Australia Approved

It’s been almost two years now that Tony Abbott et al have been demanding an election. We’ve also had devoted lovers of the right comment here at Café Whispers that it has been the people of Australia, not Tony Abbott who have been calling for an election. From what you will read below I can narrow that down even further. Simply, only the right-wing brigade have been calling for an election from the moment the dust settled on the last one.

I’ve revisited a post by Ben Tolputt from September 2010 called Australia Approves which had a candid look at the first opinion poll after Julia Gillard was elected Prime Minister. I realise that the right-wingers will sledge hammer their way in here pointing at the poll results of the last 12 months but it will only serve to deflect the truth: that they’ve been talking crap since September 2010.

Here’s Ben’s post:

Well, the bones have been cast, a few phones called, and the mathematical models consulted. In other words, NewsPoll has done their first poll since the decision resulting in our minority government has been done . . . and Australia approves.

A majority of voters (48% to 36%) agree with the independents’ choice of party to form minority government. And, with that said, an election held today would still result in a hung parliament with the two party preferred dead even.

I await the Shanahan spin on the matter (haven’t read his take on it yet – was saving it for a laugh over my lunchbreak). I personally expect that, contrary to their other editorial reporting, he will split the primary vote of the so-called “Labor/Greens Coalition”. This means he gets to report a devastating loss of primary support for Labor and conveniently forget to add the increase in Greens support (up 2.2% to reach 14%). Personally, I would love to see a breakdown between the Liberals and the Nationals in that particular Coalition, but that would break narrative too much. Left-wing Coalitions are bad and fraught with instability whilst right-wing Coalitions are stable and good for the nation. After all, if they weren’t Shanahan would tell us about it!

The “others” (our best view of the independents’ results) are up over 5% to a total of 11%. Meaning that, contrary to the editorials, the indies don’t seem to be punished for their choice either.

On the downside, nearly three in five (59%) believe that the government will collapse before a full-term is served, with on three in ten believing it will serve it’s full three years.

My hopes are that we will see these trends continuing. That is, we’ll see a continued growth in the Greens and “others” vote, whilst a continued decline in the Labor and Liberal polls keeps them from trying to break the government early. It would also mean a hung parliament next time around . . . with the subsequent need to and capability of politicians to represent their electorates rather than the party machine.

You know, back to the representational democracy we’re supposed to be.

English: Prime Minister of Australia Julia Gil...

The WINNER of the 2010 election (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

251 comments on “Australia Approved

  1. “You know, back to the representational democracy we’re supposed to be.”

    It is ignored, that our parliament is working as the Founding Fathers design it to.

    Well nearly. It would if perinatal taxation powers were returned to the states.

    Parties did not count for much, to the latter half of last century.

  2. Whenever I read that Tony Abbott will not allow a conscience vote on the issue of gay marriage, I wonder about the entire system which states that one’s party should have the potential to come before one’s conscience.

  3. … devoted lovers of the right comment here at Café Whispers that it has been the people of Australia, not Tony Abbott who have been calling for an election

    If that is indeed the case – and I’d take with a grain of salt the claims of wingnuts – then the explanation is simple. People absorb, then echo, the memes put out by the right-wing media. If the media tells the audience often enough that people are wanting a fresh election, then it is likely to become self-fulfilling and people end up WANTING a fresh election. It’s the media not reporting but influencing – making the media the most influential presence in a democracy.

  4. I see Labor has abolished the Howard govt Chronic Disease Dental Scheme and replaced it with nothing.

    It was abolished to save $1B so that Labor can get that long hoped for surplus.

  5. Cuppa, and the msm did it again with the Everyone Hates Julia meme. Yet it defied logic, and as yet no right winger has yet put forward anything remotely substantial by way of an argument as to why everyone hates Julia.

    The technique is to run with a so-called proven fact and then to apply bullshit liberally…so to speak.

  6. Wow, Neil, you really are quite clueless, aren’t you? The CDDS was abolished because-like so many of Howard’s ill-conceived ideas-it wasn’t means tested & was being rorted like there was no tomorrow. Instead, Labor has replaced that scheme with a $5 billion investment in public-funded dental care, which is by far & away a better approach that Howard’s ad hoc methodology!

  7. Sorry Marcus- Howards scheme was scrapped to help balance the budget. Gillard has saved $1B by scrapping the scheme which has been used to fund the long hoped for surplus.

    There is no money for this new scheme. It is not in the budget. Plibersek and Gillard have given conflicting accounts about where the money is coming from for this. Gillard said it would be financed from money saved by scrapping howards scheme but Plibersek has stated that Labor has no money for the scheme and will have to find savings from somewhere to fund the scheme.

    I will believe it when I see it. If you trust Gillard which I don’t, it will start in 2014.

  8. Beats me.

    Gillards scraps a dental scheme so Swan can get a surplus budget with something supposedly to take its place hopefully in July 2014 (ie in 22 months time) and all the leftoids cheer.

  9. The Teen Dental scheme which provides an annual $160 voucher for a dental check for teens is expected to be scrapped to help pay for the new scheme. The Teen Dental plan was used by just 30 per cent of eligible families.

    Instead, under the new plan children aged 2-18 will be able to access up to $1,000 worth of dental care under Medicare every two years.

    Which is a much better idea especially for very young children as the health of the deciduous teeth greatly effects the health of permanent teeth. And it is the very young where parents often neglect dental care thinking that these teeth are going to fall out anyway.

  10. Too bad Gillards just announced scheme has no money to fund it. The money they got by scrapping Howards scheme has been used to fund the hope for budget surplus.

  11. Oh the cracks are appearing…I am tipping Abbott will be unceremoniously dumped, he is so unpopular that rusted on Libs cant stand him. Gillard has grown into the job where as Abbott, well he is still Tony Abbott. As Hewson said, Tony’s main problem is being Tony.

  12. Spot on, Ricky.

    I agree with your words that Julia Gillards has grown into the job. It’s a job where one certainly needs the right temperament. Abbott hasn’t even got the temperament to succeed as a bell-boy.

  13. It won’t matter if they replace Abbott or Gillard or whatever, the next election will still be a contest between two knobheads who don’t give a flying rodent’s bottom about the rest of us – except when they want our “votes” of course.

  14. All of those praising the government dental scheme announced the other day could benefit from listening to this podcast from Radio National’s “Life Matters”.
    [audio src="http://mpegmedia.abc.net.au/rn/podcast/2012/08/lms_20120830_0905.mp3" /]

  15. Michelle Gratten, has reservations as well:
    Some of Labor’s large spending promises are not quite what they seem in fiscal terms at first glance. Take the new dental scheme, which costs more than $4 billion over six years. It will replace two existing schemes, one of which (dental treatment for people with chronic illnesses) is costing $80 million a month while the other (for teenagers) is costing $377 million over the budget period. In a budget accounting sense, the big savings from scrapping the chronic illness scheme does not help the government – because Labor had wanted to scrap it, the scheme has already been wiped out of the budget numbers. But if one looks at the substance, the government will actually be making a saving on its dentistry spending.

    Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/politics/the-splurging-behind-labors-toothy-smiles-20120830-253fy.html#ixzz253fSTWaq

  16. Abbott had every chance to be in government and the reason the Coalition aren’t in government is Abbott.

    As was revealed later even if Abbott had gotten a minority government he had plans to usurp that and engineer an early election in the hope he had complete power.

    That he is the cause of the Coalition not being in government and the revelations of the lengths he will go to to have absolute power more than anything illustrates he is unfit to have power.

    He’s a disgrace to Australian democracy, which he so aptly displays every time he pulls his infantile stunts in parliament.

  17. “Abbott had every chance to be in government and the reason the Coalition aren’t in government is Abbott.”

    If Turnbull was leader the Coalition would have been slaughtered. It was Abbott who turned it into a close contest.

    And Gillard lied to win the election. She shook hands, verbally promised and put it down in writing that she would agree with Wilkies pokie reforms. To bad she reneged on the deal.

    And if it was the Coalition who cut a dental scheme and replaced it with nothing you would be saying they were mean and nasty.

  18. Sorry Neil but you are talking in circles again.

    As has been explained to you multiple times and as both The Australian and Shanahan at the time reported, Gillard did not lie.

    But you never pick up Abbott for his constant stream of lies, including those he made during the election campaign that turned out to be promises he had no intention of keeping. No comment from you in him recently being caught out in a direct lie and then lying to cover up the lie. Seems it’s only a claim of a Gillard lie that has you calling for her to be replaced by a person who constantly fabricates and confabulates.

    Also Abbott said that a carbon tax was the way to go to abate carbon emissions. So by your standards he is now lying as he’s not going to have one.

    Why the double standard?

  19. Möbius Ecko @ 6:07 am

    Abbott had every chance to be in government and the reason the Coalition aren’t in government is Abbott.

    He certainly gave it a shot but I have to ask you would you pay anything to get something you wanted. even if the price asked was your soul? Gillard was willing to do that but Abbott wasn’t and frankly its to his credit that he did not buy the pup of minority government at the price that was paid by Gillard.

    As was revealed later even if Abbott had gotten a minority government he had plans to usurp that and engineer an early election in the hope he had complete power.

    And what do you call Gillard’s seduction of Peter Slipper, other than an attempt to get complete power?

    That he is the cause of the Coalition not being in government and the revelations of the lengths he will go to to have absolute power more than anything illustrates he is unfit to have power.

    That is a ridiculous argument, especially when you consider that Gillard sold her integrity to get the keys to the lodge with her back flip on that infamous “there will be no carbon tax under a government that I lead” promise

    He’s a disgrace to Australian democracy, which he so aptly displays every time he pulls his infantile stunts in parliament.

    Don’t you get that parliaments are the theatre houses of politics and that sometimes the players make their points rather well with humour or “stunts” rather than the pretence of dour seriousness all of the time?

  20. As has been explained to you multiple times and as both The Australian and Shanahan at the time reported, Gillard did not lie.”

    I think Wilkie would disagree with you

  21. Mobius,

    They don’t pick Abbott (or indeed any of that sort) up on their lies. Because to RWFs, lies are lingua franca. Lies, spin, slogans, memes, smears and threats – that’s their toxic repertoire, sent into every household in the nation every day via the complicit media.

  22. Listen Cuppa. Gillard shook hands, verbally agreed and then signed a written document that she would agree to Wilkies pokies reforms if Wilkie helped her win govt. They shook hands and then Gillard reneged on the deal.

  23. Yes Neil she did on the pokies reforms, and I agree with you on that. It was wrong of her and the government, something I and others here said at the time, but they did put a compromise in place that Wilkie agree with.

