113 replies to this topic

[Young Skywalker]

Howard and company took the country out of debt and into surplus.

Was that surplus funded by the sale of every public asset which wasn't nailed down? Was a sufficient proportion of those surpluses spent on much needed public infrastructure? Just asking.....

Edited by Young Skywalker, 01 June 2012 - 11:14 AM.

[proftournesol]

new vision from Parliament TV of the coalition leaving the chamber to escape Craig Thompson

[ayou2]

The parallels are self-evident to you, but unfortunately, largely illusory. Governments don't "win" the economy, or win anything in particular. Judging economic performance is a complex business, because there are so many variables, and so many measures. A focus on government debt, as any economist will tell you, is simplistic and, as at present, economically reckless.

It is pointless to compare the business of government to the business of teams playing one another according to a clearly defined set of rules by which one determines which has been successful.

Maybe it is too simplistic but the paralells are there and IMO they are quite relevant.

Sports clubs dont allow their member base to vote on club strategy. If they did, Mick Malthouse probably would have gone before he achieved premiership, Nathan Buckley was put in place ,ultimately, I believe, because Collingwood had lost faith in MM, but decided to make use of him to eventually install a better new coach, rather than just drop him altogether.

Mark Thompson the same, Alaister Clarkson was on the chopping block before 2008 .... etc.

John Worsfeld at West Coast survived calls for his head & has turned around some ordinary seasons post 2006.

WE, the voting public, are the problem in so far as no govt, left or right leaning, is allowed the time to get a long term strategy to come to fruition. Once pain reaches a certain threshold, we vote them out. Back to square one.

Why do we do this ? Ultimately, because we can. So it becomes like letting the membership of a sports club run the place. They dont see the results they want, heads must roll.

We dont see the things we think we want / need .... heads must also roll .... in the political arena.

This then leads to lots of fresh pollies each time, who spend the first term, just coming to grips with their extremely complex new work environment & equally complex new job. They arent terribly effective for quite some time & are often given an altogether new role, voted out in the case of one term govts or sacked in disgrace, just as they have completed their 'apprenticeship' ... so to speak.

So in my view, the problem is democracy. People who do not really know what is going on, other than what they read in the papers, get to ultimately choose and they base their choice on short term results. They also vote with their wallets, which isnt great, but it does seem to be the human nature we are stuck with.

IF, we moved away from democracy towards a centralised, work together government that wasn't subject to the whims of a largely selfish public, we could see results similar to what sports teams, who dont constantly chop & change their leadership roles, are able to achieve.

They would also get to spend alot more time doing what needed to be done & not carrying on like children (question time) or having to convince one another that they are onto a good thing. Looking at how many pages the Climate Lies thread generated .... its not hard to see that being in opposition to one another produces endless hot air. Heck, if we had a centralised work together govt, I'm 99% certain they would have just looked at the IPCC reports & said "better do something about this then & do it quickly".

It would save a lot of time, money, needless hostilities & disillusionment. Labour looks set to lose the next election for just that reason. "there will be no carbon tax" ..... we have a carbon tax. No one likes it, even if it might be the best thing to do, so out Labour go. (obviously this remains to be seen, but hopefully you get my drift)

If nothing else, its pretty tasty food for thought.

We entrust a work together govt to do what is best for us, if some of us dont like it then drink some cement and dont act so spoilt, its better, its cheaper, it gets rid of the clown factory & if we stick with it, we can all live happily ever after.

Edited by ayou2, 01 June 2012 - 01:08 PM.

[proftournesol]

I think that we can distinguish between policy direction and the party in power. The policy direction is virtually the same whether it's coalition or ALP so we do have continuity of policy. Any actual differences are greatly magnified though by each party because each wants to be in power. The problem is not with representative democracy, the problem is with the adversarial nature of the party political system. In fact the mechanics of minority government have worked quite well: the ALP has had to negotiate and accommodate the views of independents and Greens and has had to become more inclusive. When Abbott wins the next election it'll be back to back room deals with rich patrons in the mining industry and no consultation.

