Tony Abbott for PM

[Julia]

People are spending money. They may not be spending them at department stores, but they are out at cafes and spending up big on electronics.

Feel good stuff to counteract the underlying anxiety.

the point I keep raising is the right leaning on this forum are holding up Abbott and co as being amazing economic managers

Are they? I don't recall anyone saying Abbott et al would be 'amazing economic managers'. On the contrary, I think many of us so fed up with the present government, have many reservations about the alternative.
Perhaps don't exaggerate to make your point.

It's quite wrong to assume that because some of us are entirely disaffected by the government, then ipso facto we are convinced the opposition is a force from heaven.
Many, however, will vote for the opposition on the simple principle that pretty much anything has to be better than what we have now.

Personally, although the financial situation of a country is important, I feel most unhappy when I feel my liberty is under threat. Though I don't think the LibNats are perfect in this regard at all, the overarching totalitararian Fabian socialist agenda of the LabGreens is highly disconcerting.

I'm sure that I'd have much to whinge about under an Abbott gu'mint, but I guarantee I'd be overall more at ease.

= life would be better... at least psychologically.

I so agree. I'm immensely disturbed by the invasion of so many of our freedoms, especially the freedom to express an opinion without the threat of being charged because someone feels offended as a result.
I never thought I'd see the day when this was even a remote possibility in Australia.

 

[sptrawler]

halving of capital gains tax on assets held for more than 12 months.

Ever since that decision investment properties have run at a loss. Pretty sure that decision had a major bearing on the debt boom that followed!

I agree 100%, as most investment properties are bought with the the expectation of a negative cash flow.
The cash flow losses should only be able to be carried forward and offset to capital gain.
The reason the property was purchased was for capital gain, not income, therefore the interest should not be offset to income.
There you go Sydboy, we have common ground, it would help everyone.lol

 

[Julia]

For someone who claims to hate both the Government and the Opposition, you are very defensive of the Gillard government.

sydboy, would you like to outline your political philosophy and fundamental leanings. I'm inclined to share Calliope's confusion about your opinions on this thread. No obligation, of course.

 

[sptrawler]

I agree 100%, as most investment properties are bought with the the expectation of a negative cash flow.
The cash flow losses should only be able to be carried forward and offset to capital gain.
The reason the property was purchased was for capital gain, not income, therefore the interest should not be offset to income.
There you go Sydboy, we have common ground, it would help everyone.lol

I may be wrong and I will stand corrected, however I think I read Jullia had a negative geared property in Canberra

 

[Calliope]

If ever a reason was needed why we should toss this dangerous government out on it's ear, then Roxon's Law provides it. Ian Callinan, former High Court Judge, said we should oppose it by all lawful means. Abbott should play this one as a trump card. It is a winner.

THANKFULLY, the many eminent contributors to the debate about proposed new anti-discrimination laws have not been afraid to offend the Attorney-General. While Nicola Roxon trumpets her draft human-rights and anti-discrimination laws as "reform", former High Court judge Ian Callinan describes them as "outrageous".

In an important intervention, Mr Callinan has lent his considerable legal and constitutional authority to the case against the bill. In an Australia Day address, he urged all of his fellow citizens to "do everything they lawfully can to oppose the introduction of this outrageous law". He said the dangers of this move to "criminalise speech which might cause offence to anyone" should not be underestimated. "It seems," he added, "as if each year the Constitution and cohesion of the Australian community are put at some new and entirely unnecessary risk

."
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...aws-trump-orwell/story-e6frg71x-1226563771183

 

[Logique]

Tim Mathieson might be first in the dock to be Roxon-ed.

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/polit...rostate-joke-is-bad-taste-20130129-2dhk1.html
First bloke's prostate joke 'is bad taste'

'

...'We can get a blood test for it, but the digital examination is the only true way to get a correct reading on your prostate, so make sure you go and do that, and perhaps look for a small female Asian doctor is probably the best way,'' he said...

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/polit...s-bad-taste-20130129-2dhk1.html#ixzz2JJOstOdC

 

[MrBurns]

If ever a reason was needed why we should toss this dangerous government out on it's ear, then Roxon's Law provides it. ]

It will never get through but serves a good purpose as it exposes once again how Labor are just a bunch of clueless dim wits.

