Oz Federal Election 2013 - Discussion and Comments

[amaroo]

So... it turns the difference between a fiscal emergency and responsible economic management is 6 billion over four years.

I like it. Less money spent on the PS & Foreign Aid. More money spent on infrastructure and job creating.

 

[777]

Unlike Swanny…

"budget emergency" when they're doing it. If we were in, we'd do pretty much the same.

Seriously, running a deficit in this global economic climate is good economic policy. It always will be until the global economy picks up.

I was genuinely fearful that the coalition believed their own rhetoric about returning to surplus immediately because it would undoubtedly plunge the country into recession. As of today (48 hours to go) they have said that they won't. I'm actually relieved to hear that but the fact that got 5 years out of running such an obviously stupid line says a lot about how little scrutiny they've been under.

 

[777]

I like it. Less money spent on the PS & Foreign Aid. More money spent on infrastructure and job creating.

I'm all for infrastructure spending. No complaint there although completely abolishing urban public transport funding is short sighted and stupid.

 

[Pukka]

There are still ways of making money from this if you really believe it.

The betting is pretty clear right now - Coalition to win 91-100 seats is the firm favourite. Any more or less than that and there are fairly big prices available. Ditto with the ALP at 51-60 seats.

To be honest, I don't mind the Coalition winning but I get a bit uncomfortable with the likely extremity of the result already, so I hope his small sample is a bit of a statistical anomaly.

Woah big move on Rudd with Centrebet Tony Abbots odds have doubled to 1.02 lol

 

[amaroo]

I'm all for infrastructure spending. No complaint there although completely abolishing urban public transport funding is short sighted and stupid.

Everyone loves public transport - as long as they don't have to use it!

 

[Pukka]

Everyone loves public transport - as long as they don't have to use it!

Yes the higher rate of tax is like that too, everyone loves it until they start paying it. Funny that.

 

[777]

Everyone loves public transport - as long as they don't have to use it!

Infrastructure spending should be practical not ideological. If the best investment is PT to move people around then invest in that. If it's roads so be it. But saying "we will not look at proposals for public transport" under any circumstances is just bad policy making.

 

[Skyring]

I'm all for infrastructure spending. No complaint there although completely abolishing urban public transport funding is short sighted and stupid.

Why do you think the Commonwealth should be paying for council buses?

 

[whatmeworry]

thank goodness it's only showing affection to his family.

He still looks creepy around his daughters or for that matter any woman.

So you conservatives are already crowing about the Liberals winning?

Good Luck, as you careless aging baby boomers want the rest of us to continue funding your lifestyle's whilst the greatest generation did without so you can blow the whole foundations of that prosperity that we enjoy today!

The Liberals will keep spending as much as Labour, however it will be to the benefit of those whose time has passed and who will then just shrug, when it is their time to give something back.

 

[marki]

Quote-=>He still looks creepy around his daughters or for that matter any woman.<=-Unquote

Sorry that's a bit creepy you saying that!

 

[Pushka]

This "baby boomer" will be fully self funded and not receiving any of your tax payments thanks. BTW you do realise that it is our tax payments that put you through school don't you? And paid for all your doctors visits, helped fund your Uni education if you went, health payments to Doctors and Hospitals, paid baby bonuses if you had children and so on. Helped fund childcare etc et. Goodness, who looks selfish now?

 

[Skyring]

The Liberals will keep spending as much as Labour, however it will be to the benefit of those whose time has passed and who will then just shrug, when it is their time to give something back.

You have no idea. Some of those who give most are well advanced in years.

 

[777]

Why do you think the Commonwealth should be paying for council buses?

Well, state governments run buses for the most part and the infrastructure they run on (roads) gets big Federal subsidies. As it stands Tony Abbott will pay for the roads they move on but not for rail even if it can be demonstrated it will move more people for less. Why not just invest on the basis of cost/benefit?

 

[amaroo]

He still looks creepy around his daughters or for that matter any woman.

I don't see what you are seeing He's a father that obviously loves his kids......whats the problem? The bloke is surrounded by women at home and at work

As a dad I can't see any issues......are you looking at this as a dad?

you conservatives are already crowing about the Liberals winning?

I reckon we're pretty reserved actually. All the noise is from the other side IMHO

Luck, as you careless aging baby boomers want the rest of us to continue funding your lifestyle's whilst the greatest generation did without so you can blow the whole foundations of that prosperity that we enjoy today!

The Liberals will keep spending as much as Labour, however it will be to the benefit of those whose time has passed and who will then just shrug, when it is their time to give something back.

I get confused - what's a baby boomer these days?

FWIW according to wiki I'm Gen X

 

[Pukka]

He still looks creepy around his daughters or for that matter any woman.

So you conservatives are already crowing about the Liberals winning?

Good Luck, as you careless aging baby boomers want the rest of us to continue funding your lifestyle's whilst the greatest generation did without so you can blow the whole foundations of that prosperity that we enjoy today!

The Liberals will keep spending as much as Labour, however it will be to the benefit of those whose time has passed and who will then just shrug, when it is their time to give something back.

What a complete crock

One question are you paying the top rate of tax?

Even if you are which I guess you are not let me reassure you that you are not in any way for 1 milli second funding my lifestyle

 

[777]

<redacted>

I'm a tad skeptical about debating the point with someone who joined in election week and this is your first post but...

As long as you apply the same standard to ALL of schools, hospitals, conservation and environment, roads, public works, agriculture and fishing, industrial relations, community services, sport and recreation, consumer affairs, police, prisons and emergency services that's a perfectly reasonable argument and entirely consistent.

If not, it's a completely arbitrary point.

 

[amaroo]

Well, state governments run buses for the most part and the infrastructure they run on (roads) gets big Federal subsidies. As it stands Tony Abbott will pay for the roads they move on but not for rail even if it can be demonstrated it will move more people for less. Why not just invest on the basis of cost/benefit?

I'll take a new or improved road any day over a promise of a rail link between the never, never. These tosser can't even decide on an airport plot in Sydney let alone building any rail network.

I predict the next rail/PS link of large scale will be framed around the new airport that the Libs/Nats build in Sydney.

 

[777]

I'll take a new or improved road any day over a promise of a rail link between the never, never.

So would I. But i would take the reverse too (an actual rail line over a fantasy road) so it is clearly a straw man comparison.

Simple question: if the government is investing in infrastructure should it aim for best bang for the buck or should it simply decide arbitrarily it will only look at half the options?

 

[amaroo]

So would I. But i would take the reverse too (an actual rail line over a fantasy road) so it's a pretty stupid comparison.

Simple question: if the government is investing in infrastructure should it aim for best bang for the buck or should it simply decide arbitrarily it will only look at half the options?

FWIW I don't take kindly to your stupid comment......why is it that the forces from the left always resort to using offensive language?

Lets your side down IMHO!

 

[amaroo]

So would I. But i would take the reverse too (an actual rail line over a fantasy road) so it's a pretty stupid comparison.

Simple question: if the government is investing in infrastructure should it aim for best bang for the buck or should it simply decide arbitrarily it will only look at half the options?

Along with offensive language - I see you also like to leave major parts out of posts.....what, no reply on a new airport in Sydney????

Or are you more interested in a fast rail network that will only ever exist between the ears of one K Dudd!

I'll take a new or improved road any day over a promise of a rail link between the never, never. These tosser can't even decide on an airport plot in Sydney let alone building any rail network.

I predict the next rail/PS link of large scale will be framed around the new airport that the Libs/Nats build in Sydney.