[Makka]

In my view the problem of dumb voting is largely attributable to inadequate education.

Nowadays education could more accurately be called training.
A deliberate strategy of the policy makers (and I don't mean politicians).

Here's a graduate speech from the US but it could as easily have been delivered in Aus. or the UK.
It accurately expresses many of my views too.

Edited by Makka, 01 June 2012 - 01:05 PM.

[proftournesol]

In my view the problem of dumb voting is largely attributable to inadequate education.

Nowadays education could more accurately be called training.
A deliberate strategy of the policy makers (and I don't mean politicians).

I agree Makka. Vocational training starts in school these days and the lack of a broad education is a problem.

[Makka]

It might also be true to say that the elites get a decent education and are actually trained to think, though still inside a fairly narrow reality tunnel.

Then you need a quick dose of LSD to break out

[ayou2]

It might also be true to say that the elites get a decent education and are actually trained to think, though still inside a fairly narrow reality tunnel.

Then you need a quick dose of LSD to break out

Shrooms are better.

[ayou2]

I think that we can distinguish between policy direction and the party in power. The policy direction is virtually the same whether it's coalition or ALP so we do have continuity of policy. Any actual differences are greatly magnified though by each party because each wants to be in power. The problem is not with representative democracy, the problem is with the adversarial nature of the party political system. In fact the mechanics of minority government have worked quite well: the ALP has had to negotiate and accommodate the views of independents and Greens and has had to become more inclusive. When Abbott wins the next election it'll be back to back room deals with rich patrons in the mining industry and no consultation.

Really ?

Howard gets booted, Labour repeal workchoices. If the Libs get in they promise to repeal carbon tax. Historically, on the big issues, that is how one ousts the other. One wants to do what they think is best for all, the other convinces the public its not & we see a change of govt.

Question time sees them arguing flat out every week about whats the best course of action ..... surely thats not all just for show is it ?

I can see one policy that intertwines which is constant growth, the methods differ but policy is the same.

Im guessing your hinting at what you see as the best thing, which would be the main two falling behind (seeing as you view them as pretty much equal) & the Greens rising to govern ... yes / no ?

[proftournesol]

yes, some of the methods differ, i.e. WorlChoices, but the push to a deregulated user pays economy with reduced security for all workers, degrading infrastructure, short-termism, managerialism over ideas, prioritising the macroeconomy over the lives of people is a strong common thread shared by both branches of Laberal. Like Telstra and Optus, the duopoly pretends to compete by emphasising small detail differences whilst essentially offering the same product.

[ayou2]

I still see a few more differences than you, but I'm not in total disagreement either.

Is it a conspiracy do you think ? Do Julia and Tony secretly play 'show me yours ... I'll show you mine' ? Maybe thats why he has read speedos, its symbolic of his love of red things, like Julias map of Tasmania.

Edited by ayou2, 01 June 2012 - 03:09 PM.

[emesbee]

I still see a few more differences than you, but I'm not in total disagreement either.

Is it a conspiracy do you think ? Do Julia and Tony secretly play 'show me yours ... I'll show you mine' ? Maybe thats why he has read speedos, its symbolic of his love of red things, like Julias map of Tasmania.

Please, don't put images like that in my mind. Thank goodness its friday though, a therapeutic visit to the Salma thread might be called for at this stage.

[Makka]

Shrooms are better.

Well, yes in a way. But not for this purpose IMO.

[rantan]

You dudes forgot PCP and angel dust

[Makka]

No experience.

I'd still do mushrooms if they came my way.
So soft.

Somebody should filter some shrooms into the tea at parliament.
It would do us all a lot of good.

[MC240]

No experience.

I'd still do mushrooms if they came my way.
So soft.

Somebody should filter some shrooms into the tea at parliament.
It would do us all a lot of good.

ORDER ORDER will the honourable member for Nimbin I mean Clarence please resume his seat, after I have another cup of that amazzzzzing tea.