 

[Calliope]

Tim Mathieson might be first in the dock to be Roxon-ed.

Prostate joke 'is bad taste'[/B]

Not bad taste...just bad advice. See my post on the Gillard thread;

I don't agree with Tim Mathieson that you should look for a "small female Asian doctor" to do your digital prostrate examination. I think the length of the index plays plays an important role, and while women's index fingers are usually their longest finger, and the ring finger is longest for men, overall men's index fingers will be longer than women's.

 

[drsmith]

Really? Ya think?

I do, I do, I dooooo.

You can see the numbers on the latest Essential Media poll for yourself, and the trend.

http://essentialvision.com.au/category/essentialreport

 

[sydboy007]

sydboy, would you like to outline your political philosophy and fundamental leanings. I'm inclined to share Calliope's confusion about your opinions on this thread. No obligation, of course.

I'd consider myself a centrist. Some of my attitudes would be to the left, others to the right

I'm very much a free market person. I see the role of Government as pushing the market in the direction that benefits us the most, or setting the goal and generally standing back and letting the free market get there at the lowest possible cost.

I believe education is the best way out of poverty, and would dearly love to see the public education system enhanced before we devolve into a US style system where the chance of a decent education is limited to those lucky enough to be born into a relatively well off family. Australia does it early via the school system, the yanks do it much more with their universities.

I believe the economy is our servant, not master, though these days it feels we are here simply to serve.

I believe the tax system should be as neutral as possible. Income should be taxed at the same rate however it's earned. Tax churn should be minimised as much as possible. We need a big change with the tax system in this country, but from the looks of things it's not going to happen because both sides will take the populist route. We deserve better from our leaders!

I believe that global warming is occurring, but willingly accept how bad things will be are still fairly hard to predict. I hate that Australia funds middle east terrorists with billions of petro dollars and think if we're not careful that the circa $40-50 billion a year deficit in fuel oils around 2020 is going to have major implications for the economy. So aiming to have the economy as energy efficient as other major rich countries seems like sensible policy to me. Converting our trucking fleet to CNG could be a very important step int the right direction - could cute 20-25% of oil imports.

Having read Abbott's motherhood policy release I can agree that we need to do something about the unions in the building industry. They have abused their powers for too long and are costing tax payers far too much in excess costs and lowered productivity. I do agree with union membership though, and collective bargaining at the enterprise level seems to have served us well since it was introduced in the 80s. Some of the lowest productivity in Australia occurred during the reign of work choices, so attacking the average workers pay and rewards, while standing back and allowing "market forces" pay the executives 4-500 times their wage, doesn't sit too well with me.

i don't believe either side of politics is better equipped to deal with the issues we face. I'd argue over the last 15 years the difference between the core of the ALP and Liberals have pretty much merged at the center. I'll leave the Nationals out of this since they are like the Greens and go off on flights of fancy because they know they wont have to actually try and achieve it.

I do take issue with the the current mob are so bad nothing can be worse. Well, I think it can be. My fear is that what is happening in QLD with the massive public sector cuts will be replicated in the rest of Australia and be a major driving force of a recession if Abbott gets into power.

I also tend to base my views on what is known. Currently we have little concrete policy from the LNP, so I look back at what they did in their last term, and well as we can all attest to, there's a lot not to like. So how can you be confident they wont do the same again? Will they restore the baby bonus back to it's original level? Why do they need such an expensive paternity leave system?

 

[sydboy007]

In regards to tax revenue can someone verify if these are the correct figures I should be looking at?

They probably are, but you need to then compare them to GDP.

Current revenue since the GFC is around 3% less of GDP over the period that what had occurred in the prior 7 years.

Some argue that the % figure is not important, but i think it's the only way to compare levels of spending in a growing economy.

As you can see the ratio has been quite harsh since the GFC, but I think we are going to have to accept that it's around what we will have for the next few years.

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

I'd consider myself a centrist. Some of my attitudes would be to the left, others to the right

+1 syd,

You would make a good Liberal.

The reason that the LNP are coy about putting policies out is that they not alone have to fight the ALP to get their message through, but also the ALP's man and womanservants, the Fairfax Media and the ABC.

The media have such a huge effect on people that rational debate is strangled.