    The difference here, and I’ve pointed this out to you many times, which you conveniently ignore, is that you never admit to and lambast Howard’s and now Abbott’s lies. Especially Abbott who has not only put out an almost continuous string of lies and confabulations but has lied about lies.

    How come you don’t hold Abbott and the Liberals to the same standard as Gillard and Labor?

    Here comes his nonsense about Labor. Never fails, the same guff over and over.

  24. Miglo,

    Abbott hasn’t even got the temperament to succeed as a bell-boy.

    The only temperament Abbott shares with a bell-boy is the eagerness to do as he’s told – as he’s told by fat mining billionaires, greedy media pigs and cashed-up vested interests, that is.

    As to the temperament required of a leader, as you say, forget it. He cannot negotiate, he can’t string more than a few words together without going into mental paralysis. He’s intolerant, ignorant, deceitful and unscrupulous.

    No wonder RWFs like him! He sets the standard for them.

  25. Cuppa what Neil does is get hold of one thing and then he will flog that over and again, and do so for a very long time, sometimes bringing it up many months after it is dead and gone. He does so even when we agree that it was wrong of the government or the Labor pollie, and even if it is us who makes the criticism.

    He does not do the same for the Liberals, whose lies and malfeasances he defends to the point of becoming ridiculous.

    Dissimulator much.

  26. Mobius,

    Glad you’ve got the stomach to read what the RWFs write, and the tenacity to keep swatting them. Not me, I scroll past. There is an abundance of that rubbish in the “mainstream media” – I come to places like the Cafe to get away from that. They’ve got their own putrid blogs, surely, yet they insist on coming here to perpetuate the filth where it’s neither welcome or believed.

  27. Thanks for the link to the Koukoulas article, Bacchus. Don’t hold your breath waiting for a response from Neil.

    For me however, even Koukoulas is an orthodox economist, in thrawl to the magic of surpluses, or “over the cycle” balanced budgets.

    Perhaps I’ve spent too much time reading heterodox economics but to me it makes sense:

    The government prints money (that it creates out of thin air), spends it into the economy, lets it circulate and do its work, then taxes it back. That is, it spends and taxes, rather than the other way around. We couldn’t pay our taxes if the government didn’t first give us the money !

    What it spends it on is determined by the political choices.

    If it taxes back more than it spends we call that a surplus (for the government). But by the rules of accounting, the other side of the ledger must record a deficit for the non-government (us). A surplus leaves us, literally, short changed.

    So when folk ask, rhetorically, “where’s the money coming from ?” they display an ignorance of the fundamentals. Similarly when they claim “Howard/Costello left us with x billion in “the bank”…

    The purpose of taxation is not to pay for services and infrastructure (the government has its own inexhaustible supply of electronic funds) but to regulate aggregate demand to dampen inflation.

    But it suits the interests of some sections of society, subscribed by the high priests of economic orthodoxy, to have us mugs believe the opposite.

    And at various times in the cycle the myths become bullets in the faux wars of politics. We should be able to do better than that.

  28. I think you need a new title, “Red Rag” or maybe you could take on the Title that the Communist Party News Paper used to have. Incidentally when is the Labor Party going to reinstall the White Australia Policy and the BLF or Water Side Gangs?

    It was my belief as a Union member that the Unions were to represent the concerns of the workers, yet we have the Labor Party taking control HSU, because they were making noises about the introduction of real democratic principles into their Union, and uncovering Corruption that supports the ALP and it’s members.

  29. MJ,

    It’s pretty well impossible to convince the Neils of the world about MMT, when they don’t even have the slightest grasp of orthodox economic theory…

  30. Well it appears that some believe that the PM has no right to behave as a politician.

    For some unknown reason, Labor should be above this.

    Labor politicians should not act as politicians.

    That should be left to the experts. That is the coalition of Liberals and Nationals.

  31. Speaking of Bill Mitchell, He has a very interesting article up at the moment, slaying the BS from the likes of Gina & amusing himself (and us) with the thought that in America, “government spending creates jobs and even the conservatives are saying it.”

    http://bilbo.economicoutlook.net/blog/?p=20782

    Today, I present a series of vignettes that traverse a range of related topics. How Australia’s richest person thinks that billionaires work hard and create jobs and wealth and the poor … well drink and smoke a lot while socialising. Then we consider today’s investment data for Australia which is a precursor to the June-quarter national accounts release. We try to make sense of claims that Australia’s (alleged) socialist government has killed investment in mining. Then we consider how leading economic forecasters mislead the Australian public by claiming that the Australian government will not have enough money to provide dental care to the poor. Then we hop over to America and learn that government spending creates jobs and even the conservatives are saying it. All in a day’s blogging. A veritable pot pourri of lies, deception and self-serving bluster.

  32. So again if the Right are holding the government to a lofty standard of their setting that supposedly has a benchmark of honesty and integrity, and they contend this government should be kicked out now because they don’t meet that standard, then why aren’t they demanding the opposition, specifically Abbott and Hockey, be immediately stood down?

    So you reckon your own personal rate of inflation is high….

    These are all figures that are much better than they were under Howard and if we are to believe Hockey/Robb on their scant detailed economic policy then will be far worse under an Abbott government.

    So why aren’t the Right wing commentators who come here to specifically point out supposed failings and lies of this government whilst suppressing or denigrating, usually by deceits and lies, the successes and truths, not jumping up and down in anger at the gross failings and lies of the Abbott opposition and none more so than Abbott, who is now piling lie upon lie?

  33. “But if one looks at the substance, the government will actually be making a saving on its dentistry spending.” Hang on, what’s going on…OK. here goes; Iain I totally agree. Dental health is the key to long term health and preventative medicine. It is prohibitive expensive for people on low incomes. The chronic illness scheme has proved to be a rorting gravy train for unscrupulous dentists. It has spiralled out of control and needed to be overhauled. Like all issues their will be political point scoring bouncing about, however this is a great idea as in the long run, like the issues surrounding tobacco, its an investment in “long term” (a term lost on most pollies of the modern age) health outcomes.

  34. Prohibitively….bloody predictive text… Miglo I would not want him anywhere near my bags , he would nick em, steal my budgies and blame the carbon tax, besides he is not too good at dealing with baggage. I can see his carcass rotting, He’s getting whiffy and not looking at all like an alternative PM, public opinion has consistently confirmed that. Unlike Gillard, who is involved in significant reforms for future prosperity. Abbotts biggest problem as Dr Hewson so eloquently put it, is being Tony.

  35. Migs
    I try very hard not to disappoint 😉
    Ricky
    Did you listen to the “Life matters” podcast that I linked too?
    I found the part where they pointed out that it is not the young who have the most need when it comes to dental care most illuminating and also it should not be ignored that despite the lack of a means test that more than 80% of those who made use of the chronic disease care program were in fact from the very demographic that are most needy.

  36. Like all issues their will be political point scoring bouncing about, however this is a great idea as in the long run, ”

    Too bad it does not start until July 2014. What do people do in the meantime?? Oh, there is no money for it anyway. Any problems with the current scheme could have been fixed if the ALP wanted to.

    Just another ALP con job.

  37. That “Neil” character..There’s one like him posts on the Political Sword…turgid, repetitive chap..one line/theme..over and over..I’m certain it must be brain damage!
    I remember visiting a hospital once to see someone and as I passed a private ward, there was an aged person there, obviously with dementia of some kind and she just sat in bed saying over and over and over..: “What will I do now, mum?”..over and over..just like the right-wing posters here……Nothing new, nothing lucid or debateable….just the same old same old overandoverandover…
    What DO they have for breakfast!!?

  38. So Neil you disapproved of all those time Howard and now the State Liberal leaders put off introducing policies until the next financial cycle, two to four years down the track?

    Strange, I can’t ever remember you canning a Liberal government for making a policy commitment for several years down the track, something Howard often did.

    Surely you’re not applying double standards again?

  39. Don’t know about a “trend”, 23’…probably just a lack of imagination..I mean..; “…of Sydney”…” …of Melbourne” ???…A more imaginative nom de plume would be : “Bruce of Western Qld, just about 15kms’ east-sth east of Croydon, down Smithy’s Track…ask for “Groper”…” Now THAT would be interesting!!

  40. “It’s pretty well impossible to convince the Neils of the world about MMT, when they don’t even have the slightest grasp of orthodox economic theory…”

    Quite, Bacchus.

    Knowing the orthodox theory does give a background to compare the empiric reality.

    Then it’s up to us.

    It’s not that the new ideas are difficult, it’s getting rid of the old ones that is the problem.

  41. From what I can tell, Neil only knows one theory. There’s no need for me to repeat it – it’s been hammered home.

  42. I don’t know jack shit about orthodox economic theory so leave off to those who are more knowledgeable.

    What I do know is CDF when it comes to financial matters and bullshit being disguised as economic knowledge used as an ideological attack to (falsely) make a point or rewrite history.

    I do know that the constant now very long term harping of one person over deficits BAD, surpluses GOOD, and only Liberals deliver GOOD falls into the bullshit category.

    When was it that budget deficits became such a bad thing that a government’s entire credibility and worth is now based on only producing surpluses, no matter what their other great achievements that benefit the nation nor the damage and neglect being done in pushing for surpluses?

    But this is also very selective for when a Liberal government produces a budget deficit it’s turned into a GOOD, yet when Labor do it for the same reasons it’s a BAD. This was the case with O’Farrell where his $4 billion deficit was explained for the right reason of putting into place the foundations for building infrastructure and fixing neglected areas of the State. Bravo Barry, well done, what a good government you’re running.

    But this is a similar thing the previous State Labor government, other State Labor governments and the current Federal one have done. Boo hiss, what terrible governments.

  43. Strange, I can’t ever remember you canning a Liberal government for making a policy commitment for several years down the track, something Howard often did.”

    I don’t think there were many Liberal govts around until recently. And I did not take much interest in Federal politics until I arrived on Dunlops blog a couple of months before the 2007 election.

    What I do find strange is that people opinions on issues vary depending on who is in power. If the Coalition stripped $1B from dental health they would be called mean and nasty.

    Labor strips $1B from dental health and it is called a great idea by you lot.

  44. Did anyone hear Hockey complaining about there being nothing left to sell.

    Of course that is true, as Howard and Costello beat him to all the goodies, which have been long sold off.

    If Hockey waits a while, he might be able to sell off what this government is busy building.

  45. “If the Coalition stripped $1B from dental health they would be called mean and nasty.”

    It might surprise you. Howard and Costello did tear millions from dental care. They took the money that gave to the states, saying dental care was a state responsibility.

    They with drew the money, Keating gave to the states.

    Yes, Neil, we would say, they were mean and nasty.

