Federal Election - Rudd Wins

[Grunt]

Federal Election Date Set

November 24

[amanda]

Thank goodness - we'll be on holidays.

I quite like voting before the election date - avoid a lot of long queues at the local school!

[Andrew]

Thank goodness - we'll be on holidays.

I quite like voting before the election date - avoid a lot of long queues at the local school!

Here, here. I have postal voted for about the last 20 years. It started when I was touring & therefore away a lot. Now it's just habit & the fact that I hate being in unorganised random crowds.

[Grunt]

I have not normal voted for about 10 years being a shift worker. It is just so easy.

[Bruce]

I'll be away too.
I will have to work out how to not vote via post and still avoid penalties.

[Grunt]

Due to working on Saturday I have just gone and voted. This elections senate paper for NSW was not as big as last time. Only 3 feet long.

[Moe Norman]

hope you didn't vote for a recession ;)

[Jarro]

We have a polling booth at the International terminal here in Brissy 8)

I'll be voting whilst at work this Saturday

[Grunt]

hope you didn't vote for a recession ;)

Voted to see myself better off.


We have a polling booth at the International terminal here in Brissy 8)

I'll be voting whilst at work this Saturday

Have tried that in other years and got hassled off the boss that I had to do it in my own time. Could not be bothered with the hassle again so I pre poll each vote now no matter what. Is real easy too, way less people and less parties handing how to vote crap.

[poidda]

The best news about this election is that the ****ing adds are pulled as of midnight tonight. Thank **** for that.

[Jarro]

The best news about this election is that the ****ing adds are pulled as of midnight tonight. Thank **** for that.

What he said :smt038

[OMG]

I don't mind going to vote at the schools....always buy one of those bags of fudge, reminds me of school days, good fun!:)

[AndyP]

The best news about this election is that the ****ing adds are pulled as of midnight tonight. Thank **** for that.Why's that? Does this happen every year?

[Jarro]

They seem a little more "aggressive" this year

[Grunt]

Is part of the election blackout, has always been the case. State elections may be different.

[PeteyD]

Yea only good thing about the election is the adds going off air.

[AndyP]

Are Ch 9 serious with the Ray and Laurie's Election Extravaganza? Are they really going to pull in the viewers with that?

[Grunt]

Are Ch 9 serious with the Ray and Laurie's Election Extravaganza? Are they really going to pull in the viewers with that?

Have you seen the Ch 7 Ads, even worse. Is shocking how they are trying to make people think that it will be entertaining.

[OMG]

Probably as good as Koshies "No Spin" coverage.:(

Edit: See above!

[Courty]

I voted yesterday as well. Thank **** it's over for me now. :roll:

[Eag's]

I voted yesterday as well. Thank **** it's over for me now. :roll:

I voted 2 weeks ago, got to love the postal vote :)

[AndyP]

Before I thought voting in my electorate (Oxley, which is also BVs) was a waste of time, now I know that it's pointless.

Bookies odds:
Labor candidate $1.01
Liberal candidate $14

This is after we were rezoned from a strong Liberal seat (Ryan).

[goughy]

Mines the opposite! Groom, 1.008 coalition, 12 for labour!

Should I bother turning up? Or maybe I should vote for myself. Maybe the informal vote can beat the labour candidate!

[PeteyD]

At least I am in a marginal seat. My vote might count for something.

Union Hack $ 1.80
Sitting Member $ 1.95

Might be close.

[Moe Norman]

I just walked the dog around the local streets.

Counted 23 Liberal signs in front gardens, and 1 Labor sign.

Things look ok in my seat!

[Bruce]

Holy Shit!!

Nicola Roxon is paying 1.003 for the win. (http://centrebet.com/cust?lang_choice=en&action=GoSports&ev_id=32224)

Not a lot of contests according the betting in Victoria.

[Moe Norman]

could have a red state on monday... :(

[PeteyD]

Seems likely, although they look set to lose seats in WA.

[poidda]

I don't understand why people have got so caught up in saying that Labour will destroy Australia?!?! Aren't we only voting for the next 3 years? Wouldn't it be a great balance to change government each election to keep the politicians on their toes so they don't get all power hungry. I think anyone who's not a swing voter is just narrow minded.

I am all for ther Libs apart from the IR laws. The IR laws don't bother me one bit as I'm a contractor, but anyone who has spent any time in the USA would understand how important it is to have a balance between work and play. All my yank friends have no more than one weeks annual leave a year with 4 public holidays. Would you want to have to work Boxing day without panalties??

[Jarro]

The IR laws will be the Liberals undoing.

[poidda]

The IR laws will be the Liberals undoing.

Yeah and probably the only thing that could have lost them the election.

[3oneday]

Great news I heard today :):)



No more TV and Radio election adverts allowed from today :):):):)

[Moe Norman]

I don't understand why people have got so caught up in saying that Labour will destroy Australia?!?! Aren't we only voting for the next 3 years? Wouldn't it be a great balance to change government each election to keep the politicians on their toes so they don't get all power hungry. I think anyone who's not a swing voter is just narrow minded.

I am all for ther Libs apart from the IR laws. The IR laws don't bother me one bit as I'm a contractor, but anyone who has spent any time in the USA would understand how important it is to have a balance between work and play. All my yank friends have no more than one weeks annual leave a year with 4 public holidays. Would you want to have to work Boxing day without panalties??
it's a negotiation between the employer and employee. If you don't want penalty rates removed you need to budge on something else. Standard provisions like annual leave entitlements (min 4 weeks) can't be negotiated down, but they can go up.

I'd be pretty pissed off if next time I get a job I can't negotiate my salary and bonus structure myself directly with the employer, but instead have to take some collective agreement I wasn't even party to.

The only people these IR Laws hurt are the the unskilled workers who are lazy and easily replaced, if you're any good at what you do, you're worth keeping and will be in a strong bargaining position, not a weak one.

[scarfie1]

Totally agree with you Moe. We have it good compared to the Yanks, no employer can give you a contract with 1 week annual leave.

I'm all for the IR laws, creating a more market economy, with less interference from unions and Govt.

[Fishman Dan]

You guys don't consider that most people in the workforce aren't able to 'negotiate' with their employer, because they lack the skills to do so. Especially when the bloke is allowed to say "I can get someone cheaper than you if you won't do this job".

I'm not opposed to the concept of the laws, but the execution of the current crap is terrible.

[Jarro]

You guys don't consider that most people in the workforce aren't able to 'negotiate' with their employer, because they lack the skills to do so. Especially when the bloke is allowed to say "I can get someone cheaper than you if you won't do this job".



And this would probably apply to the majority of the workers in this country, i know it certainly does for me.

I can see where it would be a great advantage for people like Moe, but for "blue-collar" workers like myself .... it's a disaster !

[PeteyD]

Really? How many of your workmates have been replaced?

[scarfie1]

The result of workchoices creates the 'market wage'. If there's intervention saying 'this much' must be paid, then employers are going to hire less people creating unemployment.

[kpac]

i would have thought you would be a union boy jarro, thought all the Q staff were... ?

[Jarro]

The result of workchoices creates the 'market wage'. If there's intervention saying 'this much' must be paid, then employers are going to hire less people creating unemployment.

Not really. In our industry they just employ contract labour ... pay them peanuts, give them totally ridiculous shifts to work and don't have to give them any entitlements.

I spoke with a guy who works for a rival ground-handling employer at Brisbane International Airport. He was working a 12 hour day on Christamas day (last year) and was being paid a flat rate of $15 p/hr.

Sounds like a nicely negotiated contract for him doesn't it ?

[Grunt]

Same thing happening with the engineering, Jarro. We now have our boss giving up work to rivals. We don't have the manpower to support our own fleet any more. Could get real ugly very soon, Xmas air travel could be ugly. Company has threatened of another 89 pilots type thing.

[Jarro]

i would have thought you would be a union boy jarro, thought all the Q staff were... ?

Yeah mate, TWU member for almost 18 years now.

[kpac]

Not really. In our industry they just employ contract labour ... pay them peanuts, give them totally ridiculous shifts to work and don't have to give them any entitlements.

I spoke with a guy who works for a rival ground-handling employer at Brisbane International Airport. He was working a 12 hour day on Christamas day (last year) and was being paid a flat rate of $15 p/hr.

Sounds like a nicely negotiated contract for him doesn't it ?
send it to the fairness test ;) :roll:

[kpac]

Yeah mate, TWU member for almost 18 years now.

so i thought that they'd give you an idea of what you should get form the employer....