Edited by MC240, 01 June 2012 - 07:29 PM.

[Makka]

LOL

I live very near Nimbin.
Lovely part of the planet.
And I've been to a few.

[rantan]

LOL

I live very near Nimbin.
Lovely part of the planet.
And I've been to a few.

Cool bananas Makka.

What were the other planets like?

[proftournesol]

Cool bananas Makka.

What were the other planets like?

That depends on what you are smokin'

[Makka]

This is the best I've been on so far.

[firefly0071]

Maybe it is too simplistic but the paralells are there and IMO they are quite relevant.

Sports clubs dont allow their member base to vote on club strategy. If they did, Mick Malthouse probably would have gone before he achieved premiership, Nathan Buckley was put in place ,ultimately, I believe, because Collingwood had lost faith in MM, but decided to make use of him to eventually install a better new coach, rather than just drop him altogether.

Mark Thompson the same, Alaister Clarkson was on the chopping block before 2008 .... etc.

John Worsfeld at West Coast survived calls for his head & has turned around some ordinary seasons post 2006.

WE, the voting public, are the problem in so far as no govt, left or right leaning, is allowed the time to get a long term strategy to come to fruition. Once pain reaches a certain threshold, we vote them out. Back to square one.

Why do we do this ? Ultimately, because we can. So it becomes like letting the membership of a sports club run the place. They dont see the results they want, heads must roll.

We dont see the things we think we want / need .... heads must also roll .... in the political arena.

This then leads to lots of fresh pollies each time, who spend the first term, just coming to grips with their extremely complex new work environment & equally complex new job. They arent terribly effective for quite some time & are often given an altogether new role, voted out in the case of one term govts or sacked in disgrace, just as they have completed their 'apprenticeship' ... so to speak.

So in my view, the problem is democracy. People who do not really know what is going on, other than what they read in the papers, get to ultimately choose and they base their choice on short term results. They also vote with their wallets, which isnt great, but it does seem to be the human nature we are stuck with.

IF, we moved away from democracy towards a centralised, work together government that wasn't subject to the whims of a largely selfish public, we could see results similar to what sports teams, who dont constantly chop & change their leadership roles, are able to achieve.

They would also get to spend alot more time doing what needed to be done & not carrying on like children (question time) or having to convince one another that they are onto a good thing. Looking at how many pages the Climate Lies thread generated .... its not hard to see that being in opposition to one another produces endless hot air. Heck, if we had a centralised work together govt, I'm 99% certain they would have just looked at the IPCC reports & said "better do something about this then & do it quickly".

It would save a lot of time, money, needless hostilities & disillusionment. Labour looks set to lose the next election for just that reason. "there will be no carbon tax" ..... we have a carbon tax. No one likes it, even if it might be the best thing to do, so out Labour go. (obviously this remains to be seen, but hopefully you get my drift)

If nothing else, its pretty tasty food for thought.

We entrust a work together govt to do what is best for us, if some of us dont like it then drink some cement and dont act so spoilt, its better, its cheaper, it gets rid of the clown factory & if we stick with it, we can all live happily ever after.

I actually think consensus does eventually come through.

When I was a child, no one cared about recycling but it is a common public value.

On a more recent note is the 20th Anniversary of the Mabo decision. Very controversial at that time but is more or less accepted by both sides of Parliament although somewhat reluctantly.

[proftournesol]

Oh yes I can remember the conservative hyperbole, our back yards weren't safe, it'd be the end of mining in Australia.... on and on, gloom and doom, Mabo was going to destroy our way of life!

[MC240]

oops double post

Edited by MC240, 03 June 2012 - 12:42 AM.

[MC240]

Oh yes I can remember the conservative hyperbole, our back yards weren't safe, it'd be the end of mining in Australia.... on and on, gloom and doom, Mabo was going to destroy our way of life!

Its different this time around, Abbott and the right wing media have convinced the general public that Labor has destroyed the economy, When the opposite is true given what the world economy has been through and still going through.

