Who are you voting for?

explod · 17 November 2007

2020hindsight said:
Sometimes I wonder if a rise in the GST isn't just what we need (although I haven't even seen speculation on that one, - by either party - and equally likely by either party etc etc - and it would have to be considered by a thousand committees no doubt first)
those that spend the most pay the most.-
good way to tax the wealthy and kerb unnecessary spending.
(PS I am not an economist if you hadn't guessed already , lol)

also - a good ting about GST of course is that exporters effectively get supported (to compete on international market) - how else do we combat the rising AUD ?

The idea that the ALP will raise GST appears to have no basis in fact. Spread as part of the scare campaign. In fact if Rudd increases spending towards education, hospitals and infrastructure, as indicated, the states will not required increases. Against the ongoing bull of promises we have to tqke some of Rudd at face value, just as many on this thread say we should of Howard. And on the issue of experience, they all have to start somewhere.

I'll give it to ALP and the Greens in the upper

2020hindsight · 17 November 2007

explod said:
I'll give it to ALP and the Greens in the upper

explod - yep - me too

there's an old bloke down the road - magic old bloke - WWII RAF veteran
he just wants to live long enough to see Labour get in again -
perhaps I'm misquoting him - but he would die the happier - and hopefully in another 20 years lol

Aussiejeff · 17 November 2007

Maybe Howard has a chance after all. The fact that both parties have admitted they can't really control many of the factors that affect interest rate rises has pretty much killed the debate over interest rates. The potentially major stumbling block for the Coalition of the last interest rate rise seems to have been forgotten by the electorate already....

With hindsight, I also reckon Rudd made a critical mistake in promising almost as much in tax cuts as Howard did. His argument of not spending as much would now be significantly more potent if he had instead spent say, only $10 Billion on tax cuts and up to $10 Billion on infrastructure (total "only" $20 Billion). As a potential swing voter to Labor, his current focus on the "we will spend less" argument has a bit of a hollow ring to it as a result of his initial "knee jerk", "me too" tax cuts.

So, Howard might yet come home "with a wet sail"....

AJ

rederob · 17 November 2007

Aussiejeff said:
I actually agree in part with the sentiment that most of these polls "cannot be trusted". All these newspapers are run by businesses who in one way or other, have a political bias or agenda barrow to push, which ultimately has to affect the way their polling questions or demographics are manipulated. The fact that they don't re-poll a set sample group over the whole pre-election period means you can never know whether that set section of the population is actually changing their opinion over time or not - unlike the ASF polls which are probably more reliable!!! Hahahaha...
Cheers,
AJ

Maybe there was a poll that showed the coalition ahead since Rudd took the Labor helm - but I never saw one.
The consistency of the trend and the "gap" across all States and demographics suggests that the polls have got it right.
Centrebet has Labor at $1.20 and Coalition at $4.60 today. Once labor moves to $1.10 it's put down your glasses.

hangseng · 17 November 2007

Labor policy costings 'not submitted'

"The deadline expired last night for policies to be sent to the department for checking the accuracy of their estimated cost."

"I am advised as of 5.30pm yesterday the Labor party had only submitted $2.4 billion out of the $12 billion of spending promises it has made so far in this election," Mr Howard told journalists in Adelaide.
http://www.theage.com.au/news/Natio...icies-costed-PM/2007/11/16/1194766958206.html

Now why am I not surprised?

explod · 17 November 2007

hangseng said:
Labor policy costings 'not submitted'

"The deadline expired last night for policies to be sent to the department for checking the accuracy of their estimated cost."

"I am advised as of 5.30pm yesterday the Labor party had only submitted $2.4 billion out of the $12 billion of spending promises it has made so far in this election," Mr Howard told journalists in Adelaide.
http://www.theage.com.au/news/Natio...icies-costed-PM/2007/11/16/1194766958206.html

Now why am I not surprised?

That entire costing was a Howard furphy so Labor didn't bother as it was rigged against them. Everyone has tired of Howard's tricks and are set to try something else.

The polls yes, have been doggedly consistent all year, wont' change now

Julia · 17 November 2007

explod said:
That entire costing was a Howard furphy so Labor didn't bother as it was rigged against them. Everyone has tired of Howard's tricks and are set to try something else.

How could John Howard have rigged how Treasury would cost Labor's promises?
Why should Labor not be required to submit their plans to Treasury for costing?

hangseng · 17 November 2007

explod said:
That entire costing was a Howard furphy so Labor didn't bother as it was rigged against them. Everyone has tired of Howard's tricks and are set to try something else.