[Jarro]

so i thought that they'd give you an idea of what you should get form the employer....

We have EBA's in place till early next year ... so our conditions can't change much till then.

Well that's how it's supposed to work anyway :roll:

[scarfie1]

I you want $40 p/hour the employer's not going to hire anyone. What's better: x number of people agreeing to work for $15 p/hour or being all out of work because you're commanding too much.

[PeteyD]

Once you get on a salary it doesn't matter what hours you work or when you do. I have worked plenty of public holidays for a day in loo! if I am lucky (including christmas etc). It all comes around. Unions have their place, but so do AWAs.

[poidda]

The only people these IR Laws hurt are the the unskilled workers who are lazy and easily replaced, if you're any good at what you do, you're worth keeping and will be in a strong bargaining position, not a weak one.

What a load of shit. That's the most narrow minded quote I've ever heard of. Let me guess, you're a private school boy who was given every chance in the world to make a living?!?!? Have never been 20 year old without an education trying to make a living, and all you want is a start? Neither have I, but I don't want to be living in a country where the tophy nosed private school kids think they are a class above the rest.

[Jarro]

I you want $40 p/hour the employer's not going to hire anyone. What's better: x number of people agreeing to work for $15 p/hour or being all out of work because you're commanding too much.

That's fine if you have 2 or 3 jobs on the go ... you'd need that many to make a living.

[poidda]

Unions have their place, but so do AWAs.

Exactly. Spot on PeteyD. I agree that the AWAs have given everyone a shake up, but it definately needs to be pulled back a major step.

[dc68]

Fire up Poidda!!!!!!!!

[Fishman Dan]

Really? How many of your workmates have been replaced?

You mean you don't read Grunts posts about moving overseas to work for QANTAS?

Don't worry PD, there's probably a call centre in India that can do your job too ;)

[Fishman Dan]

The only people these IR Laws hurt are the the unskilled workers who are lazy and easily replaced, if you're any good at what you do, you're worth keeping and will be in a strong bargaining position, not a weak one.


What a load of shit. That's the most narrow minded quote I've ever heard of. Let me guess, you're a private school boy who was given every chance in the world to make a living?!?!? Have never been 20 year old without an education trying to make a living, and all you want is a start? Neither have I, but I don't want to be living in a country where the tophy nosed private school kids think they are a class above the rest.

Poidda - you're arguing with a bloke who considers Australia not to be in drought, but run by farmers who "couldn't manage their water". After all, that's what his gran'ma did.

Walk away with your dignity in tact ;)

[Moe Norman]

Poidda,

You weren't really the fish I was expecting, but nice bite.

I admit its an extreme view, but you need to explain things in an extreme fashion for people to undestand sometimes. Kind of like when explaining how tax cuts work when morons scream that the bloke earning $200k is getting a bigger tax cut than the bloke getting $35k!

Jarro,

Your example is a good one. What did that bloke get in return for giving up penalty rates on Christmas day? Don't say nothing, because that is illegal. Obviously he got something pretty good, but when people whinge, they tend to only tell you the bad bit.


That's fine if you have 2 or 3 jobs on the go ... you'd need that many to make a living. Perhaps, depends what sort of living you expect?

You live a pretty good life, play alot of golf, spend thousands on golf equipment, have a nice house with a pool. Yet you want to vote out the government that has delivered you this comfortable existence?

If you want the golf gear, the regular golf and the pool, doesn't matter who is in government - you should have to work hard for it, and I'm sure you have. But under a collective agreement, there will always be those slackers that bludge off your hard work mate. These people are the ones worse off under Work Choices, and I don't have an ounce of sympathy for them.

[kpac]

oh shit a bloody election debate....

if someone makes a really good arguement i'm sure well all agree. :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

[Eag's]

oh shit a bloody election debate....

if someone makes a really good arguement i'm sure well all agree. :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

Not touching this one otherwise we could be here forever :neutral:

[BrisVegas]

can't believe they have elections on Saturdays... Last thing I wanna do after playing golf is go and line up with unwashed masses to cast my vote... Can't we just vote online??

[Peter]

It's not as simple as people are trying to make out.

AWAs serve a dual purpose:

1. They allow highly-skilled specialists to negotiate salary, specific terms and conditions into their contract; and
2. They allow employers of low-skilled workers to push down wages.

This makes them good for the highly skilled and the 'in-demand' specialists, but not so good for the unskilled worker. At the moment they are OK for most people because of the relative labour shortage, but in an economic downturn the people that have previously been protected by unions will suffer badly.

Now this doesn't affect me in the slightest as I'm comfortable negotiating my own salary and conditions. However I recognise that there are many people that aren't in that position.

[markTHEblake]

but in an economic downturn the people that have previously been protected by unions will suffer badly.


Good point, in an economic downturn Small Business suffer even more.

Much easier to bankrupt a business then go broke paying salaries you cant afford to people you cant let go.

[Moe Norman]

and what better party to bring into power to provide an economic downturn, to prove the worth of Unions than the Labor party?!

hehe

[PeteyD]

Fish you wanker. Might be time to move to SoCal and be protected by the Governator.

[Fishman Dan]

and what better party to bring into power to provide an economic downturn, to prove the worth of Unions than the Labor party?!

hehe

You watch too much TV Moe ;)

[goughy]

it's a negotiation between the employer and employee. If you don't want penalty rates removed you need to budge on something else. Standard provisions like annual leave entitlements (min 4 weeks) can't be negotiated down, but they can go up.

I'd be pretty pissed off if next time I get a job I can't negotiate my salary and bonus structure myself directly with the employer, but instead have to take some collective agreement I wasn't even party to.

The only people these IR Laws hurt are the the unskilled workers who are lazy and easily replaced, if you're any good at what you do, you're worth keeping and will be in a strong bargaining position, not a weak one.

There are tons of jobs in australia where there is no negotiation allowed. You get what you get, and that's it. People like yourself will be in a position to negotiate your wage regardless of work choices etc. The same goes for clikchic. She'll probably never work for an award again.

The problem will always be for people who are not in a position to negotiate. And you can't say that everyone can. Because plenty can't. A family member of mine spent a year working in industrial relations etc when work choices came in. Basically all claims by workers disappeared because they had no rights to claims. During the end of their year there they spent their time investigating the changes to workplaces, and they haven't had good things to say about it. There was one large company in australia that immediately put everyone on contracts and it caused such problems for them they have now reverted to their original systems.

I'm not saying the union way is the be all and end all. But people do need help too. They can't do it all on their own. I'd guess somewhere in the middle of the two systems would be right.

And I'm saying this as a small business who had a major staff member problem a few years ago and under the old industrial relations system I basically couldn't sack them without having it come back on me. Probably wouldn't be the case these days.

Not having a go at anyone - just crapping out my opinion!

[Moe Norman]

There is no such thing as negotiation not being allowed, thats the entire point. Everyone can negotiate, its a free market. It's just that everyones strength at the negotiation table is different.

There is nothing worse than a team of 15 workers with a collective agreement. 10 of them are fantastic, work really hard, never late, highly productive. 3 of them go through the motions and 2 of them are useless and constantly turn up late, slack off, use all their sick days every year and are highly unproductive. The boss can't do anything about these 2 blokes and can't pay the other 10 blokes any extra.

The 2 useless pricks get paid the same as the 10 great workers, have all the same entitlements and get all the same rewards.

Under Workchoices, they would all negotiate individually. The 10 blokes would probably be better off, or not lose anything, and the rest would get what they deserve.

[Scoot]

The highly qualified people (across any trade / profession) are scarce and highly sought after, no doubt about it.

The government/s won't (and should'nt) favour the 'unqualified' over the people that have made sacrifices, and worked hard to get the bit of paper they have, or 'invested' the countless thousands of dollars in their businesses, to take the risk that one absolute degenerate can screw them over.

The will (and do) however encourage advancement, and subsidise etc people who take the plunge and try to get qualified, and as such deserve and (in some cases) demand the dollar.

Anyone who is not happy in their job at the moment needs to have a long think and decide if it's the job / company, or them that's the problem.

There's always the USPGA tour, or the European tour as well if your really desperate

[wavemaker]

Sheila at the Maryborough RSL club with 23 years service refused to sign a non negotiable AWA this week and got the sack. Bludger, she deserved it.!

[Billyman]

Voting ....rock .......mug punters.......hard place

[3oneday]

Voting ....rock .......mug punters.......hard place

well said, and relation to BillyBaub ?

:)

[wavemaker]

http://www.domain.com.au/Public/PropertyDetails.aspx?adid=2006832414
Be quick, what a bargain.