    Labor is not saying this. They are saying they are putting in the foundations to allow further dental care. They are remodelling what is being spent now, into a more efficient anf effective scheme.

    They are saying that savings will have to be found within the budget.

    THEY HAVE BEEN SUCCESSFUL IN DOING THIS UP TO NOW.

    They have increase spending in essential areas, without increasing rghe overall spending.

    Yes, Neil, it is about priories.

    Labor is managing to do more with the same spending.

  46. Does anyone believe that the PM is putting in place policies for the next election. The PM is going further, and setting them in stone.

    Little different from Abbott’s efforts. Everyone he has voiced has not lasted more that 24 hours without being discredited.

  47. Jaycee – maybe the [insert name] of [major city] theme is a result of some focus group activitiy to sound like you have gravitas and have some idea of what you are talking about. Demonstrably wrong but its a possible reason..

    It works as well as Clint Eastwood’s speech apparently did at the Republican National Convention.

    Republicans may have made Mitt Romney’s day with the presidential nomination he long sought, but it was Dirty Harry himself who nearly hijacked the show with a rambling diatribe against President Barack Obama – addressed to an empty chair.

    Hollywood icon Clint Eastwood brought his star power and trademark gravelly voice to the stage of the convention hall in Tampa on Thursday, jetting in as a surprise last-minute speaker to warm up the crowd for Romney’s acceptance speech.

    Eastwood’s cameo appearance, including an ad-libbed monologue with an imaginary Obama in an empty chair, seemed to thrill many in the audience, but was widely panned by observers across the political spectrum.

    http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/world/did-clint-eastwood-lose-the-plot-at-romneys-convention-20120831-254sv.html#ixzz256Fqv1aD

  48. Well I had to google for “CDF”, ME…

    If you understand that stuff then MMT should drop into place like an idle thought !

    And so it’s also no surprise you’re not taken in by the faux deficit/surplus pissing contest.

    The tragedy for the progressive side of politics however is that the Labor party has been itself blind-sided by the sheer weight of the Surplus bullshit and finds it has to go along with it.

    Actually, it’s not just the progressive side of politics that suffers, it’s (almost) the whole nation.

    Within the natural constraints of the economy (labour, skills, resources) we could be enjoying the benefits of the contributions of another million or so unemployed/underemployed workers, and the budget outcome would be absolutely of no importance.

  49. BROADCASTER Alan Jones today accused women of “destroying the joint” as he widened his attack on Julia Gillard to take in other female public figures.

    Mr Jones seemed to suggest that women should not be in politics as he ranked former Victorian Police Commissioner Christine Nixon and Sydney Lord Mayor Clover Moore along with the Prime Minister.

    Julia Gillard’s most robust critic on the airwaves – he once proposed she be put in a chaff bag and dropped into the sea – was furious over the aid the Prime Minister had announced for South Pacific nations.

    He told listeners today that $320 million would be spent by Australia promoting Pacific island women in business and politics.

    “She (the Prime Minister) said that we know societies only reach their full potential if women are politically participating,” he told listeners.

    http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/alan-jones-women-are-destroying-the-joint/story-e6freuy9-1226462326339

  50. “Women are destroying the joint – Christine Nixon in Melbourne, Clover Moore here. Honestly.”

    Mr Jones was speaking on air with Nationals Senate Leader Barnaby Joyce about the sale of cotton farm Cubby Station to Chinese interests.

    Asking Senator Joyce if he wanted “a bit of a laugh” he mentioned the aid program, saying the money would have been enough to buy Cubby Station and keep it in Australian hands.

    Mr Jones dismissed critics: “There’s no chaff bag big enough for these people.”

    The Prime Minister’s office has not responded to a request for a comment.

    http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/alan-jones-women-are-destroying-the-joint/story-e6freuy9-1226462326339

  51. Hockey stands by gay “waste” comments

    Note the bylines in this piece. If Hockey is looking to cut funding to LGBTI seniors then ergo he must also be looking to cut all other seniors groups’ support funding.

    After all he has well over $70 billion in savings to find, and that’s before Abbott brain farts his way through an election campaign.

    Hockey knows, because it’s been proven, that his current $50 billion in savings is bogus and there’s nowhere near that amount to save, along with this government making real savings leaving little for Hockey to cut. The Coalition have promised to put back all and more of some of the things this government has found savings in, like Defence. If you were privvy to what Coalition politicians are promising Defence groups and retired troops your jaw would drop with the amount of money it comes to, money they haven’t got and is not counted in their $70++ billion of unfunded liabilities. These groups are mightily pissed off at the current government, and many have every right to be, but wait for the backlash if Hockey and co renege if in government.

  52. CDF = Common Sense.

    I should do the normal Defence writing standard. Common Dog Fuck (CDF).

    Was probably the first unusual term I came across as a recruit at HMAS Cerberus all those years ago. “Get some CDF into ya son or you’ll find yourself at the short end of port arms for 20 laps.”

    “What’s that Chief, CDF?”

    “Common dog son, just plain ol’ common dog, now give me 20 push-ups.”

  53. If the clouds did not emerge today, if the rain did not fall. we would have had a beautiful sunny day. The if’s got in the way.

  54. CU I like this bit, “The Prime Minister’s office has not responded to a request for a comment.”

    I think not saying anything is the best comment of all.

  55. Cu and the Alan Jones story…typical Jones bs. For every emerging economy, prosperity resides in a goodly portion by raising the status of women.

  56. ” They are saying they are putting in the foundations to allow further dental care.

    If you believe that you are insane. They have cut $1B from dental heath and have said they will not replace it until July 2014. But everyone knows they will not find the money to fund the new scheme.

    I will say it again. If the Coalition did this you would say they are mean and nasty.

    Your idea of what is right or wrong all depends on who is in govt.

    Same goes for detention centers. Labor has locked up more than 6,000 people. There would be demonstrations in the streets if the Coalition had done this.

  57. Neil, when Howard was locking people up perhaps we should have been marching in the streets. What do you think?

  58. True, Paul. I just give oxygen to Anal’s disgusting comment.

    I’d rather he didn’t have any oxygen at all.

  59. Neil, they state. This is a six year package and $515 million announced in the 2012-13 Budget, I do not think Neil even read the policy.

    “The six-year package announced today includes:

    $2.7 billion for around 3.4 million Australian children who will be eligible for subsidised dental care;
    $1.3 billion for around 1.4 million additional services for adults on low incomes, including pensioners and concession card holders, and those with special needs; who will have better access to dental care in the public system; and$225 million for dental capital and workforce will be provided to support expanded services for people living in outer metropolitan, regional, rural and remote areas.

    Ms Plibersek said the $4 billion package was in addition to the $515 million announced in the 2012-13 Budget, which included a blitz on public dental waiting lists, additional dental training and support for people in rural and remote areas.

    http://www.alp.org.au/federal-government/news/better-access-to-dental-care-for-australians/

  60. Neil, what this government is doing, is getting rid of Howard’s middle class welfare. They are moving to having means tests on all welfare.

    Now, I must admit, that is not something one would expect from a Labor government.

    They are targeting welfare, strictly to the needy. Those who miss out, should be able to fund their own care.

    This is why they are not increased their spending.

  61. TB, especially, used to say there was more than one Neil. Coincidence that today Neil has two different assigned avatars, indicating the use of 2 different email addresses? :mrgreen:

  62. CU
    the problem with the carbon tax is that it is based upon a lie, it does noting to address emissions, the so called compensation will not be adequate and it will only be part of a rather useless money churn.
    If this government was really interested in addressing emissions then they would mandate standards for all industry, which would be far more transparent and effective. That they have chosen instead to go the carbon tax/ETS route is more about enriching the spivs and shysters rather than making any difference to the environment.

  63. So you say. Others beg to differ. Of course your opinion is always the correct one.

    The majority do not appear to be with you.

  64. Where did I mention carbon tax lately. Maybe I might have said something along the line, that Abbott is continuing to flog a dead horse.

  65. ……..he mining sector may have lost some of its sparkle, but Australia’s economy is still the envy of the developed world.

    Economists expect official national accounts data released next week to show another three months of solid economic growth in the June quarter.

    AAP’s survey of 15 economists revealed a median forecast for GDP (gross domestic product, a measure of the size of the national economy) to have grown by 0.8 per cent in the quarter…………..

    http://bigpondnews.com/articles/Finance/2012/08/31/Economy_still_growing_strong_economists_790059.html

  66. Plus, I was reading that the previous scheme reached only 30% of the targeted group therefore could be classified as unsuccessful.

  67. I see Iain is back on to his enriching the spivs and shysters explanation again, does this man not read.

  68. Sorry to spoil it for you, Bacchus, but I think it’s a WordPress hiccup. It’s still the same old/young Neil.

    Looking at it logically, there can ever only be one of him. I hope. 😦

  69. Allow me to make it up for you. We’re having a special on Penfolds Bin 389 this week. Help yourself.

    How many glasses should I get?

  70. MR IAIN the no it all is it now, by the way Iain, if you know all that is, please explain to us all here, who are the spivs and shysters again, this time we would all like there names and could you please explain why the coalitions Direct Action plan would be better for us again, even though you sate I do not like there policy.

  71. Iain, I expect that I read more than you do and that my reading is more varied as well, are you a mind reader now as well Iain or do you live in a socialist state that dictates what people read.

    You do not know what I read Iain.

    Cheers Comrade.

  72. Iain you are nothing more than a troll who complains when they do not get there own way, If you are so smart why then is your right wing blog site only get on average 6 people who comment there.

  73. “Neil of Sydney” is ;”Tom of Melbourne”..is a failed small-businessman with declining health who is now reliant on welfare and is as bitter as hell because of it.

  74. “lain of Sandpit” is a devious little character who buys and sells things at “car-boot” sales and that is why he can claim to be a “bulk and varied reader”….it’s all those second hand Mills and Boon pulp fiction he trades!….HE will say he is an “Entrepreneur”.

  75. How many glasses should I get?

    Well we’ve got paul, jaycee and Iain here at the moment Migs – better make it 5 glasses. Gees that bottle won’t go far 😯

  76. Thank you Migs, that should go nicely with the Cafe’s menu for tonight of filet mignon, potatoes dauphinois et courgettes au gratin.

  77. Bacchus at 10:16 am…

    Just got around to reading that Bill Mitchell article you linked to.

    Patrons here (of all political persuasions) who complain that Mitchell is hard work should read this…it encapsulates all (well, most) of the essentials of how modern monetary systems work, in very accessible language.

    Read this and self-vaccinate yourself against bullshit.