The polls yes, have been doggedly consistent all year, wont' change now

No "furphy" just plain fact that Labour have not submitted policies for costing

WHY NOT? what are they hiding?

explod · 17 November 2007

hangseng said:
No "furphy" just plain fact that Labour have not submitted policies for costing

WHY NOT? what are they hiding?

My point is, (as has always been the practice) it would not matter what labor put forward, Costello would distort it with his usual smug asides. In fact from that point he is as bad as Keating of late. Power corrupts.

hangseng · 17 November 2007

explod said:
My point is, (as has always been the practice) it would not matter what labor put forward, Costello would distort it with his usual smug asides. In fact from that point he is as bad as Keating of late. Power corrupts.

Yes it does, just look at the WA Labour party and it's past stalwarts Burke and Grill and current sitting member Shelley Archer. Labour has again demonstrated what corruption is all about.

Costello is quite simply an excellent treasurer and his fiscal management is on record. Who in the proposed Labour line up can compare or even come close?

Labour wee required to submit for costing evaluation and quite simply didn't. They have something to hide of that there is no doubt or they would have complied.

Julia · 17 November 2007

explod said:
My point is, (as has always been the practice) it would not matter what labor put forward, Costello would distort it with his usual smug asides. In fact from that point he is as bad as Keating of late. Power corrupts.

What Costello might comment on afterwards isn't really the point, Explod.
Don't you think Labor has an obligation in all good faith to submit their plans to Treasury? A lot of promises have been made by both sides and we deserve to know that they are in fact fundable.

doctorj · 17 November 2007

explod said:
In fact from that point he is as bad as Keating of late. Power corrupts.

Anyone "as bad as Keating" would get my vote in a heartbeat. Its a shame there's no one of his ilk on either side of politics at the moment.

explod · 17 November 2007

doctorj said:
Anyone "as bad as Keating" would get my vote in a heartbeat. Its a shame there's no one of his ilk on either side of politics at the moment.

Sorry about that, it was in fact a poor attempt to ballance a weak argumant. Interestingly was just leafing through John Edwards 'inside story' on Keating (1996). A couple of years ago was discussing politics with a Chinese businessman who said that they had regarded Keating as one of the best economists of the time. There is no doubt that his hard decisions and goundwork made the ride easy for Howard. The problem is, is that few people really understand the big picture in economics and many of its students a guided from clouded and narrow versions.

For anyone really interested, a great place to start is the story of the Rothchilds and the establishment of banks. A big message comes through when one learns that in some of the most important wars, both sides were financed by the one person.

spartn · 17 November 2007

hi guys

this will be my 3 election voting now. And out of all of them this has probably been the closest i will ever get to voting labour, but i wont.

I am sorry if this offends people but i cant and will not vote for a party that wants to help people who are 38 and older buy there first home, i am 30 know i have just paid off my house in Lysterfield which i paid for just under 250K in 2001. All i have to say is where the hell where these people spending there money between 25 - 30 years old, owning a house is an Australian dream but it doesn't mean you don't have to sacrifice to buy and pay one off.

And one of my friends who is 40 is voting labor. And we where watching TV and having a few drinks the other night when that labor add about John Howard not doing anything for 11 years to help the education system. My mate, said "that is exactly right". But you have to understand my friend just spent a bit over $50K buying a new Holden Calais which he took a 7 year loan out for, and he puts his only child through a cheap state government school. Education to me isn't expensive, people just need to put there fuc*ing priorities straight, if you aren't able to do that neither Howard or Rudd will be able to help you, its that simple.

Spartn

"viking"

numbercruncher · 17 November 2007

Spartn - Its not an Offensive position you have there, but it is kinda bizarre or perhaps selfish ....

It seems you are voting Liberal solely because others may get access to things that you have wisely already paid for ? Its like a I didnt get it so you shouldnt either situation ?

When you purchased your house you got 7000 or 3pc of the cost from the Government, I bet First home buyers dont get 3pc of the purchase price anymore ?

John Howard got free Medical, Dental and Education his entire life but now makes everyone pay ... That sorta seems like a double take, he probably even got his first home at 4 or 5 times the average salary instead of 8+ times.(I did, you probably did too).

spartn · 17 November 2007

H Numbercruncher

I did get the first home owners grant, but i wasn't dumb enough to use that as my ownly deposit. The people going around saying that you dont need a deposit are more than likely the ones that are suffering now with the increase in interest payment, when i brought my house i also had an 18 thousand dollar deposit, which took 5 years to save up, and like my friend i could of wasted it on a car, but i didn't.

And, yes i did buy my house at just over 4 times my earnings, so i arguement is about 38 and over is the fact that why didn't they buy there house then, 7 years ago they would of been the age at what i am now, and i couldn't even contemplate buying my house at 30 let alone 40. What i am trying to put forward is you cant just blame the government, people have to take the blame for there own choices.