[goughy]

Will howard hold his seat????

Is Jackie Kelly in the 'no spin' 7 coverage the one whose hubby was a dick handing out bogus propaganda?

[Grunt]

No to the 1st question and yes to the second.

[Grunt]

Bye Bye Johnny & Pete!

[Moe Norman]

it's a red state, hold onto your hats people - the next few years could be tough!

[BrisWesty]

Oh well, it's goodbye to nice Kevin (Kevin 07 version) and welcome back to evil Kevin as PM.

Sorry voters you've been conned.

But will we see John Howard do a Latham and start punching out journos and smashing cameras?

[goughy]

You expected the libs to hold power for the next 10 decades! It's just the cycle of politics. Heck, johnny has done things he should never have been able to win elections on. He did the unthinkable and won an election on the gst debate! Even I took my hat off to him on that. I had a mate who voted for them that election then got cranky when they brought in the gst.

If they do a bad job they will get voted out. Howards done things I didn't like and I live with them. The same will go for Rudd. My favourite line about politicians is from 'the hunt for red october'. 'I'm a politician which means I'm a liar and a cheat, and when I'm not kissing babies I'm stealing their lollipops!'

We're not gonna end up like somalia and regardless of what happens we still live in one of the best places in the world!

As a side note, my vote was worthless today. I live in what must be one of the safest Lib seats.

And if interest rates are your big worry, then don't worry. I don't. They won't hit the highs of the 80's cause they just can't. Today we still pay a higher percentage of our incomes in repayments than our parents did then, even when close to 20%. That's all I know to tell me it won't happen.

And if it does I'll just live with it like everyone else does.

The world ain't over.... Unless you're a staunch lib supporter!

And don't take my post too seriously. I know crap about politics and am just raving on like a mad thing off it's meds!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Grunt]

Same view here Goughy, it the world ends so be it. Could be far worse and we could live in a place like Bangladesh where we hear about their heartache almost weekly.

[PeteyD]

We shouldn't end up like somalia but Argentina is not out of the question. Lets see how well they stick to their promises.

[goughy]

It's politics! Who sticks to their promises...

[Moe Norman]

You expected the libs to hold power for the next 10 decades! It's just the cycle of politics. Heck, johnny has done things he should never have been able to win elections on. He did the unthinkable and won an election on the gst debate! Even I took my hat off to him on that. I had a mate who voted for them that election then got cranky when they brought in the gst.
Incorrect goughy. He said before his first term that he wouldn't introduce the GST, and he didn't. He then introduced the GST in his second term.




If they do a bad job they will get voted out.Exactly, and the current government has done a wonderful job.




We're not gonna end up like somalia and regardless of what happens we still live in one of the best places in the world!

We do, so why the need for change?!

If it aint broke...

[Grunt]

may not be broke for you Moe but it is for many.

[goughy]

Incorrect goughy. He said before his first term that he wouldn't introduce the GST, and he didn't. He then introduced the GST in his second term.



If it aint broke...

Cause it's politics. It's always broke. And I shouldn't have said won. I should have said he 'retained' power on the gst debate. I always took my hat off to him on that one. I always thought it was unwinable.

They seem pretty huge swings. I think the masses felt something was broke.

I actually love the banter on election night! All the backwards and forwards he said she said they did they didn't. It's hilarious.

If Howard holds his seat, I do think he needs to call his retirement. I do think they need to go into opposition afresh. Not picking on Howard. I just think it's what the party would need.

I think the 2 things that sank them was work choices (obvious) but also calling his retirement during the next term. The idea that a vote for Howard is a vote for Costello just rang bad with some people. Heck, even I've heard that Costello is nice face to face but I can't stand him on camera.

Heck, this is the only night of the year I have any interest in politics. I just love the banter! And I always swear that I'll hire a dvd :mrgreen:

[Moe Norman]

may not be broke for you Moe but it is for many.
socialism at its best, the current society is in the best state possible for anyone from any background to succeed.

Those that aren't up to it, will never be up to it.

[goughy]

socialism at its best, the current society is in the best state possible for anyone from any background to succeed.

Those that aren't up to it, will never be up to it.

Spoken like a true snob :mrgreen:

Heard one of the best comments a second ago which I do think is true.

The govt is being thrown out of office. It's not so much that labor is winning as it is libs are losing! If that makes sense. Don't know if much I say makes sense :oops:

[AndyP]

Hands up who voted for Rudd because he came across as a "nicer bloke"? :roll:

If there isn't going to be tax rebates for strip club costs now, I'm going to be pissed.

[Eag's]

Time will tell if this is a good thing for the nation or not. A lot of people out there have long painfull memories of life under a Labour Goverment. If Rudd is a leader and not a puppet for the unions then we might be ok, but if not, god help us :roll:

It should be just a case of picking up the reins and carrying on, the country has never been in a stronger position economically.

[terryand]

Surely they can't stuff the country up in 3 years :-s

Terry.

[AndyP]

Change of Government = Merging or Splitting of Commonwealth departments and reprinting of stationery that has all the old letterheads and logos.

[Eag's]

Surely they can't stuff the country up in 3 years :-s

Terry.

You would hope not Tez.

[goughy]

Govt's will change maybe another 8 or 10 times in my lifetime. I'll still be here. It is the cycle of politics.

[BrisWesty]

Little sad to lose Mal Brough as the local member. Thought he was a really good operator. Haven't heard a positive word from Jon Sullivan in the 5 years I've lived up here.

[goughy]

Lot of pushing for mal to go into state politics, and become lib leader. God nows they could use him.

It's probably the sadest thing in politics today that we seem to be voting for a leader, not for our own members. I am sure that some good good people don't hold seats tonight for that reason. It felt even more this time that it was a vote for Rudd or Howard, not even for Labor or Coalition, let alone for our own electorate member.

To me that is what saddens me about politics.

[wavemaker]

Thank who ever you believe in, but the rotten, lying toad is gone.

[PeteyD]

Time for a change of State Government now. Last time there was a labor government we lost the family business and homes thanks to rampant inflation and high interest rates. I do not have fond memories of federal labor. I am also still to meet anyone who was actually harmed by the work choices laws in the ways the union adds with wonderful actors were claiming, but matters not. The people have been conned and we now have a smarmy career public servant for PM with little political experience and a whole lot of question avoiding ability. Welcome back compulsory unionism and be wary of the recession we have to have ...

[terryand]

I have never been really that worried about a change of government, but for some reason this time I am. Maybe its because of the town and industry I am in now. I guess its one I will have to play by ear.


Last time there was a labor government we lost the family business and homes thanks to rampant inflation and high interest rates

I hear where you are coming from Pete. I was fortunate enough to own a house and manage to ride the increase from 10% to 17% and even for a young (skilled) tradesman I found it very hard to make ends meet. If it wasn't for the fact that I had 2 borders in my spare rooms I would have been part of the statistics.

Terry.

[just]

Time for a change of State Government now. Last time there was a labor government we lost the family business and homes thanks to rampant inflation and high interest rates.

Interest rates were higher under Fraser and Howard, but home loan interest rates were capped by legislation and didn't reflect the true interest rate. Labor reformed the economy (given time and opportunity the Liberals would have as well) because the economy needed it. The economy was de-regulated (i.e. banking system and others) because it needed to be and therefore interest rates were then uncapped and went higher. The Australian people at the time understood which is why they kept voting Labor despite high interest rates. Thats not to say times were not tough, they were. Keating didn't lose because of the economy because the economy was on the up when he lost. But lets remember we would not have the economy we have now without the reforms of Hawke/Keating years and the continuing reforms of Howard/Costello.


The people have been conned and we now have a smarmy career public servant for PM with little political experience and a whole lot of question avoiding ability. Welcome back compulsory unionism and be wary of the recession we have to have ...

As opposed to a smarmy lying career politician whose values and outlook on life are vastly more conservative/religious than the nation he served, who has a whole career as Prime Minister of avoiding responsibility for the stuff ups of his government/ministers/departments. By the way I have met and talked to Howard twice, seemed like a nice guy, but I still think he's a lying prick.


Welcome back compulsory unionism and be wary of the recession we have to have ...

The economy is substantially de-regulated and governments, of whatever flavour, have less and less effect all the time. Don't worry Pete, if we do go into recession it won't be because of Rudd, it will be due to the US market or the downturn in commodity demand from China/India.