[ayou2]

MC240 .... The Reserve bank keeps lowering interest rates. Westpacs chief Economist (20+yrs experience IIRC) thinks we will see another 4 x .25% cuts before the end of the year. Retail figures continue to decline and you only have to look as far as how many specialist hifi stores are closing to see thats not just manipulation of figures.

3000 job losses in manufacturing last month.

Sony and Panasonic posted billions of dollars in losses (worldwide albeit) for just the last quarter.

Presiding over a resources boom and keeping the economy from catastrophic damage isnt a sign of good management in my books.

The gloss on our economic turd will wear off quick if China slows down.

[Super Mustud]

Its different this time around, Abbott and the right wing media have convinced the general public that Labor has destroyed the economy, When the opposite is true given what the world economy has been through and still going through.

MC, I do not hear too many people saying that Labor destroyed the economy. I do, however, hear many people saying that they did nowhere near as well as they claim and that they are not to be trusted when the poo hits the fan. It is an issue of credibility. There are some in Labor who have credibility on the economy, however as a government they are pretty ropey.

The public knows the Libs will, after all is said and done, make the economy the number 1 issue. The public suspects that Labor is just as likely to be diverted to basketweaving as the economy.

[firefly0071]

A lot of the public thinks the economy will "blow up" on July 1st when the carbon tax is in place.

As I expect, there will be massive riots and rallies by the people and organisations that oppose the carbon tax with the expenses provided by the mining companies (who also oppose the carbon tax) on July 1st.

Better riots than in Athens.

[Super Mustud]

A lot of the public thinks the economy will "blow up" on July 1st when the carbon tax is in place.

As I expect, there will be massive riots and rallies by the people and organisations that oppose the carbon tax with the expenses provided by the mining companies (who also oppose the carbon tax) on July 1st.

Better riots than in Athens.

The only people I have heard say this are the Lefties. With the usual hyperbole spin on what the majority is saying.

What the majority is saying is that prices will go up at a time when life is getting harder again, and that the tax will mean diddly squat to global climate change. Personally, I think that what the majority is saying is pretty much spot on.

[rehabitat]

Life for the majority of Australians is easy. It will only get slightly less easy.

[Art Vandelay]

Life for the majority of Australians is easy.

35 years ago our elected PM told us, "life wasn't meant to be easy".

[MC240]

MC240 .... The Reserve bank keeps lowering interest rates. Westpacs chief Economist (20+yrs experience IIRC) thinks we will see another 4 x .25% cuts before the end of the year. Retail figures continue to decline and you only have to look as far as how many specialist hifi stores are closing to see thats not just manipulation of figures.

3000 job losses in manufacturing last month.

Sony and Panasonic posted billions of dollars in losses (worldwide albeit) for just the last quarter.

Presiding over a resources boom and keeping the economy from catastrophic damage isnt a sign of good management in my books.

The gloss on our economic turd will wear off quick if China slows down.

AU2 Japan along with the US were the powerhouse economy's a few years back and before them it was England who was our main trading partner, the game moved on and Australia moved with it to China when and if China slows down we will move on again, perhaps India. There's no need panic, and there's no need to run the place down the sky will not fall in is all I'm saying.

MC, I do not hear too many people saying that Labor destroyed the economy. I do, however, hear many people saying that they did nowhere near as well as they claim and that they are not to be trusted when the poo hits the fan. It is an issue of credibility. There are some in Labor who have credibility on the economy, however as a government they are pretty ropey.

The public knows the Libs will, after all is said and done, make the economy the number 1 issue. The public suspects that Labor is just as likely to be diverted to basketweaving as the economy.

SM the excreta did hit the cooling unit, and we got through it.Were the coalition in power at the time I believe they would have used the time honoured Liberal practice when in a criss rule number 1 tighten the purse stings, rule number 2 jack up the interest rates, rule number 3 put people on the dole, then while they are down kick em in the guts for being unemployed.