    Here’s my take-away quote:

    “The budget of a currency-issuing nation can never be in good shape or bad shape. These are descriptive terms that have no real meaning. An economy can be in good shape or bad shape by which we mean that growth and employment and inflation are doing something but a budget is just a residual accounting statement of private
    spending and saving decisions combined with fiscal policy parameters set by government.

    Is an increasing deficit bad and a decreasing deficit good? Meaningless. A deficit might rise because non-government saving is being supported by a fiscal stimulus which might lead to increases in employment, national income and real wages. That would be a good outcome.

    A deficit might also rise because non-government spending collapses, the government doesn’t stimulate enough and tax revenue falls as national income and employment plummets. That would be a bad outcome.

    So trying to bestow virtue on a particular budget balance or direction of movement of a budget balance is meaningless and always leads to erroneous reasoning and poor policy advice.”

    http://bilbo.economicoutlook.net/blog/?p=20782#more-20782

  78. I wish that quote from Mitchell would finally still Neil on his constant bashing of Labor’s deficits and how Howard saved the nation from ruin by paying it off, but sadly it wont.

    Howard, as he had nothing else in an economy that was improving when he won office anyway, he even said so, and having made the current account deficit his only election campaign with his truck, and wanting to take attention away from that failure, started on Beazley’s black hole.

    He went on an unnecessary savage slash and burn, some of the things were never to recover in a decade of his rule, and then demonised deficits to the point they are still political tools of damnation to this day and for not good economic reason.

    But without that Howard demonisation Neil wouldn’t have anything to hang his petard to, so he will continue to use it to bash Labor governments for no good reason.

  79. Iain you said, “the problem with the carbon tax is that it is based upon a lie, it does noting to address emissions, the so called compensation will not be adequate and it will only be part of a rather useless money churn.”

    Iain could you please explain as to why is it based on a lie, it does nothing to address emissions, the compensation is inadequate, and is a useless money churn.

    Please provide the facts an figures instead of your usual diarrhea.

  80. Ms Plibersek said the $4 billion package was in addition to the $515 million announced in the 2012-13 Budget, ”

    Paulwello

    There is no money for this $4B scheme. It is a con job.

    http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2012/s3578963.htm

    TANYA PLIBERSEK, HEALTH MINISTER: There is no money to be redirected. It is not in the forward estimates. We need to find a new $4 billion and we can.

  81. Howard and economics? Costello himself stated how he was continuously bashing his head up against a brick wall when it came to Howard and anything containing numbers.

  82. Bacchus at 10.16am

    Just read that Bill Mitchell article you linked to.

    Cafe patrons (of all political persuasions) who say that Mitchell is “difficult” should read this. It encapsulates pretty much how a modern monetary system operates, and it’s an easy read.

    Here’s my “take-away” quote:

    “The budget of a currency-issuing nation can never be in good shape or bad shape. These are descriptive terms that have no real meaning. An economy can be in good shape or bad shape by which we mean that growth and employment and inflation are doing something but a budget is just a residual accounting statement of private
    spending and saving decisions combined with fiscal policy parameters set by government.

    Is an increasing deficit bad and a decreasing deficit good? Meaningless. A deficit might rise because non-government saving is being supported by a fiscal stimulus which might lead to increases in employment, national income and real wages. That would be a good outcome.

    A deficit might also rise because non-government spending collapses, the government doesn’t stimulate enough and tax revenue falls as national income and employment plummets. That would be a bad outcome.

    So trying to bestow virtue on a particular budget balance or direction of movement of a budget balance is meaningless and always leads to erroneous reasoning and poor policy advice.”

    http://bilbo.economicoutlook.net/blog/?p=20782#more-20782

  83. An interesting (6 minute) comment on the Tea Party etc from Aaron Sorkin’s TV series “The Newsroom”. Sorkin apparently wrote this piece and was also responsible for “The West Wing”. Unfortunately Foxtel is the only place to get this series in Australia – and they aren’t up to this (the last) episode.

  84. Neil is going to bash this to death, just watch.

    So Neil if you are going to be honest and are saying that this is a Labor con job by Plibersek then you must be admitting the $50 billion Hockey has said he has found in savings, and that has proven to be bogus, is a con job by the Liberals.

    Come on, if you are bashing Labor over your belief it’s a con job then you have to bash the Liberals over a real proven con job.

    Not only that the Liberals actually have to find well over $70 billion now but refuse to address anything over the bogus $50 billion.

    For you to keep going on about the Labor $4 billion that they say they will find, especially after finding $30 billion in the last two years and still slimming down government, means you are admitting the Liberals are putting on a huge con job.

  85. ME at 4.38pm

    “I should do the normal Defence writing standard. Common Dog Fuck (CDF).”

    Henceforth the hump in a normal distribution will never be the same.

    20 pushups on the heaving deck of HMAS Cerberus was a tough call.

  86. Hard to have a heaving deck on a block of land.

    http://www.navy.gov.au/HMAS_Cerberus

    Navy names bases/depots as ships. Her Majesty’s Australian Ship Cerberus. There are many other ship references and procedures carried out on depots and bases as well. This is so sailors can more readily transition from base to ship and back again.

    Having said that Cerberus was a cold wet shit hole. Was glad to get away from that place (twice).

  87. Oops… MJ at 7.40pm and again an hour later…repeating myself…someone knocked on the door.

    Excuse double post. Too much of a good thing is barely enough ?

  88. Loosen up ME. I was pulling your leg 🙂

    In another life I was a purchasing officer buying your cornflakes.

    Kuttabul was another.

  89. Obviously I need a lesson in embedding Youtube videos

    2353 – in wordpress it’s not fancy. Just post the URL of the YouTube clip:

  90. I just posted “h t t p : / / w w w .youtube.com/watch?v=yGAvwSp86hY&w=560&h=315]”

    without the spaces or “” 😉

  91. 2353, the trick is to use the http address from the address bar and it has to be the last thing in the comment, that is no text after a YouTube link. Why? Don’t know…

  92. Liberal Party election campaign “Claytons election campaign”: the election campaign you’re having when you’re not having an election campaign.”

  93. Iain, is this the same Liealot who told Windsor and Oakeshott he’d give everything except his @rse to be PM. And frankly, if they’d offered, he would have dropped his trousers faster than the speed of light.

    I must admit to being deeply shocked that the government hasn’t included funding for the most pernicious and debilitating disease afflicting males worldwide-Man Flu. Perhaps there should be a petition?

  94. paulwello @ 6:47 pm

    MR IAIN the no it all is it now, by the way Iain, if you know all that is, please explain to us all here, who are the spivs and shysters again, this time we would all like there names and could you please explain why the coalitions Direct Action plan would be better for us again, even though you sate I do not like there policy.

    Paul take it from someone who knows, you need to use a spell check mate 🙄

    paulwello @ 6:49 pm


    You do not know what I read Iain.

    Actually I can make a pretty good guess from the things that you allude to or cite in the may comments that I have read from you, add to that your political positions and it becomes quite reasonable to trace your opinions back to their original authors. Further unlike you I make a point of reading what I consider to be the “dark-side” when it comes to politics, can you say the same about your reading?

    Cheers Comrade.

    Indeed 😉

    paulwello @ 6:56 pm

    Ok Iain, Mr know it all, what do you actually read.

    On what subject?
    Hmm
    I read all of the major dailies on line everyday, as well as about twenty blogs, I am at present working my way through a Hot Rod builder’s bulletin board and I’m reading George RR Martins “Song of fire and Ice” books add to that I read half a dozen different magazines a week, from popular culture to gaming

    paulwello @ 7:06 pm

    Iain you are nothing more than a troll who complains when they do not get there own way, If you are so smart why then is your right wing blog site only get on average 6 people who comment there.

    You can lead a horse to water but you can’t make them drink 😉
    If you actually wrote a blog rather than just surfing on the writing of others then you would realise that those of use who write do so because we feel the need to do so. My site gets its share of readers and its therapeutic just to write what I think about things on my blog and I would write it even if not one single person ever commented there.

    paulwello @ 7:12 pm

    Iain as far as I am concerned you are a downright SNOB

    You could not be more wrong Paul my cultural tastes are very plebeian when it comes down to it, I like simple unpretentious food, tea rather than anything alcoholic, popular rather than “high” culture, rock and roll music rather than opera…
    The very last thing that I am is a snob

    jaycee @ 7:15 pm

    “lain of Sandpit” is a devious little character who buys and sells things at “car-boot” sales and that is why he can claim to be a “bulk and varied reader”….it’s all those second hand Mills and Boon pulp fiction he trades!….HE will say he is an “Entrepreneur”.

    yawn! I have read some mills and Boon Jaycee but I expect that its really more your style and that you have a pile of tehm beside your bed , along with your well thumbed copies of “Green left Weekly”


    paulwello @ 7:17 pm

    so he reads 50 shades of gray. soft core porn

    No I have not actually had the pleasure of reading that book Paul so would you lend me your copy when you have finished with it? Oh hang on, I want to be able to read every page of any book that I pick up and your copy is bound to have too many pages stuck together by an unmentionable substance…


    Bacchus @ 7:24 pm

    How many glasses should I get?

    Well we’ve got paul, jaycee and Iain here at the moment Migs – better make it 5 glasses. Gees that bottle won’t go far 😯

    Well I don’t drink Mr B I will share a cuppa with you though 😉

    paulwello@ 7:25 pm

    Leave out Iain he only drinks vinegar.

    No but a good vinegar is essential for making a perfect salad dressing 8)

    Miglo @ 7:30 pm

    Vinegar is quite popular here amongst the Queenslanders. :mrgreen:

    The trouble is that the vinegar served here is often accompanied with another less pleasant pale yellow fluid 👿

    Min

    Thank you Migs, that should go nicely with the Cafe’s menu for tonight of filet mignon, potatoes dauphinois et courgettes au gratin.

    Is that a fancy way of saying “meat and potatoes”Min? you better watch out or Paul will think that you are a snob as well 😮
    paulwello@ 7:40 pm

    I suppose after XXXX it would be popular.

    Really after calling me a snob you dis an common man’s beverage?
    Shame on you Paul 🙄

  95. Sorry MJ.

    So now I know where you get you economics from. Takes financial nous to victual the cheapest stuff whilst keeping the troops in the dark. 😉

    On one ship we had a SO who thought it would be a great idea whilst the ship was in the States to change all the goffas over to Dr. Pepper as it was much cheaper than the standard stuff. He then couldn’t figure out why the entire ship’s supply ran out within a couple of days of sailing and had to restock with normal stuff in Hawaii.

    Somewhere on the Pacific ocean floor between San Fran and Hawaii is a whole lot of Dr. Peppers.