And the unions are only as powerful as the number of people they represent, which is at all time low. By the way, we can trade meaningless opinions/fears all day and it won't change the result. Only one party has broken a union strike by bringing in the military to do the job and it wasn't the Liberals. Obviously meaningless in the big scheme of things because people still believe that Labor will be controlled by the unions.

Here is another useless statistic for you. The stats show that average annual rainfall is up when there is a federal Labor government. Bring on the drought breaking rains.

[goughy]

If they hit 17% again then we'll all be statistics! I doubt anyone under any circumstances could rise out that kind of hike. Call me naive (I do) but that's the sole reason that I believe it won't happen again. I've heard the stories that many today are already paying a higher percentage of their incomes to manage their home loans than they were back then. To me that spells half the country losing their homes if they go throught the roof.

My mum spent the year before last as the PA for the chief justice of the industrial relations court in queensland (the big kahuna). She told me work choices was an abomination and they spent much of their time investigating it's affects on employees; mostly because no one was able to make claims to the courts anymore.

That's being said, I did have serious trouble with one employee years ago and was between a rock and a hard place under the old system.

[goughy]

Here is another useless statistic for you. The stats show that average annual rainfall is up when there is a federal Labor government. Bring on the drought breaking rains.

Woo Hoo! I'm really struggling under this 4 minute shower thingy. I really need 5!

[just]

That's being said, I did have serious trouble with one employee years ago and was between a rock and a hard place under the old system.

This is exactly why workplace reform is good, its just the type and depth of reform, and for a lot of Australians it went too far. Part of that is a time and place factor.

[PeteyD]

Meh it is all yesterdays news now. We can hope the mob that have got in do a competent job.

[goughy]

Way to sound positive about the future petey! Should I give up now ;)

Will he use the 'S' word?

When will he start bringing soldiers home?

Will he grease up his head to slide it into Georges butt or will it fit comfortably already?

When will the guy who knows nothing about politics stop ranting in a political thread?

Many years ago, there was a yanky comedian over here not long after johnny reached power. He was making the comment that this was the guy whose own party found him incompetent and sacked him years earlier. He now runs the country! Well done australia, well done......... Of course this was before George came to power... :)

[Moe Norman]

I like it Just, rolling out the excuses for the economic downturn already!

[PeteyD]

Hope is eternal Goughy. Mind you I like the rain thing. Here's to the end of the drought.

[Webster]

How long before Rudd throws out the magic "S" word to the indinenous folk ?

Spearchuckers? That would be a bit harsh mate..we have moved on from those nasty days (maybe not in QLD though?)

[goughy]

I like it Just, rolling out the excuses for the economic downturn already!

I thought politics was all about who could come up with the best excuse! :mrgreen:

[perci]

Must admit I was a bit miffed at being told by little JH that we're all a lot "Prouder" now after his reign as PM.

[OMG]

I have a question about interest rates. It might be a little off topic because reserve bank 'is' in charge of the rate.
Why did they raise the rate last time?
Inflation increase...mainly caused by housing and petrol. How will the rate rise help as far as these two are concerned?
As far as I can see, housing prices won't/can't fall as there is no 'cheaper' alternative (renting), and rates will have no bearing on the rising cost of petrol either. So these two major contributors to inflation will not be affected at all...of course the banks will make alot more from it all.
Also why are rates so far above the underlying inflation rate?
I think it is somewhere around 2.75% and historically interest rates sit about .5% above that...so we should really be at around 3.25% interest rate?

Cheers
OMG

[goughy]

Shite, a serious question! Don't know if I can handle that OMG!! ;)

[Moe Norman]

Rate rises put downward pressure on spending/borrowing from the general public. Which puts downward pressure on inflation.

[goughy]

And if we're worried about money, they say more money was bet on the election than the melbourne cup! Sure we don't have enough money...

[goughy]

Rate rises put downward pressure on spending/borrowing from the general public. Which puts downward pressure on inflation.

So the more we spend the more inflation goes up? Is that the grade 1 understanding of it?

[goughy]

And will Kevin hold off the next election so it can be Kevin11 next time?

[PeteyD]

Haha good one goughy! He is putting a proposal for 4 year terms through too. Just wish they would remove compulsory voting.

Your grade 1 understanding is correct at a grade 1 level ;).

[goughy]

Your grade 1 understanding is correct at a grade 1 level ;).

:smt023 Don't call me unedumacated....

[Grunt]

Why lose compulsory Voting? If it were not compulsory we would get more like the US, where they don't bother and they parties only look after those with the money to donate to the parties.

[OMG]

Rate rises put downward pressure on spending/borrowing from the general public. Which puts downward pressure on inflation.

Yes. But it doesn't address the two major inflation contributors does it?:-s
Petrol is pretty much a necessity, and we have to live somewhere so the downward pressure would only work in other areas of the economy where that pressure really isn't necessary.
I realise that this will restrict peoples spending, because they have less, but where does that money go? I believe we are just redistrubing it to the rich (the major shareholders of the banks) because it is the banks that profit from these rises. Thoughts guys?

[PeteyD]

Petrol and housing are taken into account when they work out the inflation figures, which is why it can be fairly low compared to the spikes in petrol pricing.

Major shareholders of banks include everyones superannuation funds.

[Moe Norman]

OMG - explain how the banks make more money when the RBA raise rates?

I'm intrigued.

[OMG]

Don't they?:?
I'm guessing if I owe $100k and I'm paying $7k per year in interest and rates go up to 7.5% and I'm now paying 7.5k the banks make an extra $500....no?:-s

[Moe Norman]

the banks borrow money to lend you money.....


(from the RBA)

[3oneday]

Depends on whether their costs to raise funds have also gone up, which I am guessing it would have.

[OMG]

the banks borrow money to lend you money.....


(from the RBA)

Can you explain that further please?

[Moe Norman]

not really.

When you borrow money from the bank for you mortgage, they go and borrow money from the RBA to give you that money.

Thats why the RBA rate is 6.75% and the bank rates are hovering around 8%, to account for the margin.

Further, when rates from the RBA go up, the banks don't just raise mortgage interest rates, they also raise other rates. so you not only pay them more interest, in some cases they will also pay you more interest as well...

not much to explain really, unless you want to get overly technical.

[OMG]

Thanks

[Grunt]

They don't only borrow from the reserve, they also go overseas to borrow. That is why sometimes the differential between countries is taken into account by the Reserve Bank.
For example, foreign investment will be made in a country that gives good returns. If the interest rate is too high spending in that country slows but if the interest rate is too low the amount of money invested in the country will not be enough.

[3oneday]

Couldn't picture the CBA trotting off to Reserve Bank everytime someone wanted a loan ? Institutions lend their deposit funds prior to raising any funds through securitisation (off shore and on).

Lend funds at 7.5, pay deposit interest at 5.5 (5.5 is a guess, who has funds on deposit :lol:). Margins on loans aren't as big as they used to be which is why all the banks introduced fees.

RBA set rates, they don't fund the country.

[Moe Norman]

you're rightm they don't trot off to the rBA and say Moe wants $100k what do you reckon mate?

but thats the simplest way to explain how the interest rates work, and why interest rate rises don't mean big fat profits for consumer lenders!

[Moe Norman]

Foreign countries wonder what the hell we are doing!

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article2936993.ece

[PeteyD]

Lets call it the change just cos we could election and leave it at that.

[Grunt]

How about build a bridge and just get over it! No one can change anything for 3 years now.

[Moe Norman]

Actually, Rudd can change a hell of alot.

thank god for the senate.

[3oneday]

you're rightm they don't trot off to the rBA and say Moe wants $100k what do you reckon mate?

but thats the simplest way to explain how the interest rates work, and why interest rate rises don't mean big fat profits for consumer lenders!yes my bad, **** the truth, just find the simplest way :lol:

C'mon moe, give us the truth mate, not the simplest way. We earn to learn, please teach us !!! :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

[markTHEblake]

One of the principle causes of inflation is when more cash is injected into the currency (by creating loans from nothing) without increasing production. Biggest example of this is USA.

[goughy]

Word in that Peter Costello isn't going to contest for the leadership of the Libs.

[AndyP]

Why lose compulsory Voting?So idiots don't vote celebrities/journalists with bugger all political experience over Prime Ministers.

[Bruce]

Compulsory voting inflates politician's self-importance. They know that everyone has to turn up and then claim some sort of 'mandate' when they beat the 4 or 5 other candidates.

None of the 8 people on my green ballot paper are able to adequately represent my interests in parliament. Why am I forced to give any of them any sort of support at all?

Then the stupid Libertarians put One Nation as their third preference so I had to vote below the line. Getting down to number 68 with the various nut jobs and fools on the white paper was a pain in the arse.