I also remember their last solution to Australia;s so called woe's during the mining boom Marc I the manifesto they came up with was work choices right before they imploded.

Edited by MC240, 03 June 2012 - 12:47 PM.

[ayou2]

If workchoices had been implemented all the job losses we are now seeing could have been avoided. Employers might have been able to renegotiate conditions to make them able to compete more with overseas rates.

It would have been a bitter pill, of that there is no doubt, but a job is better than no job.

Im sure i would not have been rapt about it if it was me on the receiving end, but i like to think i would have been realistic enough to see the writing on the wall and to also realise that if I was, for instance, on the assembly line at Ford, that i had it good for a long time, but that the best thing to do in the long run was to have a good hard look at the situation and swallow the pill.

[rehabitat]

35 years ago our elected PM told us, "life wasn't meant to be easy".

At a guess that would have been Fraser referring to some kind of cuts, probably to social security. I'm not really old enough to remember. He may be right but if life was easy then, it's easier now. The point is that we enjoy a standard of living that we take for granted and whinge endlessly when something threatens to erode it.

Our way of life blinkers us to the bigger picture, that for many reasons our way of life is not sustainable in the longer term. And that we in Australia are probably the luckiest buggers on the planet.

[firefly0071]

The only people I have heard say this are the Lefties. With the usual hyperbole spin on what the majority is saying.

What the majority is saying is that prices will go up at a time when life is getting harder again, and that the tax will mean diddly squat to global climate change. Personally, I think that what the majority is saying is pretty much spot on.

I am being cynical - the people opposing the carbon tax are not that well organised to organise riots rallies etc.

[proftournesol]

If workchoices had been implemented all the job losses we are now seeing could have been avoided. Employers might have been able to renegotiate conditions to make them able to compete more with overseas rates.

It would have been a bitter pill, of that there is no doubt, but a job is better than no job.

Im sure i would not have been rapt about it if it was me on the receiving end, but i like to think i would have been realistic enough to see the writing on the wall and to also realise that if I was, for instance, on the assembly line at Ford, that i had it good for a long time, but that the best thing to do in the long run was to have a good hard look at the situation and swallow the pill.

That may be the case, but at the cost of job security. We'd have lots of lower paid jobs with no security, everyone on short=term contracts providing a 'flexible workforce'. Of couse these 'benefits' would have other consequences.

[proftournesol]

The only people I have heard say this are the Lefties. With the usual hyperbole spin on what the majority is saying.

What the majority is saying is that prices will go up at a time when life is getting harder again, and that the tax will mean diddly squat to global climate change. Personally, I think that what the majority is saying is pretty much spot on.

If the money is wisely invested, the money raised by the ETS will allow us to build an 21st century energy infrastructure. Like all venture capital investments, there's always a degree of risk, that's inherent in any business, but if it pays off we will all benefit - the common wealth of Australia

[MC240]

If workchoices had been implemented all the job losses we are now seeing could have been avoided. Employers might have been able to renegotiate conditions to make them able to compete more with overseas rates.

It would have been a bitter pill, of that there is no doubt, but a job is better than no job.

Im sure i would not have been rapt about it if it was me on the receiving end, but i like to think i would have been realistic enough to see the writing on the wall and to also realise that if I was, for instance, on the assembly line at Ford, that i had it good for a long time, but that the best thing to do in the long run was to have a good hard look at the situation and swallow the pill.

If workchoices had been implemented employers could have renegotiated to compete with overseas rates you say. HELLO an average house now cost 800k in Sydney/Melbourne avergage rents $380 plus a week.
All these job losses you say. The current unemployment rate is 4.9 %.

[ayou2]

Your obviously a dyed in the wool Labour voter MC.

Im obviously a dyed in the wool conservative voter.

We probably wont get far with this ..... time will tell eh ?

[MC240]

Your obviously a dyed in the wool Labour voter MC.

Im obviously a dyed in the wool conservative voter.

We probably wont get far with this ..... time will tell eh ?

