Oz Federal Election 2013 - Discussion and Comments

[Pushka]

And just for the record.Medhead does like an argument.I know that for certain as I do as well.We all have our own biases.But I really dont think "born to rule"or "lefties" really are terrible insults.

I think it depends on a lot of things as to whether they are insults. For one, the intention of the person saying it. If I called someone a leftie I would probably be meaning to insult them, as opposed to saying Labor voter, which isn't an insult, just a fact. Born to rule implies Arrogance and all that comes with that word. So to me, insulting.

So I guess we really can't determine how someone else might take offence at a particular word.

And i have said numerous times, the performance of (Abbott as) an opposition leader is completely different to that of a Prime Minister. So how can we possibly judge his performance. You see, I thought Julie Gillard would make a good PM. Look how that turned out!

 

[lovestotravel]

I thought Julie Gillard would make a good PM. Look how that turned out!

On what possible basis would you think that ?

 

[serfty]

On what possible basis would you think that ?

TBH, she did not seem that bad as KRudd's offsider, in opposition and then in government. Then again, that may have been in contrast.

 

[casanovawa]

Yes, it was a shellacking.

I remember reading headlines suggesting that the new order was going to last a generation. Didn't quite work out that way......Krudd was excommunicated within 30 months & the once in a generation election result was wiped out in under 3 years.

Now we are trapped in a torturous slow motion death march towards Sept 2013.........where it appears another once in a generation election result will be delivered!

These once in a generation election results are coming in on a yearly base for the ALP at State and Federal level....

 

[Hvr]

A <snip>
The full facts of the policy have yet to be revealed. The intent of it is to encourage women on salaries to maintain a standard of living whilst having children. I rather think we should all wait until the FACTS are known and not jump to conclusions.


<snip>

Why is this even being considered? Surely having a child is a choice and like every choice you allocate resources to the detriment of other opportunities to use them?

It looks to me like more middle class welfare that will be paid for by poorer people. The management of women on maternity leave is a nightmare now and having worked beside them I know I, the single bloke was always expected to cover for them and change my plans to accommodate their whims.

This will only make it worse and generate another generation of welfare leeches who expect their every desire to be paid for regardless of reasonableness.

A <snip>


<snip>

I dont care who is in power. I just want them to stick to CORE promises and be competent. That is the only way the electorate can TRULY know what it is exactly, they are voting for.

Tony Abbott will not be held to the same standard of honesty and scrutiiny as Julia Gillard. He will be in the Howard style of core and non-core promises as it suits him.

There is already a push by the Liberal party to lower wages with the removal of penalty rates. This attack on workers will continue and yet so many of them will be convinced that they are better off because he right wing shock jocks/Murdoch media will tell them that the Liberal party is wonderful regardless of the facts.

As for the opposition being decimated and people thinking that is good, well I don't think it is. To have unfettered power with virtually no checks will mean some horrendous policies will be implemented. Look at QLD.

Hubris is the biggest problem for the Liberal party at the moment. Their dream of three easy terms of government may well come crashing down if they don't deliver and the Labor party regroup.

 

[Pushka]

On what possible basis would you think that ?

I can't remember back that far - she has battered to death any positive brain cells I had for her .....

I think the Liberals have no thoughts that it will be easy for them so their hubris is not at issue.

 

[casanovawa]

It looks to me like more middle class welfare that will be paid for by poorer people.

Hmm, i love this mentality... As i think has been establish several times, "poorer people" pay no net tax, they suck out of the system rather than contribute into it so there is a complete inability for them to "pay" middle class people anything... This feeling of some sort of impost can only be so if you take the approach that these "poor people" felt entitled to fund their lifestyle by taking a big grab out of the wallet of people that have done a bit better for themselves (mainly out of their own efforts) and so when they can't grab quite as much because the middle class people get to keep a poultry sum more (of their own money they earnt) the "poor people" almost feel like they are having to "pay" this money back that they felt entitled to, but had never actually earnt themselves in the first place... Like they're intrisically owed something for their underachievement and are being denied it somehow...