[Peter]

Bank Funding 101:

Banks fund themselves in a number of ways:-

1. Retail deposits - the Bank will take the money you put on deposit and use it to lend out. This is extremely cost efficient (particularly given current market conditions), and gives the Big 4 (5 now?) a huge advantage over the non-Bank lenders.
2. Securitisation - they take a chunk of assets (generally home loans), sell them into a trust and have the trust issue notes into the market. Spreads have blown out in the past few months, making this form of funding extremely costly. Does give capital relief to the Bank, so economically may still be a good option.
3. Wholesale Debt Markets - Bank borrows through the issue of term securities. The terms don't always match the underlying asset.
4. Borrow from each other - used to manage liquidity on a daily basis. The RBA plays around and alters the supply of cash in the economy to "set" the rate that these loans are made at. This is the target cash rate.
5. Borrow from the RBA - called repurchase agreements. Extremely costly, which is why the RBA is called the "lender of last resort".
6. Commercial Paper - favoured by corporates and NBFIs (such as RAMS), this involves borrowing money by issuing short-term bonds and using that cash to fund long-term assets (such as home loans in the case of the NBFIs). Used to work well as the short-term rate was lower than the long-term rate on the asset. Now that the market has shit itself this option has basically disappeared (along with Northern Rock, RAMS, and a few others).

If you're still reading, it gets very simple - the RBA uses monetary policy to alter the amount of cash in the economy. This alters the rate at which banks will lend to each other overnight (the overnight cash rate). That cost then flows through to the rest of the economy.

OMG - Interest rates are relatively high because demand is growing and supply is becoming limited (due to Australia nearing capacity constraints). Changing interest rates does impact on the amount of petrol people buy, and the amount they borrow from the bank.

[OMG]

Thanks for the trouble Peter, I appreciate it!:smt023

Does people limiting the amt of petrol they buy affect the price of petrol at all? Or is it out of our hands and price per barrel the major factor?

Also, isn't there a problem with people not borrowing if there isn't an alternative that isn't putting as much pressure on inflation? (Renting)

[Peter]

Basic economics say that a reduction in demand should lead to a reduction in the price of petrol, however price/barrel and oil company profits are probably bigger factors. Even if the price stays the same people buy less, easing inflation.

Renting is less inflationary as there's no upfront movement of cash.

[markTHEblake]

Not to mention the fact that those chinese and indian fellas are purchasing oil in increasing quantities. demand might slow in Australia, but worldwide demand will constantly increase.

[Peter]

Until we run out!

[Grunt]

Guess the sharemarket is really worried about the election result, going up nicely.

[Bruce]

I would think they already had it factored in.

[OMG]

Until we run out!

I'm not that worried about running out of oil. I believe that the oil companies have bought up enough new ideas that they could replace all the fuel driven cars now. They don't because of costs...both retooling costs and all the oil refineries etc becoming useless.

[markTHEblake]

I believe that the oil companies have bought up enough new ideas that they could replace all the fuel driven cars now.

Fuel driven cars account for such a small % of overall usage of oil, that if all cars were converted to electric the impact on the Peak Oil issue that will arise in 8-10 years is negligible

Massive amounts of oil are used in manufacturing, energy and plastic.

[Moe Norman]

Guess the sharemarket is really worried about the election result, going up nicely.
Hey Grunt,

The sharemarket isn't a bloke that lives around he corner, so I don't think it can worry about anything really!

[wavemaker]

Let's see how he goes about making us a more civil and honourable country.

[Courty]

Let's see how he goes about making us a more civil and honourable country.

How's a slimy politician going to achieve that?

[Moe Norman]

with an education revolution and a plan for the future Courty - haven't you been listening?

[markTHEblake]

at least unemployment will be resolved with the 357 new govt departments that will get created

[BrisVegas]

woohoo!! It's a public service renaissance! I'm off to get me a cushy, high paid government job. Who's with me?!!!!?!?

[PeteyD]

I think I prefer to have a job where I do something thanks Dion. Old fashioned I know.

[BrisVegas]

oh, didn't I use a :roll: smiley....

[shazza_rs]

woohoo!! It's a public service renaissance! I'm off to get me a cushy, high paid government job. Who's with me?!!!!?!?

too late... already have one :mrgreen:

[AndyP]

How long before Rudd throws out the magic "S" word to the indinenous folk ?
It won't be long.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/11/27/2102422.htm

Can't they just keep avoiding the 's' word?
Remorseful, apologetic, conscience-stricken, shamefaced,.......
(http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/sorry)

[Jarro]

with an education revolution and a plan for the future Courty - haven't you been listening?

.. and ditching the IR laws ... don't forget that, that's the clincher :mrgreen:

[PeteyD]

nah the IR laws are staying, they lied about that ;)

[Jarro]

Who lied ?

Johnny ???

[Moe Norman]

Senate will block major IR changes and Labor won't be repealing work choices anyway, just making slight alterations.

[Jarro]

You sure about that Moe ??

Even the new-look Libs are saying the IT crap needs a total overhaul.

[terryand]

They need to somewhere in the middle for years of the unions having "it" over bosses and small business it would have been nice for them to have "it" over the unions for once.

Terry.

[Jarro]

I believe they're going to attempt to tone down the power the Unions once had ... if they can do that, and still maintain a fair system for the workers, then everyone should be pretty happy.

[Moe Norman]

Except business, who drive the economy and pay the workers.

Rudd should apply his own social mobility to eradicate his socialist leanings.

[Moe Norman]

http://www.news.com.au/business/story/0,23636,22834982-14334,00.html

It has begun, and it's Grunt and his mates at work!

[3oneday]

http://www.news.com.au/business/story/0,23636,22834982-14334,00.html

It has begun, and it's Grunt and his mates at work!having skimmed to here, are you saying this strike action has come about because of Rudd being in power ?

Qantas engineers have been upping the ante on this stuff for a while, not since Satdy.

[poidda]

http://www.news.com.au/business/story/0,23636,22834982-14334,00.html

It has begun, and it's Grunt and his mates at work!

You only just started reading the papers again Moe? A quick search of www.news.com.au and there are some obvious ones of late.

Teachers Strike
(http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,22762182-29277,00.html)Postal Workers Strike (http://www.news.com.au/business/story/0,23636,22517306-462,00.html)
Cobras Strike
(http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,22561153-2,00.html)Nurses Strike
(http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,22593466-29277,00.html)Virgin Blue Pilots Strike (http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,21287354-2,00.html)

And going on your theory, can we blame Rudd for Gatorade inventor dies aged 80 (http://www.news.com.au/business/story/0,23636,22835235-31037,00.html)? That happenned today!

[PeteyD]

KRudd killed the gatorade inventor. When did he go to Florida?

[3oneday]

The Gatorade inventor is dead ?????

:cry:

[AndyP]

Powerade is better anyway. I think John Howard invented it.

[Grunt]

http://www.news.com.au/business/story/0,23636,22834982-14334,00.html

It has begun, and it's Grunt and his mates at work!


This has been going on since October last year Moe, if you want to blame anyone blame lil Johnny. His mate Geoff is packing shit now that he has lost his mate in power. They have been stalling EBA negotiations all year, last week when they realised there may be a change of govt. they rushed a deal through and presented it to the workers without showing the union. They were trying to get us to give up all our conditions for a 3% payrise locked in for 3 years. They told us it had to be agreed upon by the 27th of this month for it to be a deal and pressured us saying our jobs are not safe.
Geoff had given himself a 130% rise in the past 3 when they asked us to lock our out so they could get on top of the sept 11/ Ansett dilemma. We did and he looked after himself. I have seen this coming for quite some time, he wants engineers on lower wages than motor mechanics.

Could get interesting

[Jarro]

Powerade is better anyway. I think John Howard invented it.

.. but nobody buys it anymore.

[Moe Norman]

I guess I should use an emoticon next time...?

PS: Grunt, your comparisons to the CEO's salary are quite amusing.

[PeteyD]

could all get outsourced to Asia cos they can't afford em here anymore ...

[Jarro]

could all get outsourced to Asia cos they can't afford em here anymore ...

That's their plan.

They also want to throw out all the groundhandlers and replace them with Kiwi contractors :roll:

Dixon is a dick !!

[Grunt]

Dixon is a dick !!

Good ol Darth.

How's his comment that the $70 million fine for price fixing freight won't affect profits. Funny thing is he sold the aircraft spares dept for a measly sum as he said the airline no longer needed it and it was hurting the bottom line. The mob has just upped the price of aircraft parts so now we rob parts from one plane to another to keep them flying.