AU2 it really doesn't matter who's in for me, for the most part I've been self employed for over 20 years.

[ayou2]

That may be the case, but at the cost of job security. We'd have lots of lower paid jobs with no security, everyone on short=term contracts providing a 'flexible workforce'. Of couse these 'benefits' would have other consequences.

This is part of the 'entitlement' mentality Australians are stuck with.

I admire anyone who goes into bat for the working man, but right now might not be a good time to cling to the Union mentality.

There is no entitlement to own a house, no entitlement to drive a car less than 4 years old, no entitlement to eat out once a week and no entitlement to own a hifi etc etc.

If the babyboomers, Gen X & Gen Y wont relinquish some 'lifestyle' because they feel entitled to have all that they desire, we risk leaving absolutely nothing for coming generations to do.

"Sorry lil Johnny but Daddy insisted on his Australian born right to earn $35 / hr dropping bolts into an engine on the Ford assembly line. Then he complained about the prices of Falcons going up and bought a Hyundai.

Ford Australia moved to Korea, selfish bastards.

So stay in school and learn how to speak Korean & when your old enough, you can borrow $20,000 off the Al Gore Bank, to pay the carbon offset on your flight and go and follow in the old mans footsteps.

Youll have to get the bus to the airport though, Dad had to sell the Hyundai to pay the govt solar panel tax"

Yeah it is a double edged sword. I see it as making business economically sustainable with out Unions

Edited by ayou2, 03 June 2012 - 05:46 PM.

[ayou2]

AU2 it really doesn't matter who's in for me, for the most part I've been self employed for over 20 years.

Top Effort !

Seriously, no sarcasm, youve done good

[rantan]

I just wonder how much of your own lifestyle you are willing to forgo Ayou.

I also wonder what sort of future you want for your children or young people in general. Why do they have no right to own a house or attend the theatre or have an audio system when you [ and I ] have done for years. Why should they have zero job security, 3 months renewable contracts, no sick leave, no annual leave, no OHS requirements, 1 hour minimum shifts and all for the princely sum of $8p/h.
be in no doubt ,this is what large corporations like Coles ,Woolworths and the like would desire and euphemistically describe as a flexible workforce.

The other thing is that you use the words union mentality in a very pejorative sense. I readily admit that unions no longer always serve their members best interests and that greedy,ambitious and sometimes criminal people just use them for a leg up into politics, but the original principles of unionism,long since abandoned were, and are, very sound.

They were necessary when they were first formed and they are necessary now, but they need to be run by people of integrity and not empire builders.

P.S. I am also self sufficient and receive nothing at all from this or any previous government

Edited by rantan, 03 June 2012 - 05:55 PM.

[proftournesol]

ayou, you talk about employment but in part the 'growth' in the Australian economy has been sustained by a property bubble. Whilst I (and many others) have some concerns about the wisdom of this, there's nothing like employment with no job security in a large percentage of the workforce to blow a huge hole in property values across the country. We are saddling young people with HECS debts and then giving them jobs with no security, no chance of a mortgage....

[Super Mustud]

I readily admit that unions no longer always serve their members best interests and that greedy,ambitious and sometimes criminal people just use them for a leg up into politics, but the original principles of unionism,long since abandoned were, and are, very sound.

The way that Labor defended Cunning Craig indicates that sort of behaviour is just par for the course these days. I agree with your comments about the original principles of unionism. Given the slow but steady marginalisation of unionism in everything except Government employment and the construction of desal plants, how is the original intent to be restored?

[Super Mustud]

ayou, you talk about employment but in part the 'growth' in the Australian economy has been sustained by a property bubble. Whilst I (and many others) have some concerns about the wisdom of this, there's nothing like employment with no job security in a large percentage of the workforce to blow a huge hole in property values across the country. We are saddling young people with HECS debts and then giving them jobs with no security, no chance of a mortgage....

No need to have a HECS debt if one is prepared to have a part time job and learn something about the realities of work instead of bumming around.