The management of women on maternity leave is a nightmare now and having worked beside them I know I, the single bloke was always expected to cover for them and change my plans to accommodate their whims. This will only make it worse and generate another generation of welfare leeches who expect their every desire to be paid for regardless of reasonableness.

Yes i have been in a few offices where a couple of women at a time have been on maternity leave and so i principally had to take on most of the extra work, which was a lot of fun... And of course when they come back to do 2 days a week and the first half of the first day is morning tea and catching up and the second half of the second day is afternoon tea, winding down and handing over to others to complete unfinished tasks, well lets face it they can only be entrusted with the most simple, mundane work tasks rather than anything urgent or important...

But that comment about welfare leeches smacks of far right, silver spoonism if ever i have heard it....

The other stuff in your comments about right wing radio is the usual Alan Jones mind control guff which i think we have dealt with in the thread... Of course TA and his govt will be smacked hard if they diverge too far from their core and non core promises but he is going to have a hell of a job after being handed this basket case so he may be cut a little slack... And hopefully the coalition will control their hubris, i mean Howard's period was one warning of what hubris can do, but the total annd utter train wreck that has been the last 6 years should stand head and shoulders above that as a guide in how to not totally screw up a golden opportunity...

 

[vetrade]

I haven't "done a u turn". This thread is full of extreme right views shouting down any attempt to subject their preferred party to any scrutiny with things like Juliar and 3 words sound bites. Adopting an extreme left position is one response to such an approach. As I said you and the others seem to catch up in your hatred to actually bother to discuss topics. To actually even move past party political statements to consider the future. How about giving us your assessment of Abbott's performance or that of the future government? Probably too hard to do.

So now you want the discussion to shift to the future just when we are having so much fun discussing the past, present and ongoing failures of the incumbent government, medhead? As we sob tears of frustration at the thought of another few months with Gillard, Swan, Wrong, Emerson et al, you can blithely ignore what is going on around us NOW and propose a pre-emptive assessment (aka attack) on Abbott when he is not even in power and only, as yet, holds the reins to the latter day incarnation of the last economically competent government we had? Ever feel just a little bit biased in not cutting him any of the slack you so readily lavish on the Labor mob, at least until he actually gets his bum in the big chair?

Don’t criticise me, you infer – I only “adopted the extreme left position” because I felt duty bound to counter the “extreme right views” shouted by those caught up in their “hatred”, you say. Well, excuse me. I was so enthralled by your little game of make-believe leftie ranting that I (we?) all suspected that they were actually your personally-held opinions – maybe even held with conviction. Maybe you should notate your posts with a disclaimer along the lines that the opinions expressed are included for balance only and are not really your own……..

While you’re time travelling to the future I hope you’ll spare a thought for those of us back in the real world.

 

[joeymelb]

Just my 2 cents...

Say, if Gillard/Swan are the CEO and CFO of BHP, and delivered continued annual loss. Shouldn't the head roll? Even if, it was the fault of "Accounts Department" (read Treasury) making bad forward revenue and expense estimates, then surely in a private world the departmental head plus quite a few staff were expected to be fired. Even worse, the company could be under the ASIC investigation and incur shareholders' revolt. At the end of the day, Gillard/Swan are in charge of the finance, they are responsible to balance the books.

Currently, as an simple income earner, what I see is a government overestimating their income and spending more than they earn.

Selfishly, I prefer to see Labor win September election. In my opinion, the budget situation is full of holes and gaps like a white ant ravaged home. Labor needs another term to really bring the house down into a rubble, before Coalition could rebuild.

I am very disappointed with Labor at the present. The party used to be full of aspirational people from hard working background, who knew the difficulties of running a business and what it meant to be a common laborer. Now the party is just full of lawyers, union reps who started their political career from Uni Activism and never worked a day of hard labor... I seriously doubt any of them ever worked as a cleaner in McDonald's or flip burgers.