[3oneday]

I guess I should use an emoticon next time...?i'm still devestated the Gatorade guy is dead :cry:

[markTHEblake]

Well I didnt want Labour to win, but now that it seems that President Turnbull is going to take over the Libs, I hope Rudd stays in long enough to see him off.

[TS]

Well I didnt want Labour to win, but now that it seems that President Turnbull is going to take over the Libs, I hope Rudd stays in long enough to see him off.

Turnbull didn't get the number mate. Nelson is the new man.

[markTHEblake]

Well thats no bloody good then, Turnbull might be the next one :-(

I am geniunely afraid of this guy potentially leading our country.

[PeteyD]

I am still scared of KRudd. Waiting for some substance behind the diplomatic waffle and persistant Trust Mes (which I find disturbing).

[markTHEblake]

I'll take Rudd over Turnbull any day. Heck I even started to like Costello after a while

[Trung]

Turnbull who?

It's Brendan Nelson

[Moe Norman]

How's his comment that the $70 million fine for price fixing freight won't affect profits. Considering the profits the cartel generated, the fine would be a piss in the ocean.

Like VISY, the punishment doesn't fit the crime.

[Jarro]

It's Brendan Nelson

Yep, sure is.

Now there's a guy that's just oozing personality :roll:

Be interesting to see whether or not he supports Rudds proposed IR reforms or not.

[OMG]

Hi everyone,
Been away for awhile and thought this was interesting topic to reread considering the time that has passed.
Once a little bit of history and economics is learnt it is amazingly easy to see that some people who profess to have all this knowledge really had none!:o


Anyway thought it might be something worth revisiting.8)

[henno]

Hi everyone,
Been away for awhile and thought this was interesting topic to reread considering the time that has passed.
Once a little bit of history and economics is learnt it is amazingly easy to see that some people who profess to have all this knowledge really had none!:o


Anyway thought it might be something worth revisiting.8)

.. because we all know the Howard and Costello would have had the smarts to prevent a global financial meltdown. It's all Rudd's fault!

Disclaimer: I didn't vote Labor

[OMG]

I believe the major reason we are in the position (good) we are here in Australia has more to do with Keating than Howard and Costello.

[Scottt]

Yeah, good call OMG, Howard rode on Keating's coattails for 12 years.

Keating did some good work, but to dismiss JH as having benefitted wholely and solely from PK's smarts is laughable.

[kev]

No, no Scottt, it's all thanks to Keating and that recession we had to have. Without that, who knows what shape our economy would be in now... :)

[OMG]

Yeah, good call OMG, Howard rode on Keating's coattails for 12 years.

Keating did some good work, but to dismiss JH as having benefitted wholely and solely from PK's smarts is laughable.

No wasn't saying "wholely and solely", but without alot of the reforms that Keating put through JH's time wouldn't have been nearly as nice!


No, no Scottt, it's all thanks to Keating and that recession we had to have. Without that, who knows what shape our economy would be in now... :)

On that subject if you look at what state the economy was in prior then it really was a recession we had to have and it produced a decade of low inflationary growth.

[Scottt]

Do you struggle to type with one hand, OMG?

[PeteyD]

What reforms did Keating actually put in?

[OMG]

The big one - Super
Also floated the dollar, reduced tariffs and deregulated the banking industry along with lots of other stuff.


Do you struggle to type with one hand, OMG?
Do you think I'm hedging Scottt? Is that your meaning??

[Scottt]

No, I mean you clearly have your hand on your dick if you think Howard was gifted 12 years of feast by Keating.

[PeteyD]

See nothing there that set Howard up for great econmic years,

[henno]

China started building lots of stuff and needed iron ore, and we happen to be able to dig a lot of it out of the ground. Economic prosperity was gifted to Howard, but it wasn't from the pocket of Keating.

Seriously though, it is hilarious that politicians are so quick to claim long periods of economic growth, and blame for periods of decline. If the wealth of this country could be so easily dictated by one man, we are truely a banana republic.

[PeteyD]

Pretty much Henno. Australia is rather insignificant on a global scale.

[OMG]

So none of those reforms had anything to do with where Australia is now PeteyD?



No, I mean you clearly have your hand on your dick if you think Howard was gifted 12 years of feast by Keating.

Yes Scott, that's exactly what I said! :roll: Try reading what I actually wrote now instead of the fantasy you read into to it!.

[PeteyD]

That is not what I said.

Mind you, reducing tariffs is part of globalisation and most likely would have happened anyway. Super just gives more people headaches when the stock market drops, and is effectively useless for the majority of people (left at compulsory levels). Super does have the advantage of a constant pool of investment money in the share market.

Deregulation of the banking industry, hmm, that is definately a two edged sword. It is one of the reasons housing affordability is where it is at (thanks to easier acess to money) and the current crisis can be attributed to easy credit and basic greed.

The lots of other stuff always gets me.

I find it very difficult to forgive the astronomical interest rates (that make today look very easy), the recession that we had to have that closed many small businesses and sent many people broke. The HK government forced the reserve bank to raise rates so they could drop them coming into an election (lots of interference for the goverment).

Regardless. The claim that the previous government was only able to do what it did because of the one before it is crap. Like the blame game we get every time government changes.

[OMG]

Interesting, can't agree with some of it, sorry about the lots of stuff thing...of course things like "most likely would have happened anyway" gets me but I am happy to disagree on things.

I am not going to say I know all this stuff inside out or that I am correct on what I do say, I have found this stuff interesting and enjoy discussing different things with anyone I can. I have no bias to Labour or the Libs (I didn't vote for Rudd) just enjoying the economics part of it all.

So far in my education and from what I have read alot of these reforms that Keating put through has helped Australia considerably. Yes, super should be higher and that is also what Keating intended (he was on lateline last night if anyone wanted to watch the show) but the Howard govt stop it at 9% (interestingly the pollies all went to 15%).

For those of you who can't get past the politics of it all, you may feel better that most of Keatings reforms were from the Campbell report, headed by John Hewson, that was undertaken during Fraser govt.

Anyway, if this sort of discussion doesn't suit you guys and it is going to turn into a slinging match I will probably opt out, I just find the stuff interesting.

[3oneday]

More than 2 lines is usually enough to bore most of us.

[Scottt]

Anyway, if this sort of discussion doesn't suit you guys and it is going to turn into a slinging match I will probably opt out, I just find the stuff interesting.

Perhaps if you didn't want a slinging match OMG you should have been a bit more specific and expansive with the post that brought it all on. I'm not having a go here, just that by saying exactly what you meant up front instead of some vague reference to JH having less to do with our good position than PK does...


I believe the major reason we are in the position (good) we are here in Australia has more to do with Keating than Howard and Costello.

[OMG]

Perhaps if you didn't want a slinging match OMG you should have been a bit more specific and expansive with the post that brought it all on. I'm not having a go here, just that by saying exactly what you meant up front instead of some vague reference to JH having less to do with our good position than PK does...

Scott, you are the one who read in the "JH having less to do with our good position than PK does" and then quite obviously you ignored my next post


No wasn't saying "wholely and solely", but without alot of the reforms that Keating put through JH's time wouldn't have been nearly as nice!

If that didn't clear it up for you...well sorry.
I am still of this opinion. The reforms that Paul Keating put in were/are instrumental in the forming of the Australian economy as it is today. In saying this I am not saying JH and Costello didn't do a wonderful job....it's not about the politics.
JH was treasurer in the Fraser govt and did very little. I believe this was not necessarily his fault as I also believe his hands were tied most of the time. He was in charge of John Hewson when the Campbell report was drafted.

[OMG]

More than 2 lines is usually enough to bore most of us.

Well the conversation probably isn't for you then 3oneday. Cheers.

[Scottt]

Scott, you are the one who read in the "JH having less to do with our good position than PK does" and then quite obviously you ignored my next post.

No, actually that's what you said. Here's your initial post again for reference:


I believe the major reason we are in the position (good) we are here in Australia has more to do with Keating than Howard and Costello.

You put the words in your own mouth.

[OMG]

No, actually that's what you said. Here's your initial post again for reference:



You put the words in your own mouth.

OK, I'll cop that.
So the next post I made meant nothing?
Did it not clear it up then? Or did you not want to let go of it yet?

[Scottt]

No, it was an intelligent partial retreat. My point was that you got the argument kick started by being vague and concise, so it was no surprise it turned ugly.