  96. The boat people are not Indonesian Nationals. The Indonesian did not sign the convention. They have no responsibility for these people.

    We keep hearing they have to take them. Have not seen any expert say this.

    Then the superior visitor would know. He is the font of all wisdom. Definitely above us pleasure loving people.

    I wonder if he knows he is a bore, and to make it worse, shows signs of being a bully.

    The boar trade in this region, will be dealt with our PM creating a regional solution.

    Our visitor is to busy telling us where we are wrong and\d what to think, that the PM generally gets what she wants.

    We have evidence of this in the dental announcement. The PM has dropped what the Greens demanded. They seem to like the alternative. Mr. Combet sis similar in dropping the $15 floor price on carbon emission. Once again, the Greens are happy. I am sure that Mr. Wilkie will also find himself in the same position.

    I seen somewhere, that it does not matter if Mr. Reith lied. After all it is only history. Yes it is. Of course it does not matter, Liberals are expected and allowed to lie.

  97. Iain, just from this comment “You do not know what I read Iain.

    Actually I can make a pretty good guess from the things that you allude to or cite in the may comments that I have read from you, add to that your political positions and it becomes quite reasonable to trace your opinions back to their original authors. Further unlike you I make a point of reading what I consider to be the “dark-side” when it comes to politics, can you say the same about your reading?

    you coold not be any further from the truth comrade, and your political position is this, u r a snob and just like your hero TA

  98. Iain please answer these questions again so every1 knows who u really are.

    ain you said, “the problem with the carbon tax is that it is based upon a lie, it does noting to address emissions, the so called compensation will not be adequate and it will only be part of a rather useless money churn.”

    Iain could you please explain as to why is it based on a lie, it does nothing to address emissions, the compensation is inadequate, and is a useless money churn.

  99. Iain here is the definition of a snob:
    1.
    a person who imitates, cultivates, or slavishly admires social superiors and is condescending or overbearing to others.
    2.
    a person who believes himself or herself an expert or connoisseur in a given field and is condescending toward or disdainful of those who hold other opinions or have different tastes regarding this field: a musical snob.

    Iain you said this “my cultural tastes are very plebeian when it comes down to it, I like simple unpretentious food, tea rather than anything alcoholic, popular rather than “high” culture, rock and roll music rather than opera…
    The very last thing that I am is a snob” now Iain is this not being a snob.

  100. ME,

    “The lowest or any tender will not necessarily be accepted”

    But it usually was.

    Please accept my (belated) apologies.

  101. No need. The biggest improvement I saw towards the end of my career was in the provision of food and supplies.

    I don’t know who made the policy, but when it was decreed that as much as practicable supplies were to be sourced locally to where the ship was based or base was located, even if this meant the cost was more, should be knighted.

    By the way one of my best up top running mates was a victualler. A much liked (and joked about) member of the ship’s company. Because of him a good SO and a superb chief cook, the ship I was on was known for the excellent meals it produced.

  102. Wowser, a word that comes to mind when out chief visitor makes his superior comments

    I no not know why this is so. Such a old fashion word, that one does not hear much today..

    ]The term wowser – surely one of the most impressive and expressive of Australian coinages – is used to express healthy contempt for those who attempt to force their own morality on everyone. The person who abstains from alcohol (for whatever reason) is not thereby a wowser: s/he’s just probably very fit. But when s/he tries to force everyone else to do as s/he does, then s/he is a wowser. Or as C.J. Dennis defines the term: ‘Wowser: an ineffably pious person who mistakes this world for a penitentiary and himself for a warder’.

    The term originally meant `A person who is obnoxious or annoying to the community or who is in some way disruptive’ and was applied, for example, to prostitutes and public drunks. Feminists and equal opportunists got the `wowser’ guernsey too: Truth (Sydney) (1902): ‘Another of his whims or freaks was to promise a number of wowsers of the `wild woman’ type (to use a term coined by Mrs Lynn Linton) that he would supplant men in the Public Service with women’. These `wild women’ wowsers were seen as on a par with `the warrigal wowsers of Waine’ whom Truth (1904) castigates as `lewd larrikin louts’.

    The shift to the present sense of wowser (to wit, a mealy-mouthed hypocrite, a pious prude, one who condemns or seeks to curtail the pleasures of others or who works to have his or her own rigid morality enforced on all) occurs at the turn of the century. The earliest citation for this sense in The Australian National Dictionary is 1900. In 1903 Truth bugles again: ‘He ridicules the mournful croakings of the wasted wowsers who denounce every earthly pleasure as sinful’. Truth, in fact, is rich in anti-wowser invective: (1904) ‘The watery wowsers who wouldn’t be seen sipping a nobbler in a public house, but who swig good stiff inches from the big black bottle on the bedroom shelf’; (1904) WHITE-EYED WOWSERS simulating sanctity… whose whole life is one pious yelp against the ordinary joys of common humanity’; (1906) ‘Those pious, Puritanical, pragmatical, pulpit-pounding self-pursuers whom we call wowsers’; (1911) ‘Moliere’s Tartuffe was a Roman Catholic French wowser’; (1912) ‘…the denunciation of Sunday golf and every kind of rational Sunday recreation – except that of putting ‘tray-bits’ in the Sabbath plate – which it is the wowser’s recreation to count up in the vestry afterwards’; (1914) ‘Governor Strickland was asked recently for his definition of the new word “wowser”. The Governor said it was generally defined as a man who objected to three inches of an open-worked stocking, but sweated his employees’; (1915) ‘The wowsers enjoy the whine of life’; (1916) ‘Because of the howls of the wowsers, the venereal diseases are just those that are most carefully concealed….’; (1916) ‘The Wowser is invariably a member of the exploiting class or one of his professional, clerical, or other hangers-on’.

    In fact, by 1911, the word would seem to have been firmly established: RTH (1911): ‘And what writer now would consider it necessary to use the inverted commas for such robust and satisfactory slang as wowsers…?’

    From elsewhere: Aussie: the cheerful monthly (Sydney, 1922): ‘Wowsers and gloom-merchants are always saying that we spend too much of our time in sport’; Surf: All about It (1930): Yet even today, the act of jumping into the Pacific with as little as possible on the body is regarded with gloomy suspicion by the wowsers ; Bulletin (Sydney, 1975): ‘But members of this odd body of wowsers want the right to force their opinions on to others’.

    http://andc.anu.edu.au/australian-words/meanings-origins?field_alphabet_value=281

  103. Would also like to add about wowsers: “Best of all, the noun wowser gave birth to the rich and wonderful verb to wowse: Truth (1909) ‘… on tea the croud carouses, and the whiskered wowser wowses, And old women garbed in trousers interject their deep “Ah-mens”‘; Bulletin (1968) ‘But, to be precise about wowsers and wowsing… a wowser was not necessarily a teetotaller, it was not meant to describe the man who led a good and pure life, but the kill-joy, the professional moaner about everything that made life pleasant’; National Times (Sydney, 1983) ‘You bunch of wowsing do-gooders….’

  104. paulwello @ 11:32 am

    Iain you need a check up comrade, and you should also use a spielcheek you bast##ed

    Hmm does spielcheek ensure that your spiel is cheeky enough? 😆

    paulwello @ 11:39 am

    Iain, just from this comment “You do not know what I read Iain.
    you coold(sic) not be any further from the truth comrade, and your political position is this, u r a snob and just like your hero

    Mate, I never claimed to KNOW what you read , I just made some educated guesses about what I think is likely so as I’ve given you a thumbnail sketch of may reading habits why don’t you do the same in return


    paulwello @ 11:41 am

    Iain please answer these questions again so every1(sic) knows who u(sic) really are.

    I don’t need to answer your questions for that to be clear paul

    ain you said, “the problem with the carbon tax is that it is based upon a lie, it does noting to address emissions, the so called compensation will not be adequate and it will only be part of a rather useless money churn.”

    Iain could you please explain as to why is it based on a lie, it does nothing to address emissions, the compensation is inadequate, and is a useless money churn.

    1)The lie is that we were promised “no carbon tax” under a government led by Gillard
    2)there will be no measurable effect of the planetary temperature from this tax even if it is as effective as its designers claim it will be
    2)when a the vast majority of this tax is used for compensating the less well off in our society for iots effects then what is the point? Money in , money out for not benefit = money churn

    paulwello @ 12:19 pm

    Iain here is the definition of a snob:
    1.
    a person who imitates, cultivates, or slavishly admires social superiors and is condescending or overbearing to others.

    Well I’m an egalitarian who does not accept that anyone is my social superior so that rules me out as a snob

    2.
    a person who believes himself or herself an expert or connoisseur in a given field and is condescending toward or disdainful of those who hold other opinions or have different tastes regarding this field: a musical snob.

    I repeatedly point out that I am a humble man and when it comes to music I may prefer a particular genre but I don’t have disdain for other styles

    Iain you said this “my cultural tastes are very plebeian when it comes down to it, I like simple unpretentious food, tea rather than anything alcoholic, popular rather than “high” culture, rock and roll music rather than opera…
    The very last thing that I am is a snob” now Iain is this not being a snob.

    That’s right I’m not being a snob Paul

  105. Iain, you have done it again. 1)The lie is that we were promised “no carbon tax” under a government led by Gillard
    2)there will be no measurable effect of the planetary temperature from this tax even if it is as effective as its designers claim it will be
    2)when a the vast majority of this tax is used for compensating the less well off in our society for iots effects then what is the point? Money in , money out for not benefit = money churn

    Same thing but given no facts to back up your claim or links to back up your claims, and by the way Iain, use a spell checker.

  106. I can find links for you paul 😉

    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/julia-gillards-carbon-price-promise/story-fn59niix-1225907522983

    “I don’t rule out the possibility of legislating a Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme, a market-based mechanism,” she said of the next parliament. “I rule out a carbon tax.”

    http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/C2011B00166

    103 A carbon unit is personal property

    A carbon unit is personal property and, subject to sections 105 and 106, is transmissible by assignment, by will and by devolution by operation of law.

    103A Ownership of carbon unit

    (1) The registered holder of a carbon unit:

    (a) is the legal owner of the unit; and

    (b) may, subject to this Act and the Australian National Registry of Emissions Units Act 2011, deal with the unit as its legal owner and give good discharges for any consideration for any such dealing.

    (2) Subsection (1) only protects a person who deals with the registered holder of the unit as a purchaser:

    (a) in good faith for value; and

    (b) without notice of any defect in the title of the registered holder.

    Sorry – that’s not a tax, is a piece of property which can be bought and sold.

