Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

Tony Abbott for PM

Jump to new
Calliope said:
Beware of any government that tries to institute "reform". "Reform" means they have found new ways to rip us off.
Click to expand...
Wasn't the GST "reform?"

(I supported it BTW, mainly because it WAS reform.)

I get that a lot of coalition voters have a hankering to return to a reformless, do-nothing government; a steady ship if you like. Imagine life though if we still had no national medical system, no trade with China and a fixed dollar! Those examples from decades ago are examples of reform, and bloody good reforms they were too (just like the GST).
 
Eager said:
Wasn't the GST "reform?"

(I supported it BTW, mainly because it WAS reform.)

I get that a lot of coalition voters have a hankering to return to a reformless, do-nothing government; a steady ship if you like. Imagine life though if we still had no national medical system, no trade with China and a fixed dollar! Those examples from decades ago are examples of reform, and bloody good reforms they were too (just like the GST).
Click to expand...

Yes the GST was reform. It removed the hidden sales tax that that was always unknown to the buyer. At least you knew how much GST you were paying for your goods.

When Keating raised the sales tax on cars from 20% to 25% nobody was any the wiser. The GST replaced that sales tax with a 10% GST and one knew how much tax was being paid. Most people did not realize a 33.3% sales tax on the likes of stationery was removed and a 10% GST replaced it. A can of coco-cola attracted 20% sales tax. White goods carried a 20% or 25% sales take, not quite sure which one.

When the GST came into vogue, the agreement with the states was to remove stamp duties on transactions such house sales and other legal tramsactions. However, most of the greedy states continued with it and in some cases it continues to this day.
 
Eager said:
I get that a lot of coalition voters have a hankering to return to a reformless, do-nothing government; a steady ship if you like. Imagine life though if we still had no national medical system, no trade with China and a fixed dollar! Those examples from decades ago are examples of reform, and bloody good reforms they were too (just like the GST).
Click to expand...

You're giving Labor much too much credit to label what they're doing as 'reform'!!

Changes, yes - big ones at that. But 'reform' is properly tested, argued, modelled on the experience of other countries, rational (and rationalised).

You wonder why Labor hasn't disclosed the Productivity Commission's analysis of the NBN or even touched on a cost-benefit analysis? In light of the Thomson/HSU scandals, the Building the Education Revolution is now going to be looked in a whole new light because of the major bits sliced off by the unions on each under-sized hall (over-sized toilet) they built.

The carbon tax is full of holes, so is the mining tax, and don't let me even start on the Malaysia Solution (I suppose you would consider the East Timor processing centre a 'reformist' idea?)
 
StumpyPhantom said:
You're giving Labor much too much credit to label what they're doing as 'reform'!!

Changes, yes - big ones at that. But 'reform' is properly tested, argued, modelled on the experience of other countries, rational (and rationalised).

The carbon tax is full of holes, so is the mining tax, and don't let me even start on the Malaysia Solution (I suppose you would consider the East Timor processing centre a 'reformist' idea?)
Click to expand...

That's purely political comment and fly's in the face of 25 years of progression to the price on carbon..GHG reform is properly tested, argued, modelled on the experience of other countries, rational and absolutely inevitable.

Why you people insist on arguing against inevitability is beyond my comprehension. :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: just because it's purely political for you doesn't mean that it is actually political...sure the (mechanism) carbon tax is but the need is not.
 
So_Cynical said:
That's purely political comment and fly's in the face of 25 years of progression to the price on carbon..GHG reform is properly tested, argued, modelled on the experience of other countries, rational and absolutely inevitable.

Why you people insist on arguing against inevitability is beyond my comprehension. :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: just because it's purely political for you doesn't mean that it is actually political...sure the (mechanism) carbon tax is but the need is not.
Click to expand...

Let's not use the phrase 'political comment' to denigrate critics of the Gillard government as climate change deniers.

It is completely naive to proceed on the basis of the science in a political vaccuum where the rest of the world is sitting back and watching us price carbon at least 4 or 5 times the rate of anyone else, so as to export our jobs and pollution elsewhere.

That's what politics means (your purely v actual distinction is meaningless), understanding that the world you live in is run by other humans.
 
Eager said:
I get that a lot of coalition voters have a hankering to return to a reformless, do-nothing government; a steady ship if you like. Imagine life though if we still had no national medical system, no trade with China and a fixed dollar! Those examples from decades ago are examples of reform, and bloody good reforms they were too (just like the GST).
Click to expand...

Eager what a disingenuous straw man argument. You will get no argument from coalition voters that reform is sometimes necessary, but generally, inter alia:

Do not want reform just for the bloody sake of reform
Do not want reform that unnecessarily increase the size of gu'mint
Do not want reform that unfairly redistributes wealth on ideological grounds
Do not want reform that impinges on liberty
DO not want reform that compromises sovereignty.