And ask people this question, how many people do you know that didn't have a single TV for the first 4 years after moving out of there parents house? Not many! and thats just one of the sacrifices I made, people cant even hold off buying a bloody TV, and for most its one of there first appliances they buy.

Spartn

:viking:

numbercruncher · 17 November 2007

Heya Spartan,

People can buy a TV from the warehouse etc for $99 new, so we cant really begrudge them these little "luxurys" can we ?

The way i see things at the moment is that "things" (toys,TVs etc) the things we dont need are relatively very very cheap especially compared to a decade ago, but the things people "must" have (shelter,food,schooling,medical) is in many cases becoming prohibitvely expensive especially compared to a decade ago and as measured as a share of average incomes.

The goal should be for each generation to progressively have it better than the last, I dont see that atm.

Perhaps we arrived at the promised land some time ago but decided to move on ? shift the goal posts so to speak ?

imajica · 17 November 2007

spartn said:
hi guys

this will be my 3 election voting now. And out of all of them this has probably been the closest i will ever get to voting labour, but i wont.

I am sorry if this offends people but i cant and will not vote for a party that wants to help people who are 38 and older buy there first home, i am 30 know i have just paid off my house in Lysterfield which i paid for just under 250K in 2001. All i have to say is where the hell where these people spending there money between 25 - 30 years old, owning a house is an Australian dream but it doesn't mean you don't have to sacrifice to buy and pay one off.

And one of my friends who is 40 is voting labor. And we where watching TV and having a few drinks the other night when that labor add about John Howard not doing anything for 11 years to help the education system. My mate, said "that is exactly right". But you have to understand my friend just spent a bit over $50K buying a new Holden Calais which he took a 7 year loan out for, and he puts his only child through a cheap state government school. Education to me isn't expensive, people just need to put there fuc*ing priorities straight, if you aren't able to do that neither Howard or Rudd will be able to help you, its that simple.

Spartn

"viking"

hehe he spend over 50k on a Holden Calais!!! what a bogan mobile! he definitely needs some therapy over that choice!

2020hindsight · 17 November 2007

Thought for the day folks.
It goes without saying that many of us (most of us) obviously live in safe electorates.
The vote for the House of Reps in these circumstances becomes pretty irrelevant.
But the Senate, now that vote will count irrespective, and the vote to enjoy the most.
.........
I just wish they could use slightly less paper

Here are your choices folks , at least for Senate Group Voting Tickets :-

http://www.abc.net.au/elections/federal/2007/guide/groupvotingtickets.htm
Group ticket voting works by each group lodging a full ticket of preferences to all candidates on the ballot paper. When a voter selects a party using the group ticket voting square, the vote is deemed to have the full list of preferences lodged by that group. A group can lodge one, two or three tickets, with votes divided equally between the tickets. More than 95% of voters use the group ticket voting square, effectively meaning that the distribution of preferences in the Senate is determined largely by deals between political parties

ACT
Group A - Australian Labor Party
Group B - Australian Democrats (Ticket 1 of 2)
Group B - Australian Democrats (Ticket 2 of 2)
Group C - The Greens
Group D - Nuclear Disarmament Party
Group E - Liberty and Democracy Party
Group F - Liberal Party
Group G - What Women Want
Group H - Climate Change Coalition (Ticket 1 of 2)
Group H - Climate Change Coalition (Ticket 2 of 2)

NSW
Group A - Liberal/National Coalition
Group B - Citizens Electoral Council
Group C - Family First
Group D - Pauline's United Australia
Group E - Climate Change Coalition
Group F - Socialist Alliance
Group G - The Greens
Group H - What Women Want
Group I - Liberty and Democracy Party
Group J - Group J Independents
Group K - Hear Our Voice
Group L - Senator On-Line
Group M - Australian Democrats
Group N - Conservatives for Climate and Environment
Group O - D.L.P. - Democratic Labor Party
Group P - Group P Independents
Group Q - The Fishing Party
Group R - Christian Democratic Party
Group S - One Nation
Group T - Non-Custodial Parents Party
Group U - Shooters, Fishing and Lifestyle
Group V - Group V Independents
Group W - Labor Party
Group X - Socialist Equality Party (Ticket 1 of 3)
Group X - Socialist Equality Party (Ticket 2 of 3)
Group X - Socialist Equality Party (Ticket 3 of 3)
Group Y - Carers Alliance (Ticket 1 of 2)
Group Y - Carers Alliance (Ticket 2 of 2)