  107. And just for good measure – is the carbon price effective?

    http://www.kimberly-clark.com.au/en/sustainability/planet/climate-change-global-warming.aspx

    Sustainability 2015 Goal to address climate change

    While we appreciate we still have work to do to address climate change, we’re proud to announce that Kimberly-Clark has developed our first goal to reduce greenhouse gases (GHG) and carbon emissions on an absolute basis. Kimberly-Clark’s desire to develop a global climate change management strategy is based on our understanding of the science of climate change and an awareness of the changing regulatory environment surrounding GHGs.

    As a global organisation we’ve pledged to reduce our absolute total greenhouse gas emissions by 5 percent by 2015 – a challenging but necessary goal – even as we are projected to grow our business.

    Locally within Kimberly-Clark Australia and New Zealand we’re proud to stretch our climate change targets even further with our 2015 goal being to achieve a 30% absolute reduction in carbon dioxide emissions from FY11 levels.

    Our global climate change strategy also includes details of sustainable energy management, responsible and sustainable water use and reduced carbon emissions across the Kimberly-Clark global organisation.

    This is just one company – multiply this by the 500 companies who have to buy carbon units… Savvy managers won’t take too long to cotton onto ways to reduce the cost of their permits.

  108. Well if I thought she was going to do nothing, I would have reconsidered my vote.

    Why was there discussion between Direct Action and a cost on carbon emissions, if the PM promised nothing.,

    There is also a difference between a carbon tax and a price on carbon emissions, that was also being discussed at the time.

    That led to the interview that the Opposition love to show. The PM went on to say she would be addressing carbon emissions.

  109. Exactly CU – let’s shout it again:

    “I DON’T RULE OUT THE POSSIBILITY OF LEGISLATING A CARBON POLLUTION REDUCTION SCHEME, A MARKET-BASED MECHANISM,” she said of the next parliament. “I RULE OUT A CARBON TAX.”

  110. Oh Iain, even if you ignore the fact that this is an ETS, not a tax, do we need to remind you of all of Howard’s lies & broken promises. No $250,000 degrees; a cutback in govrrnment advertising; curbing foreign debt; changed unfair dismissal laws to only apply to businesses with 2 employees or less, no further changes to Industrial Relations laws; ministerial codes of conduct; WMD’s; AWB; the fear mongering & demonization around “Children Overboard” & “Wik”-& those are just the ones which immediately come to mind. Yet in all that time, I don’t recall Labor demanding fresh elections every two seconds-unlike Right Wing troglodytes such as yourself.

  111. Marcus, the Libs are allowed to blurt out as many lies as they want. Meanwhile, they expect Labor to cross their t’s and dot their i’s in every sentence.

  112. I don’t think there were many Liberal govts around until recently. And I did not take much interest in Federal politics until I arrived on Dunlops blog a couple of months before the 2007 election.
    Neil of Sydney August 31, 2012 @ 3:01 pm

    🙄

    Well I don’t know about anyone else but that just proves a point I’ve been making for five years …

    Neil, you and your mates need to finish high school, before you play on big people’s blog’s …

  113. TB, Neil pretends to be a reservoir of knowledge. He does have some skills though. Nobody on in the blogosphere links to Murdoch sites as well as he does. 😉

  114. 😆 Migs. I have been called “velourhead” due to the length of my hair 😯

    Enjoy your Rex Watson McKie 3 Cabernet Sauvignon :mrgreen:

  115. Sebago Seafood Sensation
    Steamed potato filled with a delicate array of prawn, scallop, barramundi & Salmon. Then oven baked in a rich white wine cream sauce & served w/ a side salad.

    Perhaps a Cullen ‘Cullen Vineyard’ Semillon Sauvignon Blanc to accompany with a Penfolds St Henri Shiraz 2003 after dinner. Sounds nice

    Enjoy your Rex Watson McKie 3 Cabernet Sauvignon Migs :mrgreen:

  116. Well I don’t know about anyone else but that just proves a point I’ve been making for five years …

    So I get abused for telling the truth.

    How many people took an interest in politics before blogs came along???

  117. Neil, I admit that blogging has introduced a lot of people to politics. Before that they were just members of the silent majority. Blogs and social media have given them a voice.

  118. Me.

    Politics was regularly discussed on ships and sometimes heated discussions broke out in the pub.

    But you wouldn’t know what pre-Internet political discussion isNeil.

  119. How many people took an interest in politics before blogs came along

    Me. The events of 11th Nov 1975 piqued my interest, even though I was not quite old enough to vote yet. A mate of mine was also a member of the Young Nationals back then, so many “animated discussions” took place over copious quantities of beer.

    He’s not a member of a political party any more, but “animated discussions” still happen when we meet these days, though now over copious quantities of red wine 😆

  120. O.K. The answer from Bacchus and Adrian was ME, ME , Me and furthermore ME

    How many people took an interest in politics before blogs came along???

  121. The events of 11th Nov 1975 piqued my interest, even though I was not quite old enough to vote yet.

    Same here, Bacchus. I might also add that those events pissed me off.

  122. How many people took an interest in politics before blogs came along???

    So you’re obviously looking for an exact answer. The exact number of people was 1,612,498.

  123. You only showed up because you heard Migs says it’s my shout

    Well, OK, I fly out early tomorrow … so a WT Tradition and one ice block, please …

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    How many people took an interest in politics before blogs came along???

    So I get abused for telling the truth.

    Noddy, read some fkn history! People were playing politics BEFORE democracy was “invented” …

    … that’s like saying no-one went anywhere until they invented cars … or no-one spoke to anyone till they invented telephones …

    As for abuse … if you think that was abuse … you really do have soem learning to do …

    Either you are playing the fool or you are one … your choice? I’ll apologise when you tell me which, OR, when YOU apologise for calling me a liar … your call …

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    Now where’s me WT, Baccy!

  124. If you look at news stories and radio archives I think you will find that many families admitted to talking politics at the dinner table, at a time the whole family would sit at the dinner table with the TV off.

    I have vague memories of staying at school mates places and some politics being discussed at the table.

    I also know that Hawke was probably the first PM who got more people talking, positive and negative, about government than probably any other politician before him.

    Keating’s piggery, clocks and marriage were widely discussed, good and bad.

    If you think about it politics was as much discussed pre-internet as post-internet but in smaller circles.

  125. The exact number of people was 1,612,498.

    That must have been before women were allowed to discuss politics Migs 😉 The number then became 2,821,871. 😆

  126. Now where’s me WT, Baccy!

    Sorry TB. Gotta fly. It’s Mrs B’s birthday tomorrow as well as Fathers’ day, so dinner out with the family tonight.

    See Migs – he’ll get you a WT just how you like it. I’ll fix him up for it later – I promise 😉 :mrgreen:

  127. getting a “free ticket” in the lottery was enough for me to start taking an interest in politics. glad i never “won” the prize(?), it didn’t seem to do any good for those who did, nor for that matter, the vietnamese.

    funny how the right loves getting us involved in pointless and immoral wars in countries who offer no threat to ours. 🙄

  128. funny how the right loves getting us involved in pointless and immoral wars in countries who offer no threat to ours.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_War

    “The Persian Gulf War (2 August 1990 – 28 February 1991), codenamed Operation Desert Storm (17 January 1991 – 28 February 1991) commonly referred to as simply the Gulf War, was a war waged by a UN-authorized coalition force from 34 nations led by the United States, against Iraq in response to Iraq’s invasion and annexation of Kuwait.”

    It was Bob Hawke who took us to the Middle East and we have been there ever since.

  129. I wonder what Neil thought all those people out marching in the streets, from in my memory, the 1970’s on where doing. Welcoming the Queen.

    I believe that people took more interest and were more serious in those days.

  130. … glad i never “won” the prize … I won the lottery too, RAEME was short VM’s … but I missed out on the holiday to VN .. 😯

    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    It was Bob Hawke who took us to the Middle East and we have been there ever since.

    Noddy, I explained this crap to you a few days ago … we were part of a UN force … Iraq, wasn’t … John Howard, Afghanistan was after 2011 … John Howard and Julia Gillard …

    Picking and choosing is just that … justification is far more important and even that doesn’t work because “loyalties” change over time … eg look at our relationship now with Germany, Japan, Turkey, Vietnam … just to name a few …

    If you want to discuss these things rationally and learn … that’s fine … if not …

    I’ll continue to call you out … at my age everything is running out – including my patience … with nasty little pricks …

  131. Pointless and immoral are the key words.

    We went to war in 1990 because of oil.

    I do not think that many Australians gave a stuff that Iraq had invaded Kuwait.

  132. TB, the trouble is with some at our age, we still have our memories.

    What is amazing, when the right make big of Labor governments falling, as if this has not happened before, both Liberal and Labor. Seems to happen in cycles.

    Same goes for the polls.

  133. I do not think that many Australians gave a stuff that Iraq had invaded Kuwait.

    How would you know? You didn’t take an interst in politics till 2007 … (and they did by the way!)

    I did in 1968 for very personal reasons … far more personal than you will ever experience … and I for one will make sure of that!

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    CU,
    Is it that the younger you are the less memory you have!

    My son told me last night (we were discussing the CFMEU in Melbourne) that unions only caused trouble … when I questioned that singular statement I was told that “the world had changed” … I replied, “only technology changes, people and their needs and wants never change …”
    I’m still waiting for a reply (and he’s a very clever man, my boy!) 😉

  134. I do not think that many Australians gave a stuff that Iraq had invaded Kuwait.

    You’re telling the story Neil so now explain to all us Australians why Iraq invaded Kuwait. After all the US was heavily supporting Saddam at that time, selling him helicopters he was using against his people and Rumsfeld visiting Iraq several times with photo ops of him big cheese grin shaking Saddam’s hand.

    But I would be very interested in why Saddam, who had nothing to gain from invading Kuwait, did so, and you are telling the story Neil so it would be good if you could enlighten us.

  135. Adrian, good luck, with military/political history … nothing really happened before 2007 …

    Gotta go, The Minister, calls … if they have the interwebby thingy in Taswegia (do Taswegians talk in mono or stereo – and does one head have preference over the other like left or right handed folk?) … I’ll pop in from time to time …

  136. You’re telling the story Neil so now explain to all us Australians why Iraq invaded Kuwait.

    I was commenting on the statement that pterosaur1 said that it is the right that gets us involved in pointless and immoral wars.

    I suspect that if Iraq and Kuwait did not have oil we would not have been there in the first place. It was Bob Hawke who took us to the middle east.

    But I would be very interested in why Saddam, who had nothing to gain from invading Kuwait, did so, and you are telling the story Neil so it would be good if you could enlighten us.”

    You said Saddam had nothing to gain by invading Kuwait. Perhaps you could tell me. I am not telling any story. I suspect you are trying to trap me.