I agree that Keating did some good work to turn things around, but it's like Kerry and Clyde Packer. Their dad left them the same amount of cash: Kerry kicked on and turned it into squillions and Clyde pissed off to America and didn't do much with his.

Much like Sir Alex Ferguson at Man U - granted he has had a stable for legends for a long time, but you could also make the argument that it was his work that saw them become as great as they are/were.

It's too easy in hindsight to water down what Howard and his government achieved. They were handed the pill in good times, but they still achieved some pretty great things, and they deserve tremendous credit for that.

[3oneday]

Well the conversation probably isn't for you then 3oneday. Cheers.sorry, you misunderstood... I meant take a hike, you're boring (again).

:)

[OMG]

No, it was an intelligent partial retreat. My point was that you got the argument kick started by being vague and concise, so it was no surprise it turned ugly.

I agree that Keating did some good work to turn things around, but it's like Kerry and Clyde Packer. Their dad left them the same amount of cash: Kerry kicked on and turned it into squillions and Clyde pissed off to America and didn't do much with his.

Much like Sir Alex Ferguson at Man U - granted he has had a stable for legends for a long time, but you could also make the argument that it was his work that saw them become as great as they are/were.

It's too easy in hindsight to water down what Howard and his government achieved. They were handed the pill in good times, but they still achieved some pretty great things, and they deserve tremendous credit for that.

No surprise it turned ugly! You chose to ignore my "partial retreat" as you put it, that is probably more the reason for the ugliness...of which you were the main contributitor.


So what are the pretty great things they did?

[OMG]

sorry, you misunderstood... I meant take a hike, you're boring (again).

:)

:smt038
Still a tosser eh 3oneday!:-k:razz:

[henno]

So what are the pretty great things they did?

Without a doubt, John Howard's moment of greatness:

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/198/524607041_ca5757b5a5.jpg

[OMG]

I have no comeback for that...You win!:)

[Scottt]

So what are the pretty great things they did?

1. Bought back the farm (paid back $96b in debt inheritaed from previous governments)
2. Introduced the GST (and had the kags to run an election on the matter)
3. fired ATSIC and developed a more workable plan for indigenous aussies
4. reduced unemployment to amazing levels and took business and consumer confidence to great highs
5. managed interest rates responsibly - aided I accept by factors beyond his control
6. crated work for the dole (if I am not mistaken)
7. meaningful tax cuts
8. first homebuyers scheme
9. abolished CSU in universities

That's off the top of my head.

[OMG]

1. Bought back the farm (paid back $96b in debt inheritaed from previous governments)
2. Introduced the GST (and had the kags to run an election on the matter)
3. fired ATSIC and developed a more workable plan for indigenous aussies
4. reduced unemployment to amazing levels and took business and consumer confidence to great highs
5. managed interest rates responsibly - aided I accept by factors beyond his control
6. crated work for the dole (if I am not mistaken)
7. meaningful tax cuts
8. first homebuyers scheme
9. abolished CSU in universities

That's off the top of my head.

And quite a number of those things were only made possible because of the previous reforms, which is all I was saying. JH did a great job, but like I said in the second post to you, if not for the Keating reforms he wouldn't have been able to/or even wanted to do alot of things. Prior to the Australian dollar being floated, monetary policy was pretty much useless as far as controlling inflation and fiscal policy is far too inflexible to be able to handle it.

I would beg to differ on a couple of those things as being positives eg meaningful tax cuts..which ones etc too broad a generalisation to include all tax cuts made by JH in my view...and some of the others would be contentious to say the least.

However these are you opinions and I respect that.

[Scottt]

I'd say 3, 6, 9 and possibly 2 are those you'd question were beneficial?

[OMG]

I'm certainly not trying to undermine what JH did. I do believe he did what he thought was right and best for the country in the main....as much as anyone in politics does anyway. Maybe I sound like a Keating fan more than I mean to, but I don't know if anyone else in politics would have had the gumption to radically change things like he did. Alot of this also flew in the face of traditional Labour schools of thought. Fraser certainly wasn't going to do it to the extent Hawke and Keating did, he had his country party to think about. Possibily JH winning when he did was the best thing that could have happened and steadied the ship so to speak....as continued radially changes can sometimes be taken too far and fall in a big heap.

I find it all very interesting and this is why I revisited this thread. It is partly responsible for my current interest and path of learning.

[Scottt]

Don't get me wrong, I can see why some people attack Howard and his "achievements". macjackass is going to have a field day if or when he finds this! I just think he did pretty well with what he had to work with, and I agree that Keating played a part in the positive side of "what he had to work with".

[PeteyD]

One thing I agree on is that Fraser failed to act decisively. A failing he appears to still have. Particularly with pants. Maybe it was fear after the radical changes of the previous government alienated the voters.

I think Work for the dole, or something similar was in operation prior to the Howard government.

The current government seems to have stagnated, and is failing to make radical change, or much change at all, except some nutball carbon trading scheme that will send us down the gurgler. Time for KRudd to do his job instead of flying about and having summits and conferences.

[OMG]

One thing I agree on is that Fraser failed to act decisively. A failing he appears to still have. Particularly with pants. Maybe it was fear after the radical changes of the previous government alienated the voters.

I think Work for the dole, or something similar was in operation prior to the Howard government.

The current government seems to have stagnated, and is failing to make radical change, or much change at all, except some nutball carbon trading scheme that will send us down the gurgler. Time for KRudd to do his job instead of flying about and having summits and conferences.

Agree.
I actually think Gillard might be better, but can't be sure, she might be the one telling Ruddy to go on all these fact finding missions.

[OMG]

Sorry to bring back this thread to those who don't like it.

However, have been doing more research and wanted to question Scottts number one: bought back the farm.

When Howard was running for the 96 election he ran using the amount of foreign debt which was about 180 billion at the time. Near the end of Howards time foreign debt was at something around 520 billion. I am not sure how this is buying back the farm.

Now you may argue that he was talking about govt debt, except the 180billion wasn't just govt debt, and as you mention the govt debt was somewhere in the area of 96billion. So how did Howard pay off this govt debt? was it through reforms and policy? No he sold off assets(approx 80 billion worth), this didn't put the country in any better situation and in fact may have been to its detrement if the assets sold were earning more than the interest being paid on the debt.

The other problem I have on the 'buying back the farm', is that in 2006 Costello announced that the govt debt was now all gone...no debt at all. How is this a good thing? The govt isn't like a household where being debt free is a major dream (and I don't believe households should ever be aiming to be completely debt free either). It is like a large corporation where investments should be being made for the betterment of Australians in the future. BHP runs at about 25% debt.
The buying back the farm and whole debt line from the Howard govt was political theatre. We the Australian public have been lied (or at the very least lead to believe things that just weren't correct) to on many issues especially concerning the economy.
While I am not saying Howard was a bad PM and I am not saying that they did a terrible job, I believe they (the Howard govt) recieves more credit, alot more, than they deserve. I think Howard was better at politics than he was at policy.


I would like to say to those who may think I am Howard bashing that this is not the case, I am neither Labor or Liberally aligned. I am only trying to sort out the real from the spin. I think sometimes good policy gets tainted by politics.
Cheers
OMG

[Moe Norman]

Better at politics than policy?

His biggest problem was that he just did what he believed in and was prepared to wear the political backlash. It was ulitmately his undoing (with workchoices)

He made countless unpopular decisions and staunchly followed them through, and blind freddy knew they were unpopular.

I'd say he was the opposite. Great policy maker, but not great at selling the benefits of such policy.

[PeteyD]

Essentially we have taken substance and replaced it with fluff. Hopefully there will be something more solid there than a bunch of handouts.

[henno]

His biggest problem was that he just did what he believed in and was prepared to wear the political backlash. It was ulitmately his undoing (with workchoices)

He made countless unpopular decisions and staunchly followed them through, and blind freddy knew they were unpopular.

Isn't the governing political party supposed to carry out the tasks and policies sought and prescribed by the constituency that elected them? I can appreciate conviction and passion, but if it is not the popular choice, then simply by definition this is not the right thing to do.

Of course, I am not saying Rudd is doing the right thing. Unfortunately for us, so many politicians push their own agenda, and spend the majority of their time and energy marketing it so that it becomes the popular choice, rather than putting in the effort to find out what people really want.

The closet socialists will say that perhaps the public need to be told what they want. This may be true, but damn it's a fine line to tread and can prove to be political suicide, or worse, economically detrimental.

[Fishman Dan]

From a circular at work released moments ago...