NT
Group A - Citizens Electoral Council
Group B - Australian Labor Party
Group C - Australian Democrats (Ticket 1 of 2)
Group C - Australian Democrats (Ticket 2 of 2)
Group D - Country Liberal Party
Group E - The Greens

QLD
Group A - What Women Want
Group B - Liberty and Democracy Party
Group C - Climate Change Coalition
Group D - Carers Alliance
Group E - Senator On-Line
Group F - Socialist Alliance
Group G - The Fishing Party
Group H - Family First
Group I - Australian Democrats
Group J - Liberal/National Coalition
Group K - Group K Independents
Group L - Australian Shooters Party
Group M - The Greens
Group N - Group N Independents (Ticket 1 of 3)
Group N - Group N Independents (Ticket 2 of 3)
Group N - Group N Independents (Ticket 3 of 3)
Group O - Australian Labor Party
Group P - Australian Fishing and Lifestyle Party
Group Q - One Nation
Group R - Pauline's United Australia
Group S - Citizens Electoral Council
Group T - Christian Democratic Party
Group U - Non-Custodial Parents Party (Ticket 1 of 2)
Group U - Non-Custodial Parents Party (Ticket 2 of 2)
Group V - D.L.P. - Democratic Labor Party
Group W - Group W Independents
Group X - Group X Independents

SA
Group A - One Nation
Group B - Group B Independents
Group C - Christian Democratic Party
Group D - Australian Fishing and Lifestyle Party
Group E - Australian Shooters Party
Group F - The Greens
Group G - National Party
Group H - D.L.P. - Democratic Labor Party
Group I - Liberal Party
Group J - What Women Want
Group K - Australian Labor Party
Group L - Climate Change Coalition
Group M - Citizens Electoral Council
Group N - Senator On-Line
Group O - Socialist Alliance
Group P - Australian Democrats (Ticket 1 of 2)
Group P - Australian Democrats (Ticket 2 of 2)
Group Q - Family First Party
Group R - Liberty and Democracy Party
Group S - Group S (Xenophon) (Ticket 1 of 2)
Group S - Group S (Xenophon) (Ticket 2 of 2)

TAS
Group A - What Women Want
Group B - The Greens (Ticket 1 of 2)
Group B - The Greens (Ticket 2 of 2)
Group C - Group C Independents
Group D - Australian Labor Party
Group E - D.L.P. - Democratic Labor Party
Group F - Liberal Party
Group G - Group G Independents
Group H - Group H Independents (Ticket 1 of 2)
Group H - Group H Independents (Ticket 2 of 2)
Group I - Liberty and Democracy Party
Group J - Citizens Electoral Council
Group K - Family First

VIC
Group A - Climate Change Coalition
Group B - One Nation
Group C - Australian Democrats (Ticket 1 of 2)
Group C - Australian Democrats (Ticket 2 of 2)
Group D - What Women Want
Group E - Senator On-Line
Group F - Australian Labor Party
Group G - Australian Shooters Party
Group H - Liberal/National Coalition
Group I - Group I Independents
Group J - Socialist Equality Party (Ticket 1 of 3)
Group J - Socialist Equality Party (Ticket 2 of 3)
Group J - Socialist Equality Party (Ticket 3 of 3)
Group K - Family First
Group L - Liberty and Democracy Party
Group M - Conservatives for Climate and Environment
Group N - D.L.P. - Democratic Labor Party
Group O - Christian Democratic Party
Group P - Group P Independents (Ticket 1 of 2)
Group P - Group P Independents (Ticket 2 of 2)
Group Q - Citizens Electoral Council
Group R - Non-Custodial Parents Party
Group S - Socialist Alliance
Group T - Group T Independents
Group U - Australian Greens (Ticket 1 of 2)
Group U - Australian Greens (Ticket 2 of 2)
Group V - Group V Independents
Group W - Carers Alliance

WA
Group A - The Nationals
Group B - Citizens Electoral Council
Group C - Christian Democratic Party
Group D - Non-Custodial Parents Party
Group E - D.L.P. - Democratic Labor Party
Group F - Liberal Party
Group G - Australian Democrats (Ticket 1 of 2)
Group G - Australian Democrats (Ticket 2 of 2)
Group H - One Nation
Group I - Family First
Group J - Senator On-Line
Group K - Carers Alliance
Group L - Australian Labor Party
Group M - Group M Independents
Group N - Climate Change Coalition (Ticket 1 of 2)
Group N - Climate Change Coalition (Ticket 2 of 2)
Group O - Socialist Alliance
Group P - Group P Independents
Group Q - Group Q Independents
Group R - What Women Want
Group S - Conservatives for Climate and Environment
Group T - Liberty and Democracy Party
Group U - The Greens

2020hindsight · 17 November 2007

You click on group voting , you accept their set of preferences as already negotiated between them ....