    I was just commenting on pterosaur1’s comment that it is the right that gets us involved in wars.

  137. Look up Kuwait stealing Iraq’s oil, and I don’t know the validity of this story but it was said that the US was encouraging Kuwait to do so.

    Now I have no doubt if any country was stealing US oil they would have invaded in a thrice, but I guess it’s only the US and those it supports that are allowed to defend their interests and who make the rules.

  138. @TB
    we tasmaniacs shore have got HEAPS of those intertubes, AND the electrics and all that stuff 🙄

    mind, i haven;t yet qualified for the 2nd head, so can’t tell you about that 😦

  139. Look up Kuwait stealing Iraq’s oil, and I don’t know the validity of this story but it was said that the US was encouraging Kuwait to do so.”

    O.K. I think perhaps, maybe, possibly we can maybe, might, possibly agree we went to war in 1990 because of oil.

    And maybe, possibly, perhaps we went to war again because of WMD’s

    And it was Bob Hawke and the ALP who took us there.

  140. But you have them thar primitive electrics made by running water.

    Us mainlanders have the fancy stuff made by diggin’ coal and burning it in big boilers to make steam to turn into electrics to our home so we can boil a kettle to make steam.

    Yep we up here are the smart ones.

  141. There were no WMD and that was known.

    Bob Hawke did not take us to war on deliberate lies, and did not take us to an illegal war.

    But didn’t you say in Dunlop’s blog that Iraq wasn’t about oil, but now you are saying it was? Or was that another Neil?

  142. Why don’t you all go after Tony Abbott because he is the one who is calling it a carbon Tax. It is a price on carbon. Big difference. Prime Minister Gillard did NOT lie. TONY ABBOTT is the one who went around Australia telling everyone it was a tax. Why is it the people support a self confessed liar. Abbott is the one who is going to bring in the carbon tax and we will all have to pay for it not the polluters they will be getting the money for it that we would be paying. So who do you believe now?

  143. There were no WMD and that was known.”

    Well Wilkie says so but he is only one man.

    Bob Hawke did not take us to war on deliberate lies, and did not take us to an illegal war.”

    Did you not say that Kuwait was stealing Iraq’s oil and was encouraged by the US?? Did we therefore go to war on a lie??

    I do not know enough about the law to say if the second war was illegal or not. However i will say that when I have had time to investigate statements that are anti-Howard I find them wrong.

    I cannot remember what i said on Dunlops blog. But we went to war in 1990 because of oil. And it was the ALP who took us there.

    One problem for the Coalition is that they are usually in power when the US goes to war. I suspect the ALP would do what the Coalition did if faced with the same circumstances. But of course in Opposition the ALP have the luxury to condemn govt policy.

  144. No Neil, not just one man says so,the facts say so.

    I’m not going to get into a bash my head against the wall debate with you Neil, I’ve been through that course before.

    I don’t know if you deliberately play ignorant or are ignorant, but either way it’s dumb.

  145. Why is it the people support a self confessed liar.”

    Beats me.

    Gillard shook hands, verbally agreed, signed a written document, said it in front of the media that she would do a pokies deal with Andrew Wilkie to get his support to form govt.

    After getting Wilkies support she then reneged on the deal.

    Are there any other ways to agree to do something and then break the promise???

  146. i reckon that the first repetition of the oft-repeated lie about the PM lying about the ETS should warrant the same automatic loss of argument, (and credibility) as Godwin’s law.

  147. Gillard did not renege on the agreement..it was the other independents Windsor and Oakeshott who refused to accept the legislation in the form that Wilkie wanted it. However, it appears that all is not lost as Wilkie is back at the negotiating table.

  148. Gillard reneged. Her own Party was against it. She could not get the numbers because the ALP was against it. She could have at least presented the legislation before parliament and if it was voted down at least she could have said she tried.

    Shame on you for defending Gillard.

    http://afr.com/p/betrayed_led_up_the_garden_path_cGSrZqecwUsM0vGIvLKmrI

    Over the past week, Gillard’s decision to betray Wilkie in January has provided a spark to the bonfire now consuming the government.”

  149. Neil why are so disingenuous in going on and on about Gillard’s supposed lies yet never have a go at Abbott’s continuous lies, and even professing to being liar.

    Abbott has told some real porkies and finally one was revealed in an interview, to which afterwards he went on to lie about lying.

    Abbott is a great iterant liar with a long history of lying, yet you seem to have no problem with this in the possible PM of this country. By the standard you hold Gillard to you should be demanding the Liberals get rid of Abbott.

  150. Neil, the PM kept her word to support Wilkie. I believe it was up to Wilkie to get the numbers.

    The truth is that he did not gain support for those on the cross bench.

    The PM did get passed a lesser bill but at least a start.

    It was always open to Wilkie to put a bill himself before the parliament.

    Why did not Wilkie go down this path. I am sure the PM would have supported him.

    Neil, why do you hate Labor so much. What have they done to you in the past.

    Why hate a party and PM that has ensured we have one of the best economies in the world.

    One that is pulling in the excesses of the Howard years by introducing means testing where possible.

    One that is putting in infrastructure for the future,

    One that is redesigning such things as health, education and dental, to make it more efficient.

    Neil, why the hate?

    Could it be that the PM is still standing, refusing to lay down and die, proving you all wrong.

    Cannot think of any other reason.

  151. Abbott has told some real porkies and finally one was revealed in an interview, to which afterwards he went on to lie about lying.

    I saw that interview. When asked about had he read Kloppers statement he immediately said NO.

    However Abbott jumped in very quickly and it did look like he was answering a previous question or he anticipated a question that Sales was going to ask.

    People do make mistakes in live interviews. But Abbott did better in that interview than the evil left said and overall he was right.

    http://www.smh.com.au/business/taxes-a-drag-on-coal-kloppers-warns-investors-20120823-24oyp.html

    BHP Billiton head Marius Kloppers has told European investors that Australia’s carbon and mining taxes have helped to render the nation’s coal industry unworthy of further investment at this time.”

  152. Neil, you summed up Abbott wonderfully.

    He does not listen, or hear questions.

    If so, he ignores them and goes on with the answers he came prepared to answer. the ones that are in his head. This time he even bought a written response which he read from. It was more than a three word slogan answer.

    Mr. Abbott gave the wrong answer, because he has not the brains to listen to the question.

    This time he might not have lied, he may not have answered the question asked.

    he has lied, and admitted to lying on many other occasions.

    He lied about what was released by BHP.

    He lies about most things.

    Mr. Reith was happy ;lying about children overboard. He relied on being re-elected, and never being held to account.

    This is not true for Abbott, the ;lies have not worked. The PM still stands, stronger that ever. He is now being held account for his lies.

  153. Oh bullshit Neil. That excuse, which has been doing the wingnut rounds, has been well and truly trashed.

    And it’s not the evil left who canned Abbott’s interview, it was widely, and rightly, criticised for the terrible interview it was.

    It shows what happens when Abbott is held to account for his constant steam of lies and is stopped from spouting his three word slogans in answer to anything. Every time anything of substance is put to Abbott he falls in a heap.

    Do you rally want a person who cannot answer straight forward questions to rule this country, and then lies about lying?

    As to the BHP overseas statement. That has already been answered but it’s not going to stop you bringing it up over and over, which is what you always do Neil, ignore answers, explanations and facts and keep on spruiking the Right wing bullshit, as that’s all the Right can do is bullshit.

    Of course the carbon price is going to effect COAL, because that’s what it’s meant to do. Olympic Dam had nothing to do with coal and wasn’t effected by the carbon price or the MRRT.

    Then please explain that in the same week as that a major coal expansion in Queensland was announced?

    Why BHP stopped the Olympic Dam expansion is also very well covered in financial magazines and articles all over the place, and it has absolutely nothing to do with the government and everything to do with bad decisions BHP management made.

    But he Neil you just go on bullshitting and ignoring the facts and real stories because I know from a long association that’s what you always do and will always do. It renders most of your arguments and contentions mute and sometimes makes you a joke. But if that’s your want it’s up to you but don’t come here expecting to sprout your bullshit and have us accept it without question.

  154. This time he might not have lied, he may not have answered the question asked.”

    I agree with that.

    Mr. Reith was happy ;lying about children overboard. He relied on being re-elected, and never being held to account.

    The Howard govt was told that children were thrown overboard. That is what they were told.

    Three days before the election they were told by one man that this was not true.
    The facts were the refugees sank the boat and the children were in the water because the refugees sank the boat.

    What is the difference???.

  155. “Neil, why do you hate Labor so much. What have they done to you in the past.

    Why hate a party and PM that has ensured we have one of the best economies in the world.”

    CU, those are reasonable questions one could ask in a rationale debate.

    But political loyalties have nothing (usually) to do with reason.

    I have close friends who have struggled for years (some bad luck) but still give unswerving loyalty to the conservative cause. To me, their best interests would lie in backing the “other side” but I understand the underlying psychology. It helps them get through their day.

    The late infamous (but perspicacious) US comedian Lenny Bruce once said “a raggedy-ass man don’t wanna worship in a raggedy-ass synagogue”.

    He obviously understood that psychology as well.

  156. Sorry, they were told from day one. This is clear from what Navy Officers have said since.

    Reith made sure he did not get the inconvenient truth.

  157. “[i]Why hate a party and PM that has ensured we have one of the best economies in the world[/i].”

    Listen deadbeat we had one of the best economies in the world in 2007.

    We had an unemployment rate of 4.3% in 2007 and trending down.

    You have to go back to the 1970’s to find an unemployment rate with a four in front of it.

    A whole generation of Australians had grown up not knowing what it was like to have an unemployment rate at 4% until John Howard came along.

  158. Sorry, they were told from day one. This is clear from what Navy Officers have said since.”

    They were told by one person three days before the election that children were not thrown overboard. If it is was me I would have done what Howard did. One person says one thing someone else says another.

    They were told three days before the election by Scrafton

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Children_Overboard_affair

    Michael Scrafton, a former senior advisor to Peter Reith, revealed on 16 August 2004 he told John Howard on 7 November 2001 that the Children Overboard claim might be untrue.[11] Howard said they only discussed the inconclusive nature of the video footage.[12] In light of the new information, the Labor opposition called for further inquiry”

    Howard was told on 7/10 the election was on 10/10/2001, three days later.

  159. MJ, still I do not hate Liberals. Some of their professed policies are not half bad.

    Problem is they do not live up to them.

    I do not hate Abbott, why should one.

    I do not hold any respect for him. I think the man is an idiot, that has nothing to offer me.