EMPLOYMENT increased 1.6% to 10,756,800
UNEMPLOYMENT increased 3.7% to 488,600
UNEMPLOYMENT RATE increased by just 0.1 percentage point to 4.3%.
PARTICIPATION RATE remained steady at 65.1%

It's not all doom and gloom. Far too many ill-informed people with loud voices (i.e. the press). Sure the Unemployment rate rose significantly on a nett basis, but the participation rate is consistent.

[Moe Norman]

Isn't the governing political party supposed to carry out the tasks and policies sought and prescribed by the constituency that elected them? I can appreciate conviction and passion, but if it is not the popular choice, then simply by definition this is not the right thing to do.

Of course, I am not saying Rudd is doing the right thing. Unfortunately for us, so many politicians push their own agenda, and spend the majority of their time and energy marketing it so that it becomes the popular choice, rather than putting in the effort to find out what people really want.

The closet socialists will say that perhaps the public need to be told what they want. This may be true, but damn it's a fine line to tread and can prove to be political suicide, or worse, economically detrimental.
Disagree. The loud voice of few shouldn't outweight the silence of the majority.

The gunlaws issue was one of the most unpopular political acts in the last 25 years, particularly for many Nationals that would have voted for him. Surely there isn't a sane person that doesn't think this was the right thing to do?

Much like opening up the waterfront, very unpopular with the loud minority - but the right decision in the end.

Workchoices mistake wasn't the policy, but his failure to sell the policy before he did it. His lower house majority delivered to him after 10 years of good government, was ironically his ultimate downfall.

[Fishman Dan]

Workchoices mistake wasn't the policy, but his failure to sell the policy before he did it. His lower house majority delivered to him after 10 years of good government, was ironically his ultimate downfall.

You're right, it wasn't policy. It was dictatorship. And it was sold as just that, which appealed to the minority of the people that still had any sort of belief.

Not only was it unpopular, but it cost his team government, and himself an unloseable seat.

It wasn't about selling a concept, he couldn't give a rats. It was about losing touch with what 'policy' actually meant.

[henno]

Disagree. The loud voice of few shouldn't outweight the silence of the majority.

The gunlaws issue was one of the most unpopular political acts in the last 25 years, particularly for many Nationals that would have voted for him. Surely there isn't a sane person that doesn't think this was the right thing to do?

Much like opening up the waterfront, very unpopular with the loud minority - but the right decision in the end.

Workchoices mistake wasn't the policy, but his failure to sell the policy before he did it. His lower house majority delivered to him after 10 years of good government, was ironically his ultimate downfall.

All of the examples you gave there were in fact the popular choice though. Sure, there were loud minorities, but the vast silent majority means that in essense it was indeed the popular choice.

I think the failure of workchoices may have a little more to do with gross unpopularity rather than simply a loud minority.

But you're right, it's all marketing and that's the real shame.

[poidda]

hahaha. I love this thread. People getting their backs up just because they are staunched supporters of either party. You could argue that black is actually white for years and not get a result.

Now I've forgotten. Was it the 12 years of the shyte Howard government that caused the global economic crisis, or is it Krudds fault for Brisbane's storm season??

[BrisVegas]

It's Kevin's fault.

[poidda]

It's Kevin's fault.

I disagree.

[kev]

I disagree too! What did I have to do with it??? :)

[AndyP]

Statistics and trend data say otherwise, Kev.

[markTHEblake]

Do people still say "labour always means higher interest rates" - despite he was gifted the subprime crisis interest rate reductions, the fact remains that Howard got in on the back of a downward trend in rates, and left with rates in an uptrend.

and the previous 2 liberal governments both took interest rates upwards throughout their terms.

We all know that Hawke/Keating took us to record interest rates, however that was inline with the constant uptrend of the previous 20 years, and they did bring them down much lower than when they started.

[Moe Norman]

The Rudd government has alot to answer for.

In the 1980's our cricket team was shit, Shark lost majors on Sunday's, the stockmarket nosedived and the Hawks and Manly won premierships. None of these are good things.

The common denominator??

Labor Government!!!

:D

[WBennett]

The last time Collingwood won a flag, ALP was in power....

(as did my equally beloved Raiders)

Go Kev07!

[Moe Norman]

2010 here we come!

[PeteyD]

There was a largely meaningless yacht race in there somewhere, and lots of bosses refered to as bums, but I see your point!

[just]

Here is another useless statistic for you. The stats show that average annual rainfall is up when there is a federal Labor government. Bring on the drought breaking rains.

.... but as predicted a Labor government has bought drought breaking rains!;)

[OMG]

Better at politics than policy?

His biggest problem was that he just did what he believed in and was prepared to wear the political backlash. It was ulitmately his undoing (with workchoices)

He made countless unpopular decisions and staunchly followed them through, and blind freddy knew they were unpopular.

I'd say he was the opposite. Great policy maker, but not great at selling the benefits of such policy.

I would suggest you do a bit more reading about Howard Moe. He didn't do what he believed in, he did what he thought was going to get him reelected.
What are these great policies this great policy maker made?
And don't come up with the gun law...

[OMG]

Wouldn't it be nice if we had a govt who was more worried about doing what is in the best interests of Australias future instead of what is in the best interests of THEIR future?

[PeteyD]

I would suggest you do a bit more reading about Howard Moe. He didn't do what he believed in, he did what he thought was going to get him reelected.
What are these great policies this great policy maker made?
And don't come up with the gun law...


Interesting that you claim this when he maintained a policy that got him booted out.

[Moe Norman]

GST & Work Choices spring immediately to mind.

[goughy]

He won an election on the GST platform which just astounded me considering all the bad hype about it - then was re-elected after bringing the gst in. Whether I like him or not I am impressed with how he managed that!

[OMG]

Interesting that you claim this when he maintained a policy that got him booted out.

Interesting that you seem to think the election loss was solely based on that policy.

[PeteyD]

Other than work choices, what lost them the election?

[OMG]

GST & Work Choices spring immediately to mind.

It is interesting to know that Howard wanted to cut the GST back to 8% just before it was due out because he was worried about votes.
Workchoices wasn't about doing what is best for Australia, it was a wish list of conservative IR reforms. It may look like Howard was backing it even hough it was unpopular because he thought it was the 'right' thing to do, but you can bet your last dollar that if he had known the backlash and ammunition it supplied to the opposition it would have been shelved very very quickly!

I am not here to Howard bash, or bash any other polly. But I am not going to kid myself, as some of you are, that these guys are in the job solely for the benefit of Australia and the Australian people.

Politics is about staying in power not necessarily about doing the right or best thing for the country! This is the crying shame of it all. Politics gets in the way of good policy!

[OMG]

Other than work choices, what lost them the election?

The disruption within the ranks of Howards govt, the fact that Howard would not commit to serving a full term, and he should have moved on prior to the 2007 election anyway. Labor finally got it's act together under Rudd....and the list can continue.
Without all these other underlying issues the Australian public could have quite easily put the govt back in for another term. To say that workchoices is the only issue that displaced the govt would be naive at best.

However as stated above I am not here to Howard bash. It wouldn't matter to me who was in office or what party they are from. What I would like to see is some people who aren't afraid of not being reelected doing what is best for Australia come what may.....maybe I am being naive now!

[Webster]

OMG, given your love for Keating, you're not his little gay boy Asian concert pianist that he left his wife for are you?

[PeteyD]

No. There cynical and clever campaign by the union movement about how bad Work Choices was, how it was unfair and unaustralian and would cost jobs (very clever work on their part) was worth a great percentage of the votes. The ironic thing is the global meltdown is going to see unemployment rise and small businesses going broke, so the same effect!

Work Choices is what bought the Howard government down, none of the airy fairy crap you claim.

You are great for bashing the howard government and then saying I am not here to bash howard.

[OMG]

OMG, given your love for Keating, you're not his little gay boy Asian concert pianist that he left his wife for are you?

Ah Jack, blaze away with the unsubstantiated personal attacks champ, after all it is all you have isn't it.:lol:

[OMG]

No. There cynical and clever campaign by the union movement about how bad Work Choices was, how it was unfair and unaustralian and would cost jobs (very clever work on their part) was worth a great percentage of the votes. The ironic thing is the global meltdown is going to see unemployment rise and small businesses going broke, so the same effect!

Work Choices is what bought the Howard government down, none of the airy fairy crap you claim.

You are great for bashing the howard government and then saying I am not here to bash howard.


As I said naive at best...

It wouldn't matter what govt had been there or who the PM was, I would say the same thing regardless. If you or anyone chooses to believe otherwise, well that is up to you.