Moreover, coalition voters want re-reform to de-reform unsatisfactory reforms and reverse the above sins.
 
If Faulkner is looking for new depths he will have to go a long way down in the sewer to match Gillard, Slipper, Thomson and her motley independents.

Back in the real world, it's still all Tony Abbott's fault. John Faulkner, Sydney Morning Herald, yesterday:

I DO not think it is a complete coincidence that such questions of legitimacy, such vitriolic attacks on the very right of elected officials to hold their office, are directed against America's first black president and Australia's first female prime minister. In Australia, since Federation, even in 1975 . . . no opposition has gone as far as the current opposition, led by Tony Abbott, as to undermine, through their political rhetoric, public trust in the electoral and parliamentary process. Tony Abbott has sunk to new depths.
Click to expand...
 
Calliope said:
If Faulkner is looking for new depths he will have to go a long way down in the sewer to match Gillard, Slipper, Thomson and her motley independents.
Click to expand...

Abbott has done almost nothing except pass a few comments on the debacle unfolding before him. I think these Labor pollies are sinking to new depths in the way that they are continually trying to malign Abbott. And what about Tony Windsor, a few weeks ago he actaully said that Abbott was mentally unstable and that's why he didn't opt to side with the coalition after the last election, and just the other night he called him rabid!! How is it that Tony Windsor can get away with calling Abbott mentally unstable and rabid and not be held to account? :mad:
 
Miss Hale said:
Abbott has done almost nothing except pass a few comments on the debacle unfolding before him. I think these Labor pollies are sinking to new depths in the way that they are continually trying to malign Abbott. And what about Tony Windsor, a few weeks ago he actaully said that Abbott was mentally unstable and that's why he didn't opt to side with the coalition after the last election, and just the other night he called him rabid!! How is it that Tony Windsor can get away with calling Abbott mentally unstable and rabid and not be held to account? :mad:
Click to expand...

Yeah - it's best to grin and bear those things, Miss Hale. And Abbott's done an admirable job on that front for a little while now. All the rant about him being homophobic has disappeared recently.

It's best that Abbott walks away from this stuff anyway because the image in my mind of him convulsing when Mark Reilly confronted him with his "**** happens" prase he used in Afghanistan sticks in my mind as the one time I was going to see a journo get socked!!

Let the chattering classes feign their mora outrage.
 
Looking like Abbott's finger prints are all over Slippers accuser.................old form in the grubby side of the game.
 
wayneL said:
Eager what a disingenuous straw man argument. You will get no argument from coalition voters that reform is sometimes necessary, but generally, inter alia:

Do not want reform just for the bloody sake of reform
Do not want reform that unnecessarily increase the size of gu'mint
Do not want reform that unfairly redistributes wealth on ideological grounds
Do not want reform that impinges on liberty
DO not want reform that compromises sovereignty.

Moreover, coalition voters want re-reform to de-reform unsatisfactory reforms and reverse the above sins.
Click to expand...

Ross Gittens sums up well I think

But thanks to a great American institution, the Pew Research Centre, I now realise I think more like a European than an American on one of the central issues of economics and politics.
Click to expand...

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/polit...cy-pendulum-20120501-1xwzq.html#ixzz1thXS02bf
 
IFocus said:
Looking like Abbott's finger prints are all over Slippers accuser.................old form in the grubby side of the game.
Click to expand...

Who cares, if it gets a guilty creep out of the Speakers chair it's a good thing.
 
StumpyPhantom said:
The carbon tax is full of holes, so is the mining tax, and don't let me even start on the Malaysia Solution (I suppose you would consider the East Timor processing centre a 'reformist' idea?)
Click to expand...
None of the above, actually. A new tax is a new tax, pure and simple, just like managing asylum seekers is nothing more than managing asylum seekers, regardless how it is done.

Why cloud the issue?
 
Eager said:
None of the above, actually. A new tax is a new tax, pure and simple, just like managing asylum seekers is nothing more than managing asylum seekers, regardless how it is done.

Why cloud the issue?
Click to expand...

I cloud the issue because I'm interested in the outcome. Does it actually achieve it's purpose.

I can see why you're EAGER not to cloud the issue with the disastrous results that have and will be achieved.

That's the problem with true believers. Faith is everything
 
IFocus said:
Looking like Abbott's finger prints are all over Slippers accuser.................old form in the grubby side of the game.
Click to expand...
Is that a noise I hear coming from the pit of poop ?

Let's not forget it was one of Julia Gillard's staffers who tried to set Tony Abbott up on Australia Day.
 
Eager said:
Why cloud the issue?
Click to expand...
Perhaps because that's what the government consistently attempts to do.

I'd suggest that one of the main reasons the government is so despised by the electorate is their persistent disingenuous smoke and mirrors presentation of pretty much every issue.

In so acting, they are insulting the collective intelligence of the electorate.
 
Top