I would also agree that many of my ALP mates have the same ideals and vision for the country, and see the same dangers from the extreme left and right, and from crooks, as you do.

I can guarantee you that each and every LNP member will fight this election as a loseable one, to win it.

The Australian public are sick of the current state of affairs, and a good victory from either side will lead to prosperity for all.

gg

 

[Calliope]

+1 syd,

You would make a good Liberal.

I suppose GG that you agree with sydboy's assertion that LNP public sector cuts to trim the bloated public service were unnecessary. He seems to be implying that there was an alternative.

My fear is that what is happening in QLD with the massive public sector cuts will be replicated in the rest of Australia and be a major driving force of a recession if Abbott gets into power.

Apparently a bloated public sector and bureaucracy is a hedge against recession.

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

I suppose GG that you agree with sydboy's assertion that LNP public sector cuts to trim the bloated public service were unnecessary. He seems to be implying that there was an alternative.



Apparently a bloated public sector and bureaucracy is a hedge against recession.

That is a difficult one to answer.

Queensland ALP blew out the public sector, and it was dysfunctional at the end.

Just look at Bundaberg Hospital and the Payroll Disaster, for two examples, I could give many more.

What Campbell Newman has inherited is a complete mess, he needed to make cuts.

Friends and rellies of mine have suffered as a result, but I blame the ALP.

The Queensland Public Service was the most overbloated public service anywhere in the Commonwealth under Labor.

There were many fine workers there, but a disproportionately large number of bludgers protected by their unions.

Just ask anyone who has worked there.

Let us hope the bludgers get thrown out.

I take your point though.

Queensland is a rich enough state to recover and boost it's public service again, once the bills incurred under Labor have been paid.

gg

 

[Julia]

I'd consider myself a centrist. Some of my attitudes would be to the left, others to the right

I'm very much a free market person. I see the role of Government as pushing the market in the direction that benefits us the most, or setting the goal and generally standing back and letting the free market get there at the lowest possible cost.

I believe education is the best way out of poverty, and would dearly love to see the public education system enhanced before we devolve into a US style system where the chance of a decent education is limited to those lucky enough to be born into a relatively well off family. Australia does it early via the school system, the yanks do it much more with their universities.

Thank you for responding to my question. I agree with much of what you say, especially the above.

Given this philosophy, however, I'm a bit surprised that you seem as tolerant as you are of the present government.

As you say, let's see what policies are put up by the opposition. The small amount offered this week is very much a step in the right direction imo.
Hopefully, amongst it, will the wiping of the ridiculously generous maternity scheme.

I do take issue with the the current mob are so bad nothing can be worse. Well, I think it can be. My fear is that what is happening in QLD with the massive public sector cuts will be replicated in the rest of Australia and be a major driving force of a recession if Abbott gets into power.

You don't believe the public service, particularly Health, in Queensland had become hugely bloated under the Bligh government and that Campbell Newman had to make the appropriate savings ? I think gg's post above puts it well.

 

[sydboy007]

+1 syd,

You would make a good Liberal.

gg

Thanxs, but I consider myself more a pragmatist than a political label. I find these days the politics in Australia is a bit like religion. 2 sides antagonistic to each other, barely able to hear what the other is saying over the shouting between them. Both are on the righteous path and cannot admit / accept that the other side could have any decent policies.

Give me a clearly defined issue and a clearly defined policy on how you propose to deal with it, and let me decide if I agree with your direction. I'm sick of the current level of politics in this country where there is endless debate about issues from decades ago, insults are traded, and nothing much is achieved.

I'll take actions over words any day. Maybe that stems from the fact I've got a couple of cousins who are addicts, and while I'll give people benefit of the doubt and hope they can change, it is what you do that is more important than what you say. So while Abbott says some of the right things, he says quite a few of the wrong things too, and when I look back to the previous LNP Govt I can see they're still craving the populist route.

That's the problem. Politicians these days are like crack addicts. They're snorted and injected the drug of populism to such a degree that every thought, let alone decision, is run through discussion groups and analysed to such detail in the hopes to not offend anyone. We have a political paralysis now because neither side will make a decision that could cost them votes and a marginal seat!

I suppose GG that you agree with sydboy's assertion that LNP public sector cuts to trim the bloated public service were unnecessary. He seems to be implying that there was an alternative.