I just hope at the end of the day with whoever is in power, that we all still have a job that pays our bills...

 

[amaroo]

There is already a push by the Liberal party to lower wages with the removal of penalty rates. This attack on workers will continue and yet so many of them will be convinced that they are better off because he right wing shock jocks/Murdoch media will tell them that the Liberal party is wonderful regardless of the facts.

Big difference between coalition IR policy and the nonsense that pours out of the mouth of Billy Shorthorn.

IMO people should stop listening to the rambling thoughts of intellectual pygmies like Billy & start reading the facts!

 

[casanovawa]

I think Labor have been a bunch of union hacks and factional heavy weights for as long as i can remember, but in the past they have done some noteworthy things while yes the current lot are a rabble all over the place, infinitely good at spinning a load of BS but hard to pin down exactly where they've come from and what they are good for... The only time they look half competent and capable is when you compare them to their coalition bedfellows The Greens, who seem to come from a different reality...

 

[eastwest101]

IMO people should stop listening to the rambling thoughts of intellectual pygmies like Billy & start reading the facts!

You mean the "facts" asserted by Brendan O'Connor about 457 visas recently?? :shock:

 

[casanovawa]

In all this talk of the budget deficit and all recently, it keeps coming up about how irresponsible the previous Coalition Govt was to hand out all this middle class welfare and tax cuts and not spending on big ticket infrastraucture and squandering the boom and all...

And yet i keep seeming to recall about how Labor back in the early 2000s use to savage Howard and Costello relentlessly for being the biggest/highest taxing Government in history?? It just doesn't seem to add up that back then they were complaining about how much tax was being taken and now they are complaining about how much tax was given back, unless there's a bit of liberal rewriting of history going on with a bit of 20/20 hindsight mixed in for good measure??? That they were complaining about the tax burden when they actually 'really' meant the Coaliation should have been keeping the tax burden high (and higher) and just doing even more forward thinking things than the Future Fund...

 

[medhead]

Yes. Your posts assume that people who vote with the coalition are born to rules. That is in denial of their discussion points.

No, I use that phrase based on what people write and say. I do not think about every coalition voter when I say that, only those that say "only Tony Abbott can lead this country". Which is contridicted by Abbott's actions.

Now this is the bit that leaves me dumbfounded. There is NOTHING that Gillard has done that has any sense of good governance, accountability, and political standards. Gillard has gone against many of the Labor principles in the last few years. They have spent relentlessly without due consideration of the financial reality - but their absurd predictions.

Perhaps you need to learn what they have actually done and stop listening to Abbott's misinformation. NDIS, paid parental leave, education, health NEAT target. Are these all bad things? An ETS that is linked to a market and that will reduce according to market demand?

As for their predictions - Apparently they were mostly correct last year. Federal budget 2013|Michael Gordon Basically it seems that many people are blaming them on the political failings not on what they are actually trying to do. 3 word sound bites are dumbing down politics.

On the one hand, Swan is confident he has a good story to tell and, when it comes to the macro economy and the rest of the world, the evidence is there to support him.

An unemployment rate of 5.5 per cent, gross domestic product tipped to be 3 per cent next financial year and inflation under control are not contested - and are broadly in line with last year's forecasts (though GDP this year is a little less than what was predicted).

The most impressive chart Swan cited in the budget lock-up was one showing that, by 2015, the Australian economy will have grown by 22 per cent since the global financial crisis.
The equivalent figure is 9 per cent for the United States and 2 per cent for Japan, while Europe will be yet to enter positive territory.

On the other hand, the problem for Labor is that credibility is earned by what you do, not what you say you are going to do, and even Labor's successes tend to be sullied by declarations it didn't have to make, and were generally driven by poor political judgment.

The full facts of the policy have yet to be revealed. The intent of it is to encourage women on salaries to maintain a standard of living whilst having children. I rather think we should all wait until the FACTS are known and not jump to conclusions.

You might have noticed that I tried to avoid the worthiness or importance of paid parental leave in my comment. I was talking about the politics and pointing out that Abbott is doing everything that the ALP is lambasted for in relation to his PPL policy.

But if we are going to talk about the policy, it is over priced and provides too much to the middle and upper classes. (that's not a class comment it's a need based comment and effective use of my taxes comment) Anyone earning $150000 and over will get $150000 per year. The top 1% of incomes are $210000 and above. I think $150k+ is like the top 3% to 5% (someone will correct me if wrong) Why the hell do they need a full $150000 in income support to have a child. The ALP policy provides a base amount and lets the employer top it up if they wish. The Coalition will have the taxpayer pay the full amount. This is not to say it's a bad concept, the problem is what is being proposed.

Then lets look at the stated purpose of this, Abbott and Hockey have clearly stated that it is about increasing productivity and getting mothers back into the workforce. Paying someone to be on leave while having a baby will help them decide to have a baby and also help maintain their standard of living, but it will not make it easier for them to go back to work and leave the child in child care.

Then there is the cost. I note that Germany has a paid parental leave scheme with all sorts of benefits. They also have a debt that is about 40% of GDP. IIRC.

Of course things change. Like having to give up core policy issues and promises just so you can keep your position in power. If she was unable to broker a deal with the independents AND keep her core promises then she should have gone to the electorate again. And I also apply this criteria to the Coalition. If they had done a deal like Gillard did, and broken CORE promises then I would be angry with them too and if they had performed as poorly as this Government has, may well have voted Labor next time.

I dont care who is in power. I just want them to stick to CORE promises and be competent. That is the only way the electorate can TRULY know what it is exactly, they are voting for.

No one could have done a deal without compromising their promises before the election. That's why Abbott did not get support, he wouldn't bend far enough. Having another election is not the answer, there are clearly established conventions involved and they were followed.

Another way to know what a party stands for is to research their policies. They need to actually have policies in order to research them.

I also note that you have been banging on about the ETS and core promises. Here is the challenge to you and anyone else who bangs on about that lie. Did that statement change your vote?

Hmm, i love this mentality... As i think has been establish several times, "poorer people" pay no net tax, they suck out of the system rather than contribute into it so there is a complete inability for them to "pay" middle class people anything...

I think you're just making up stuff now. Lets have a look at what the ATO tells use about 2010-11. If you refer to table 2.13 and 2.14 in this spreadsheet you will find that taxpayer across the income levels had net tax payable. http://www.ato.gov.au/docs/cor00345977_2011INDchap.xls Basically just saying something is true does not actually establish it truth. Something that the coalition needs to learn.

But please do go ahead with the entitlement complex created and nutured by the coalition.

[TABLE="width: 657"]
[TR]
[TD="colspan: 7"]Resident individuals’ net tax payable, by taxable income, 2010–11 income year
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD="colspan: 2"]Taxpayers[SUP]1[/SUP]
[/TD]
[TD="colspan: 2"]Net tax payable
[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Taxable income
[/TD]
[TD]No.
[/TD]
[TD]%
[/TD]
[TD]$m
[/TD]
[TD]%
[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]$6,000 or less[SUP]2[/SUP]
[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]2,227
[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]0.0%
[/TD]
[TD]..
[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]0.0%
[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]$6,001 – $37,000
[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]2,908,555
[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]31.0%
[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]5,363
[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]4.0%
[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]$37,001 – $80,000
[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]4,598,771
[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]49.1%
[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]45,637
[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]34.4%
[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]$80,001 – $180,000
[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]1,613,234
[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]17.2%
[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]46,940
[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]35.4%
[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]$180,001 or more
[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]251,397
[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]2.7%
[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]34,773
[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]26.2%
[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Total[SUP]3[/SUP]
[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]9,374,184
[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]100.0%
[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]132,713
[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]100.0%
[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="colspan: 7"]1. The taxpayer population includes only taxable resident individuals – that is, those with net tax payable of more than $0.
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="colspan: 7"]2. '..' means rounded to zero, but not zero.
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="colspan: 7"]3. The totals may differ from the sum of the components, due to rounding.
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

The other stuff in your comments about right wing radio is the usual Alan Jones mind control guff which i think we have dealt with in the thread... Of course TA and his govt will be smacked hard if they diverge too far from their core and non core promises but he is going to have a hell of a job after being handed this basket case so he may be cut a little slack... And hopefully the coalition will control their hubris, i mean Howard's period was one warning of what hubris can do, but the total annd utter train wreck that has been the last 6 years should stand head and shoulders above that as a guide in how to not totally screw up a golden opportunity...

Oh yeah? Held to account by who? Certainly their policy failures are not held to account now. Then if the ABC dares to question them the chattering masses will scream bias - falsely. Overall pull the other one, it plays jingle bells.

As for screwing up golden opportunties. Priceless. The GFC is now the fault of the ALP. Hubris writ large. The coalition would have been equally poor performers.

Big difference between coalition IR policy and the nonsense that pours out of the mouth of Billy Shorthorn.

IMO people should stop listening to the rambling thoughts of intellectual pygmies like Billy & start reading the facts!

Yep, people should stop listening to intellectual pygmies and start reading the facts. That applies across the board.

In all this talk of the budget deficit and all recently, it keeps coming up about how irresponsible the previous Coalition Govt was to hand out all this middle class welfare and tax cuts and not spending on big ticket infrastraucture and squandering the boom and all...

And yet i keep seeming to recall about how Labor back in the early 2000s use to savage Howard and Costello relentlessly for being the biggest/highest taxing Government in history?? It just doesn't seem to add up that back then they were complaining about how much tax was being taken and now they are complaining about how much tax was given back, unless there's a bit of liberal rewriting of history going on with a bit of 20/20 hindsight mixed in for good measure??? That they were complaining about the tax burden when they actually 'really' meant the Coaliation should have been keeping the tax burden high (and higher) and just doing even more forward thinking things than the Future Fund...

Are you serious? It isn't an either/or proposition. They were the highest taxing government and they did not spend the tax collected in the best way - or whatever the complaint is that you're referencing. It really isn't that hard to understand. The tax churning system they created is a total waste.

 

[drron]

Hey Medhead the tax payable that you quote actually shoots down your argument.
See note 1 on what you have quoted-"The taxpayer population includes only taxable resident individuals – that is, those with net tax payable of more than $0."
So your quote has-9,374,184 taxpayers.
Yet the ABS says there are presently 11663200 people working in Australia-
6202.0 - Labour Force, Australia, Apr 2013

So that is over 2 million workers not paying tax yet alone accounting for the rest of our 23 million population.

 

[Pushka]

I'm not going to quote you medhead as there is too much "stuff" to quote but I'm tired of you taking the position that we only listen to Abbott and that Sydney guy to form opinions.

And the question you need to think about is if Gillard had been honest that she was going to implement a carbon tax, then the election result would be different.

And I don't believe either party should have been given the chance to form a minority government if it meant their core promises were to be broken. Australia wanted a re election especially those who got dudded by the electorate.

 

[dfcatch]

I love the fact that the issue of paid maternity leave (an ALP love child policy) is now derided by the ALP and it's supporters because it's championed by Tony Abbott.

Just saying

 

[amaroo]

Hey Medhead the tax payable that you quote actually shoots down your argument.
See note 1 on what you have quoted-"The taxpayer population includes only taxable resident individuals – that is, those with net tax payable of more than $0."
So your quote has-9,374,184 taxpayers.
Yet the ABS says there are presently 11663200 people working in Australia-
6202.0 - Labour Force, Australia, Apr 2013

So that is over 2 million workers not paying tax yet alone accounting for the rest of our 23 million population.

Yes, it's all been posted before.......yet the line "only the poor pay tax" just keeps dribbling out.

Infographic | Australians who don&rsquo;t pay tax: what would Romney say?

 

[11sjw]

I'll just pop this here.

 

[cove]

Croc tears?