have come to the state of devolution represented by modern Berkeley folkways, from wife-swapping to vegetarianism. These ideas don’t come from a hardscrabble existence in contact with nature’s elemental forces; they are the inevitable consequence of being an effete urban twit removed from meaningful contact with reality. The over-civilized will try to portray their decadence as something “highly evolved” and worthy of emulation because it can only exist in the hothouse of highly civilized urban centers, much like influenza epidemics. Somehow these twittering blockheads missed out on what the word “evolution” means. Evolution involves brutal and often violent natural selection, and these people have not been exposed to brutal evolutionary forces any more than a typical urban poodle.
Click to expand...

Tony Abbott is a man, a strong man, who wishes the best for his country. He is not an "effete urban twitterer" unlike some of his opponents, and the electorate will come around to his style of leadership when he becomes PM.

Meanwhile, his opponents will excoriate him for being a man.

gg
 
Some Dude said:
enabling politicians and voters to interact more.
Click to expand...
The illusion of thinking you are being heard. It just north of a gossip site. Labor wanting to censor the internet and stuffing round with freedom of information laws, media laws etc is more of a threat then libs not twittering to the twit masses.
 
I've serious doubts that half the content tweeted by some of the pollies is actually being tweeted by them personally and not their PR advisers or assistants.
 
moXJO said:
It just north of a gossip site. Labor wanting to censor the internet and stuffing round with freedom of information laws, media laws etc is more of a threat then libs not twittering to the twit masses.
Click to expand...

I agree with you about those issues, and my reference to twitter was not made with relation to censorship. It was an obvious reference to the silly labels that were used with reference to others.

moXJO said:
The illusion of thinking you are being heard.
Click to expand...

Twitter enables people to ask those questions that they feel don't get asked by the media, to have an interactive conversation, and for politicians to gauge sentiment on a wider basis unfiltered. Technology and mechanism that enable more bi-directional unfiltered communication directly between politicians and voters seems like something that should be encouraged and built upon.
 
So what are the reasons people would vote for TA as PM??

At present I can't think of any policies he's spoken about that would make me inclined to vote for him. Repealing the carbon tax and MRRT wont make much diff to the economy, but does seem to make it close to impossible to reach his budget surplus promise (tho not quite clear if it's core or non core).

I'd be interest to understand what proof people believe they have that a TA led Govt would be better than the the current one.

Anyone care to offer suggestions on what spending cuts TA can make to get the budget back into surplus??

For someone who's labeled a real man, he's being a wimp by hiding his policies until the next election is called. It's a real shame that Howard brought in the small target idea of opposition and it now seems to be well entrenched into the political psyche.
 
sydboy007 said:
So what are the reasons people would vote for TA as PM??.
Click to expand...

To be rid of this sexist, spending and incompetent lot who wrecked our border protection system and have no idea how to fix it. To the best of my knowledge, never before has a PM waved the sexist card so dreadfully.

To be rid of a government which inherited cash in the bank and now left us with a gross debt of around $260 billion (interest approx $12 billion per annum) with very little to show for it.

To get rid of the carbon tax.

The real issue is to put an end to the current stuff-ups regardless of the leader of the libs.

I am surprised you find something so simple to be so difficult...:D:D:D
 
sails said:
To be rid of this sexist, spending and incompetent lot who wrecked our border protection system and have no idea how to fix it. To the best of my knowledge, never before has a PM waved the sexist card so dreadfully.

To be rid of a government which inherited cash in the bank and now left us with a gross debt of around $260 billion (interest approx $12 billion per annum) with very little to show for it.

To get rid of the carbon tax.

The real issue is to put an end to the current stuff-ups regardless of the leader of the libs.

I am surprised you find something so simple to be so difficult...:D:D:D
Click to expand...

What proof do you have that a TA lead Govt would have run surpluses over the last 5 years? Govt revenues fell by 20% in the first year after the GFC. Can you honestly say Tony would have cut $40 billion out of spending? The guy has a hideously expensive maternity leave tax for large companies on offer, with nary a middle class welfare cut in sight.

What proof do you have that economic refugees wouldn't have flooded Australia over the last 5 years with the old system in place?

I get you don't like the current Govt, but as yet no one is showing me how voting for Tony and Barnaby Joyce will be an improvement. Direct action payments to companies instead of a market based carbon tax. Agrarian socialists pouting any time a farmer ain't happy with what Tony decides. A communications minister who says fibre ain't the way forward for Australia, but will invest in Telcos overseas doing exactly that. The same Tony who feels knowledgeable enough to comment on current events, but then admits to not reading reports. The same Tony who hounds the PM over events 2 decades ago, shrilling claiming the odour of corrupting, yet says Mal Borough is a good bloke when a judge pretty much says he was doing some tricky things.

Why is the carbon tax so bad? As far as i can tell no company has closed down and cited it as the reason. Hopefully it will force us to become a lot more efficient. Australians are pretty profligate energy consumers compared to most other OECD countries.

I will argue that Howard left the ALP 30 billion in debt when he lost to Hawke, sold off more in assets than he used to pay down the debt, so really if you sell assets to pay off debt, is the net position any better if those assets are producing an income higher than the interest costs of the debt?? Would we be needing to spend billions on the NBN if Telstra wholesale had been kept in Government hands and encourage to build out FTTN 10 years ago, with fiber replacing copper now instead of costly sticky tape repairs? Would infrastructure be so worn out now if Howard had spend some of the windfall resource boom revenue on infrastructure rather than vote buying middle class welfare?
 
sydboy007 said:
What proof do you have that a TA lead Govt would have run surpluses over the last 5 years?

What proof do you have that economic refugees wouldn't have flooded Australia over the last 5 years with the old system in place?
Click to expand...

What proof do you have that you do not have an obsession with continually harping on the theme;

"What proof do you have?"

A legitimate response to these nonsense questions would be:

"Can you disprove it?'
 
sydboy007 said:
What proof do you have that a TA lead Govt
Click to expand...

Great post, have had similar thoughts myself.

I have not seen anything Abbot put up that is constructive or backed up by substance. Not that I think they would be much worse than Labor, but the one good thing about Tony Abbot, is people looking closer to the detail towards election time will expose him as hopeless and the Libs will not win the next election.

Watch this space.:rolleyes:
 
Calliope said:
Yes, I suppose that as an ex-copper you also have an obsession with trying to prove the un-provable.:D
Click to expand...

Give me some some backed up substance on the value of Abbott?

What has he done?

At least some of the others have had to change their minds but Abbott has had nothing to change, he is just a blank page.

Oh, and the ex cop bit, if you are losing the argument go for the man.:banghead:
 
Top