Apparently a bloated public sector and bureaucracy is a hedge against recession.

Let me make my position a bit clearer for you. I am not saying that the Newman Govt didn't need to make cuts, but I am saying that the size of them are at least partially politically motivated. QLD is not in such dire straights that the slash and burn of the public sector is required. It's caused doom and gloom to descend on the state and you can see if from all the statistics coming out now.

You can't cut to growth when the private sector is not willing to step in and take the lead. By the end of the year I think it will be plain to see that QLD has fallen behind the other states because of this. They would have been better off to have made 6-8K of targeted staffing cuts, and any natural attrition as a top up. Once the economy has stabilised they could then make further cuts. Sending the economy into reverse only makes balancing the budget that much harder. Look to Europe to see what the paradox of thrift does when the private and public sectors are both contracting.

To say they were head to becoming a Greece was all about politics. All Newman needed to do was show a believable path to a balanced budget, and eventual surplus, and the bond markets would have been happy.

 

[shermerhorn]

Nah, Wilson Tuckey's the man?????? He's got plenty of guts to stand up and speak his mind. Send him in to bat at the next wicket to fall, but he will have to watch Kevvie the spin specialist; he's trickey on a turning pitch.

I reckon Wilson could swing the bat around the heads some of those Liberal ETS supporters.

Don't forget old "IRON BAR" has plenty of runs on the board.
What do you reckon GG ( aka the Townsville MP) has Wilson got a chance?

Masterful comment, 12th man! Was I meant to be hearing the late great Tony Greig in my head as I read? I almost snorted a lung out of my nose when I read this! Nice work.

 

[shermerhorn]

Thank you for responding to my question. I agree with much of what you say, especially the above.

Given this philosophy, however, I'm a bit surprised that you seem as tolerant as you are of the present government.

As you say, let's see what policies are put up by the opposition. The small amount offered this week is very much a step in the right direction imo.
Hopefully, amongst it, will the wiping of the ridiculously generous maternity scheme.


You don't believe the public service, particularly Health, in Queensland had become hugely bloated under the Bligh government and that Campbell Newman had to make the appropriate savings ? I think gg's post above puts it well.

Bloat or not, unprecedented cuts in the history of the country sends the wrong message to investors. Didn't Newman's own party haul him over the coals for this? - shooting his mouth off about QLD being the "spain" of the Aussie states. Ouch. So after scaring off magnesium plant investors and using some federal has-been to write up how bad the state was (this was sloppy work from Costello and he could have done much better), Newman votes himself and his mates a payrise? And how much did the redundancies cost? Someone I know got one - almost their full year's wage in one payment, tax free! Lucky them. Check it out. It would have cost less to performance manage people out or phase them out over a few years if it was genuine bloat. Or they just could have worked for their jobs on reallocated tasks. You can't say "we can't afford them" and cry cut backs then spend more than a year's worth on them at once. That's betting on losing from the start!

And take it from someone who knows the guy - Newman's clueless at running a state economy, and his own party are (wisely) putting their distance between him and them. Rightly or wrongly - however you want to see it - people are probably scared Abbott will be as clueless as this.

Look at it this way. The 'health report' on the state said how much QLD was in the red based on what they wanted to bring in, even though previous federal estimates on income were exceeded. So it's an unrealistic expectation, and coming from the libs - the party we'd hope has some financial sense - that's a huge worry. That would be like me saying "I'm missing $2mil from my bank account" because I wanted to win lotto.

Oh yeah, and I know that's the first thing I would do to get public confidence when I announce the biggest cutbacks in the country's history - give myself a pay rise. You can thank Cambell for putting the stink on federal libs big-time. Just what they needed!

 

[shermerhorn]

That is a difficult one to answer.

Queensland ALP blew out the public sector, and it was dysfunctional at the end.

Just look at Bundaberg Hospital and the Payroll Disaster, for two examples, I could give many more.

What Campbell Newman has inherited is a complete mess, he needed to make cuts.

Friends and rellies of mine have suffered as a result, but I blame the ALP.

The Queensland Public Service was the most overbloated public service anywhere in the Commonwealth under Labor.

There were many fine workers there, but a disproportionately large number of bludgers protected by their unions.

Just ask anyone who has worked there.

Let us hope the bludgers get thrown out.

I take your point though.

Queensland is a rich enough state to recover and boost it's public service again, once the bills incurred under Labor have been paid.

gg

Well, sadly this is where your wishful thinking falls flat on its face. Sadly, most redundancies (as you'd know through your rellies, no doubt GG) were voluntary. But typically you aren't going to get your cliched lay-about public servant off of a 'good wicket' by offering them a lump sum and then no job - because then the gravy train runs dry. On the contrary, you get the confident, hard-working go-getters who have had a gut-full of the restraints of govt going into higher paying private jobs! I have this first hand from people in govt, and it even follows in my experience and colleague's experiences in the private sector. If someone offers you a large sum of cash to look for a new job and you don't love the job you're in - or even if you have the confidence and competence to find something better - you go!

I have a mixed history of public and private sector, and I'd take private any day - and I don't have to ask someone else to know that, yes, there are people who 'coast' or 'bludge' in both arenas, and yes, they are there in the public sectors in a big way! They're in private too - to a huge extent. Big companies and big bloat go hand in hand. But I digress. Blaming ALP or the previous government might be a home run, but gutting the public service by a landslide of golden handshakes was a ridiculous thing to do. Unions bound to go into bat for their members, of course. But it would have been cheaper and fairer to performance manage first, and mitigate union outrage. Being pragmatic about things you have to deal with the beast at hand.

Unions couldn't argue against the removal of non-performing employees or beg the question of every case either. It should have been a no-brainer to put more effort into performance management and less into voluntary redundancy. A suck-it-and-see approach might have worked better too. Example: after gutting the contractors (massive numbers there!) see if the economy kicks back before rolling on with the more expensive permanent employee redundancies.

Anyway, I'm defending the indefensible here. QLD just replaced dumb with dumber. And thinking in terms of ALP or LNP won't fix it. How about both parties find leaders with at least half a brain before running for office - it might help.

 

[shermerhorn]

I suppose GG that you agree with sydboy's assertion that LNP public sector cuts to trim the bloated public service were unnecessary. He seems to be implying that there was an alternative.


Apparently a bloated public sector and bureaucracy is a hedge against recession.

It can be, actually - but it depends. Maybe not bloat, but large sudden growth... have a think. If it's an investment in the long or mid term future that needs a large influx of workers - if the target project it boosts industry - of course it can.

You don't turn into IKEA or Microsoft or the England in the Victorian era without investment. Public investment, private investment - whatever. Investment! Lots of so-called libs don't seem to believe this sort of thing anymore, but take the king Lib himself as an example. "Menzies' coalition government pursued various initiatives of the former Chifley Labor government, including development of the Snowy Mountains Scheme." http://www.nma.gov.au/primeministers/robert_menzies Menzies had to see a productive merit for it - and a pragmatic economic advantage for it in the long term. So what's wrong with us now. Comparatively speaking, conservatives (Lib nats) and liberals (Labor + Greens) are gutless shadows of the past in this regard, and it's their lack of imagination that is costing our progress. Individualised and privatised debt looks prettier on a govt balance sheet but is far more damaging in the long term for the economy.

Anyway, getting off track.
So of course investing in public health (for example) doesn't have the same sex appeal as mega infrastructure to some. But when the health of your workforce is concerned it can make a massive difference. It's harder to measure, yes. But only the most cynical loafer would claim that a working hospital system (for example) is just to make bludgers healthy and won't make an economic difference. And if private hospitals aren't coping or can't cater to everyone, you can either ignore your workforce and it's economic productivity (bad idea) or attempt to fix the problem. So yes, sure, I'm not saying for a moment that any QLD govt at any stage has had hospital improvements (for example) "in the bag". But yes, *under some circumstances* you need to put more money in the doctor's hand to save the patient (and here I'm talking about the state itself). Business - foreign and domestic - tends to follow a government's lead.

If you were starting an oil company and had two potential target countries - one with a shrinking government sector, poor infrastructure and a sick workforce, another with a govt that was investing in roads and hospitals, etc where would you invest? If the govt helped you with infrastructure, you'd go for the green grass every time. Business is about faith and confidence. Government has a responsibility to foster confidence and facilitate business. Realistically undertaken, debt itself shows confidence. Mindless slashing shows the opposite.