For instance, in NSW, the preference allocations for "Pauline's United Australia Party", can be found by clicking on that party...

(although I didn't realise all preference deals were done yet) .

http://www.abc.net.au/elections/federal/2007/guide/groupvotingtickets.htm
http://www.abc.net.au/elections/federal/2007/guide/gtv_nsw_d.htm

NSW Group D - Pauline's United Australia
Preferences Candidate Party
1 BURSTON Brian Pauline's United Australia Party
2 CARTER John E Pauline's United Australia Party
3 NEWSON Judith One Nation
4 WEBBER Andrew One Nation
5 BUSSA Peter One Nation
6 FREW Andy One Nation
7 BORSAK Robert Australian Shooters Party
8 PETERSEN Terje Liberty and Democracy Party
9 NEWELL Patrice Climate Change Coalition
10 CARTER Marylou Carers Alliance
11 BRIDGE Garth Fishing Party
12 GREEN Paul Christian Democrats
13 MARKWELL Andrew Family First
14 GEREMIN John Non-Custodial Parents
15 McLENNAN Toni Hear Our Voice
16 BEAMS Nick Socialist Equality party
17 McNEALL Richard Keith Conservatives for Climate and Environment
18 LAWLER Ann Citizens Electoral Council
19 BAINBRIDGE Alex Socialist Alliance
20 CAINES Justine What Women Want
21 REILLY Pat Senator On-Line
22 O'DONOHUE Michael Democratic Labor Party
23 WOLDRING Klaas Independent
24 BRYCE Ian R Independent
25 TINYOW Walter Independent
26 NADAS Paula Independent
27 LEVY Curtis Independent
28 NERO Silvana Independent
29 STEFANAC Jennifer Independent
30 SHAW Robert Australian Shooters Party
31 MUIRHEAD Jim Australian Shooters Party
32 HESTELOW Andrew Australian Fishing and Lifestyle Party
33 MORGAN Thomas Idris Australian Fishing and Lifestyle Party
34 NILE Elaine Christian Democrats
35 LOTFIZADEH Allan Christian Democrats
36 PILT Peter Christian Democrats
37 YORK Bruce Christian Democrats
38 BROWN Nell Carers Alliance
39 CLARK Katrina Carers Alliance
40 MOCKLER Mary Carers Alliance
41 DER SARKISSIAN Berge Senator On-Line
42 CARROLL Lindsay Hear Our Voice
43 AUGUST John P Independent
44 BEREGSZASZI Janos Liberty and Democracy Party
45 ROBINSON Janette What Women Want
46 PRICE Susan Socialist Alliance
47 EMANUEL Kamala Socialist Alliance
48 DOBSON Tim Socialist Alliance
49 KRUSZELNICKI Karl Climate Change Coalition
50 GRAY Kathy Family First
51 McCAFFREY Ian David Citizens Electoral Council
52 BRADLEY Max Independent
53 PATERSON Stewart Fishing Party
54 MAXFIELD James David Conservatives for Climate and Environment
55 FOSTER Roland Non-Custodial Parents
56 CHAN Maria Independent
57 DIVJAK Carol Socialist Equality party
58 O'DONOHUE Terence Markham Democratic Labor Party
59 COONAN Helen Liberal Party
60 WILLIAMS John National Party
61 LEES Murray National Party
62 McGAHEY Vicky Liberal Party
63 CURRIE Carolyn Liberal Party
64 PATERSON Brett Australian Democrats
65 KING David Australian Democrats
66 HEILPERN Sandra Greens
67 HO Christina Greens
68 MUNDEY Jack Greens
69 ELLA-DUNCAN Marcia Greens
70 SHOEBRIDGE David Greens
71 JAMES Pauline Labor Party
72 SEATON Fiona Labor Party
73 ESBER Pierre Labor Party
74 STEPHENS Ursula Labor Party
75 CAMERON Doug Labor Party
76 ARBIB Mark Labor Party
77 NETTLE Kerry Greens
78 PAYNE Marise Liberal Party
79 SHUMACK Lyn Australian Democrats

Who are you voting for?

Who will you vote for?

Labor

Liberal

National

Other with LIB/Nat preference

Other with a Labor preference

Greens

explod

Gong Xi Fa Cai

explod

In Memoriam

Gong Xi Fa Cai

explod

Gong Xi Fa Cai

In Memoriam

Hatchet Moderator

explod

Beware of Dropbears

Beware of Dropbears

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency