Oz Federal Election 2013 - Discussion and Comments

[medhead]

Bit of selective reading there? Even with my cursory reading of that report I note that the Hawke Government did this:

The Superannuation and Other Benefits Legislation Amendment Act 1986 amended the legislation governing the operation of both the DFRDB and DFRB from the payday of 23 October, 1986 to discount the 1986 pension increase by 2 per cent from 9.2 per cent to 7.2 per cent.[38] This policy continued till 20 October, 1989 (that is, the full CPI increases were not passed on to DFRDB pensioners). There was no later increase in the DFRDB pension to make up for this period of discounting.

Seems you're the one with selective reading. The main complaint is indexing by CPI, which is viewed to have reduced their standard of living. That was introduced by Fraser. One year of special measures that applied to ALL commonwealth pensions, is a minor issue. It certainly has not reduced his pension from a previous level as claimed. It also has nothing to do with Rudd as claimed.

 

[eastwest101]

....policy that is a major threat to government dent levels and continuing deficit. This raises my existing question. How can anyone who who claims to oppose deficits and debt and also claims to oppose the PPL policy support Abbott? How can they ignore the threat to government debt? Debt levels that are calculated to be greater than those of the ALP.

I hope you were thundering on about the ALP costings in 2007 that were released at 5pm Friday before the Sat election. Oppositions apparently don't release their full costings before the stroke of midnight unless there is some sort of law implemented to compell them to do it.

Yes yes - I know - you can't change the behaviour of the ALP in 2007 medhead, but I am just saying that I can't change the behaviour of the coalition in 2013 either....

 

[amaroo]

Right so you're backing away from your previous rants about debt and deficit. Good to see you final acknowledge the error in your previous position. Can you finally acknowledge that you vote for the coalition blindly without even considering party policy.

In any case, this is a core Abbott policy not a random minor policy. Abbott is nailing his flag to the PPL mast head.

One persons post is another persons rant!

Errors, there are plenty here....none by me

Why the interest in how I vote?

My voting intentions can't be that obvious.......Moods has marked me down as a swinger

I had you picked for a swinging voter from the outset .... just like Skyring

 

[medhead]

I hope you were thundering on about the ALP costings in 2007 that were released at 5pm Friday before the Sat election. Oppositions apparently don't release their full costings before the stroke of midnight unless there is some sort of law implemented to compell them to do it.

Yes yes - I know - you can't change the behaviour of the ALP in 2007 medhead, but I am just saying that I can't change the behaviour of the coalition in 2013 either....

Yet you seem to buy the coalition line that two wrongs make a right. The coalition is running on trust us. But they don't want to lift standards.

 

[drsmithy]

Then why was Prince Harry chastised in dressing in a naz_ costume?

Just to be clear, you consider that comparable to being photographed at a school with a picture of Hitler in the background ?

 

[drsmithy]

No, of course there was nothing sinister about a class display on leaders of WW2. I made the point precisely to highlight the similarity to the other incident that so deeply and stridently offended Julia Gillard. Nobody imagines that singling out Hitler from a school project display of Roosevelt, Churchill, Macarthur, Monty and Rommel means that Rudd is a naz_.

Though now I think on it...

There is no similarity in the two situations at all.

Now, if Kev had gotten up in front of a crowd of neo-naz_s to speak, and been snapped in front of a picture of Hitler, you might have had some semblance of similarity.

 

[drsmithy]

Wiping a party because you don't agree with every policy - don't think so.

Not voting for a party because of a policy they consider to be key, however, and follows a pattern of similarly structured policies in the past, might be a reason.

 

[amaroo]

Not voting for a party because of a policy they consider to be key, however, and follows a pattern of similarly structured policies in the past, might be a reason.

Correct. This is how any logical voter would assess the worthy party/candidate gunning for your vote.

 

[casanovawa]

The only party that has been running up the debt over the last 6 years has been the ALP, almost out of control the way the budget deficit has been growing by the month this year... They have got most of their estimates wrong over their 2 terms and the way their revenue estimates from their taxes they proposed hasn't beenw ithin a bull's roar of what eventuated, leading to them prematurely spending like drunken sailor will in the eyes of many Australia's have shot their creditiblity to pieces...

Even if Kruddy is proposing to spend less in the future would anyone believe a word these clowns are saying from now on??? You talk about looking at "similarly structured policies in the past" what a bunch of doozies the ALP are dragging around behind them...

As opposed to the Libs maybe going to spend more in the future??? Its a case of maybe against established fact (of a bunch of lying, maths challenged bumblers) which has gotten us where we are now up a certain creek...

I would be happy if TA got in and maybe trimmed some of his plans or delayed them a year or two, but my faith in Labor to manage the economy responisbly is lower than the proverbial whale ****... So for many it doesn't even come down to much of a contest really...

And are we still banging on about the opposition releasing everything, grow up, no opposition going into an election campaign is doing that anywhere around the world these days unless absolutely forced to... Its all about being a small target if you can...

 

[medhead]

The only party that has been running up the debt over the last 6 years has been the ALP, almost out of control the way the budget deficit has been growing by the month this year... They have got most of their estimates wrong over their 2 terms and the way their revenue estimates from their taxes they proposed hasn't beenw ithin a bull's roar of what eventuated, leading to them prematurely spending like drunken sailor will in the eyes of many Australia's have shot their creditiblity to pieces...

Even if Kruddy is proposing to spend less in the future would anyone believe a word these clowns are saying from now on??? You talk about looking at "similarly structured policies in the past" what a bunch of doozies the ALP are dragging around behind them...

As opposed to the Libs maybe going to spend more in the future??? Its a case of maybe against established fact (of a bunch of lying, maths challenged bumblers) which has gotten us where we are now up a certain creek...

I would be happy if TA got in and maybe trimmed some of his plans or delayed them a year or two, but my faith in Labor to manage the economy responisbly is lower than the proverbial whale ****... So for many it doesn't even come down to much of a contest really...

And are we still banging on about the opposition releasing everything, grow up, no opposition going into an election campaign is doing that anywhere around the world these days unless absolutely forced to... Its all about being a small target if you can...

The fact remains that the coalition is promising to spend double the ALP. Not a case of maybe. The coalition has promise to spend more. Basically you are happy for the coalition to lie about what they are going to do. Double standards compared to what you accept from the ALP, I bet.

Perhaps you need to mature your standards and understand or how the process works. The opposition get judged on their promises, including cost. When the oppositions promises cost double the government's, your one eyes attack on the ALP spending history is ludicrous. Made even more ridiculous because you are trying to pretend that the GFC would not have happened under a coalition government.

 

[medhead]

Correct. This is how any logical voter would assess the worthy party/candidate gunning for your vote.

Then why don't you?

 

[casanovawa]

The fact remains that the coalition is promising to spend double the ALP. Not a case of maybe. The coalition has promise to spend more. Basically you are happy for the coalition to lie about what they are going to do. Double standards compared to what you accept from the ALP, I bet.

Perhaps you need to mature your standards and understand or how the process works. The opposition get judged on their promises, including cost. When the oppositions promises cost double the government's, your one eyes attack on the ALP spending history is ludicrous. Made even more ridiculous because you are trying to pretend that the GFC would not have happened under a coalition government.

Oppositions get judged on promises and Governments get judged on their track record... Pretty obvious which one the general public seems to be less enchanted with eh as they have pretty much lied non stop for the last two terms... And prior track records are also pretty good indicators of future performance... And while Labor for the last 6 years has been TALKING a good game, they haven't come close to delivering on many of the great ideas/platitudes/targets they have trotted out, one political mistep after an economic one, they couldn't help falling on their faces repeatedly... Why would Joe Public want to fall for the same guff again and again and again???

And no one is forgetting the GFC but its fading into distant memory as an excuse for the serial screw ups of the current government, with the mining and investment boom we had and China's then going boom, it would have been almost impossible for us to go into anything more than a shallow down turn, so lets not try to rewrite history and make out Australia came within a hairs breadth of getting pole axed like the US and Europe did... But its almost getting as tiresome as Bush's illegal wars in terms of the ad nauseum recycled BS...

 

[amaroo]

Then why don't you?

Oh, I am. I'm very confident that the party/candidate that I back will be great for the country.

 

[Skyring]

There is no similarity in the two situations at all.

Denial isn't just a river in Egypt, evidently. It's flowing well here.

 

[Skyring]

The fact remains that the coalition is promising to spend double the ALP. Not a case of maybe.

Citation required here.

 

[drsmithy]

Oppositions get judged on promises and Governments get judged on their track record...

And the Liberals record is of massive spending levels on things similar to Abbot's PPL and unsustainable tax cuts.

Funded at the time by asset sales and a once-off mining boom.

Unfortunately there aren't many assets left, and the mining boom is winding down.

 

[drsmithy]

Denial isn't just a river in Egypt, evidently. It's flowing well here.

By all means, enlighten me on how getting up in front of a group of agitated political "protestors" carrying signs and yelling abuse is the same as visiting a schoolroom. I could do with a laugh.

 

[Pushka]

Cut cut cut. Cut cut cut. Cut cut cut. Cut cut cut.

 

[OATEK]

The fact remains that the coalition is promising to spend double the ALP.

That one already got a FAIL from fact checker.

 

[amaroo]

<snip>

Unfortunately there aren't many assets left, and the mining boom is winding down.

and after 6 years of this poor excuse of a Gov - no money left in the bank!