  160. I believe that Tony’s sister summed him up well, when asked if her brother had offered her any advice.

    She said that Tony always has something to say. The impression I gained from the answer, that she was not impressed with his advice.

  161. For the record, the unemployment rate is 5.2%, inflation is 1.2% and GDP growth is 4.3%. And by the way, not since 1964, has Australia simultaneously enjoyed this mix of fundamentals with a mortgage rate as low as 6.85%.

  162. Neil, how much personal debt. How many interest rates rises was that, in the land of many surpluses.

    How about the GFC, which is still affecting much of the world.

    What about the run down health and education facilities that were left by them.

    Neil, it was not a golden age.

    What about falling productivity for that matter.

    How about the trade deficits.

    What was so wonderful about that time.

  163. By the way, proof that I have hit a soft spot with Neil, when he compliments me by calling me a deadbeat. One up to me.

    By the way, I could be, but feel I have had a few success during my life.

    I believe that lowest unemployment was under Whitlam. I also will say, that it also went up.

    .

  164. Neil cannot even get the date of the 2001 federal election right. the election was on 10 November 2001. If neil cannot get date right even when reading them, 😕 😕

  165. Neil, I am not saying this is a golden age. There are many dark clouds on the horizon, as there is always.

    We need to be careful who we vote for. We, at this time cannot afford one who only aims to demolish. The country cannot afford that.

    We are living in a time of massive global change, in all areas, Solutions that come from the past will not work. It is a new, and I suspect exciting new age, where we are in the right place.

    Saying that, we can still spoil the future that is ours for the taking.

    We need people who have the imagination to see that future and put in place the infrastructure needed to reap the rewards.

  166. By the way, proof that I have hit a soft spot with Neil, when he compliments me by calling me a deadbeat. One up to me.”

    Sorry CU.

    I thought I was replying to Mangrove jack. I also lost my temper.

    Also Gough Whitlam was handed unemployment at 2%. he doubled it to 4% in a very short time. Four percent may not seem high but in those days 4% unemployment was seen as dangerous to our country

  167. MJ, I take it as a compliment to be mistaken for you. That would be a indication, that I am indeed catching up.

    No, unemployment went down under Whitlam.

    Labor learnt from that time. Whitlam like Rudd took over, when the world economy was heading downwards.

    Rudd, rook action fast and hard. It worked. Whitlam did not, and was force into the successful I believe but expensive RED scheme.

    Some good come of it thought. The western suburbs of Sydney have many beautuful parks and gardens they did not have before.

  168. Neil, I must have misunderstood you. I thought you said that you and people did not take an interested in politics before the blogs.

  169. “MJ, I take it as a compliment to be mistaken for you. That would be a indication, that I am indeed catching up.”

    CU, we make a good team. We remember our political and economic history.

    As for Whitlam, he walked into a hornet’s nest. The US had just abandoned the gold/convertible standard, there was the first of the oil shocks, inflation and unemployment had burst out in all the developed economies and the world’s best economists had no idea what to do about it.

    That the Whitlam was able to launch its ambitious programme of reforms, and bring in an almost accidental surplus in the ’73 budget was amazing.

    But the Neils will play childish gotcha games, invoking a grossly distorted history of the Whitlam government and those tumultuous times without knowing a damn thing about it.

  170. Cu and,

    The PM did get passed a lesser bill but at least a start.

    Precisely, and something is always better than nothing. For a while there Wilkie was doing a Fielding, deciding that if he couldn’t have everything and immediately, then he would have nothing at all. I believe that common sense has now prevailed with Wilkie back negotiating with the government..something which has a chance of getting through the lower house.

  171. BHP spokeswoman Fiona Martin said: “We have determined that the new project team to investigate an alternative less capital-intensive design of the open-pit expansion will comprise approximately 50 positions.”

    The total number of job losses is yet to be determined, she said.

    There are currently 190 people in the existing team, most based in Adelaide, and Ms Martin said some employees would be considered for redeployment to other operations in South Australia and across the country.

    BHP isn’t alone. Major mining companies around the world are revisiting their investment plans and refocusing on cutting costs as cash flow is dented by a drop to multi-year lows for prices of iron ore, coal and other industrial raw materials.

    And the real reason why BHP Billiton are currently not going ahead is also included in the article..

    The scrapped plan – which included stripping away a deep layer of rock and soil plus the construction of a coastal desalination plant, new airport, additional port facilities and further accommodation for workers – had become unviable amid a jump in construction costs and a fall in commodity prices, Mr Kloppers said.

    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/mining-energy/bhp-billiton-cuts-jobs-as-28bn-olympic-dam-plan-unravels/story-e6frg9df-1226460588080

  172. MJ, that new book that is due for release will make interesting reading. Seems to support many of the suspicions that many had at the time about Kerr.

    That is the one thing good, if one lives long enough, is to see the truth revealed as papers become available.

    When the time comes for the Howard years, there should be many good stories to unfold.

  173. “MJ, I take it as a compliment to be mistaken for you. That would be a indication, that I am indeed catching up.”

    CU, we make a good team. We remember our political and economic history.

    …. and pass it on to all who(m) read here at the Cafe… and we take that ‘talk’ out into the greater community…… tide-changers and teachers here at Cafe Whispers U 😀

  174. “Big public surpluses counter-balanced by big private sector deficits.”

    MJ

    I thought you said debt was not a problem. Is this correct?? At least with the private sector they are doing things with the borrowed money. How the hell is Qantas going to purchase A380’s if they do not go into debt?? How is BHP going to dig holes in the ground if they do not borrow???

    Our Federal govt is now spending an extra $1B of taxpayers money on locking up 6,000 asylum seekers. And they have the hide to say the Pacific Solution was a waste of money.

    Now that extra Federal debt is a waste of money.

  175. “I thought you said debt was not a problem. Is this correct?? ”

    No, that is not what is being said. The opposite is.

    What is being said, that government deficits are not necessary bad.

    Private and industry debt is a part of life, and poses no problem, as long as it can be serviced. When the debt is beyond ones ability to repay, it becomes a problem.

    There is differences between all types of debt.

    Neil, why do you twist what is said, to support your rubbish?

  176. “Our Federal govt is now spending an extra $1B of taxpayers money on locking up 6,000 asylum seekers. And they have the hide to say the Pacific Solution was a waste of money”

    Maybe if the PM was not obstructed of what she wants to do, there would be no need for this waste. Just a thought.

    We heard the Republicans say, that Obama has failed in getting the economy going. They say this, in the full knowledge, that they obstructed everything he attempted.

    Neil, one cannot continually criticise what a government does, and the outcomes, without acknowledging the contribution that the Opposition has made.

    Do not waste out times, with the squawk that they are not in government. Opposition are responsible for the actions they take, when they oppose.

  177. Maybe if the PM was not obstructed of what she wants to do, there would be no need for this waste. Just a thought.”

    They are being obstructed by their Coalition partners- THE GREENS.

    And the current policy is what Gillard campaigned on in 2007. The Howard govt Pacific Solution was mean and nasty and immoral said Rudd.

    What is now happening in what the ALP and its supporters voted for in 2007

  178. Neil, stick to the facts. The Greens are not partners.

    This is NOT a coalition government. It is a minority government.

    The Greens are still in opposition, along with the Coalition.

    The Greens and Independents have agree not to vote in a no confidence motion against the government. This allows them to be a legitimate government, in agreement with the Constitution.

    The Liberals are responsible for any action they take.

    The Coalition has the power to negate the vote of the Greens, if they wish.

  179. It was the ALP which abolished the Pacific Solution proclaiming about how immoral and nasty was the Howard govt. And of course the ALP is more kind and gentle.

    http://www.minister.immi.gov.au/media/media-releases/2008/ce08014.htm

    ” ‘The Rudd Government pledged to dismantle the Pacific solution and we have moved quickly on that front,’ Senator Evans said.

    ‘The Pacific solution was a cynical, costly and ultimately unsuccessful exercise introduced on the eve of a Federal election by the Howard Government.’

    The Department of Immigration and Citizenship expended $289 million between September 2001 and June 2007 to run the Nauru and Manus OPCs.”

  180. Blah Blah Neil, that is history.

    Many, I among them, believe that the boats would have returned. I believe that Mr. Howard believed this. Why did he begin to build Christmas Island. Labor, when they came in, cut back the Howard plans for the Island.

    Neil, look again at the calendar, it is 2012, nor 2002.

    When Rudd changed the system he was keeping a election promise. There was strong support from the community for that action.

    Would you have wanted his to break his promise, and be declared a liar by the likes of you.

    There are many in the Opposition that did not support the Pacific Solution.

    It worked, as long as Howard denied the people legal and human tights. The aim was to keep the people hidden and in isolation.

    That is no longer possible. The high court has declared his actions illegal.

    Refugees come in waves. Always have and always will.

    What is important, is what do we do today.

    Who is to blame, means little. Does not matter.

  181. Hunt is getting a hard time on Meet the Press. Made to explain Direct Action.

    It appears that is going to work like the water but back, which tells us they bought in and was successful.

    Water buy back and carbon but back will work the same.

    Did not say and was not asked were the money is coming from.

  182. “I thought you said debt was not a problem. Is this correct?? At least with the private sector they are doing things with the borrowed money. How the hell is Qantas going to purchase A380′s if they do not go into debt?? How is BHP going to dig holes in the ground if they do not borrow???”

    Neil, I agree with you that debt as you’ve defined it here is not a problem. Unless of course it is invested unwisely. But I think you are distorting what I’ve said to suit a new argument: you’re the one who’s on record saying debt is bad ( but only, it seems, if it’s a Labor govt deficit).

    I think what a lot of us here at C/W find puzzling, especially coming from the side of politics which purports to have an innate understanding of ‘sound money’ and ‘business’ is this odd aversion to the notion of borrowing, when borrowed money is the petrol that powers the economy (as you now acknowledge above).

    The argument is actually a fallacy of composition: you can’t equate the way public finances work with that of the private or household sector. CU regularly makes this point. But it’s one that you constantly make. Except now ?

    When a business like Qantas borrows (and spends) it is booked in the national accounts as investment and adds to aggregate demand. In economics spending for investment purposes is treated differently from spending for consumption.

    But when the government sector runs a surplus (in the absence of a positive external balance) the private sector must by definition, run a deficit, for a given level of GDP.

    That means, in simple every-day language, households will be unable to save (in aggregate) and will have to go into debt.

    If they didn’t do that, and tried to save, then the economy would come to equilibrium at a lower level of output…and we’d say we were heading for a recession.

    The blowout in household debt during the Howard years kept GDP growing and made up for the spending gap created by the surpluses. When the GFC hit, households went on a thrift binge and if it hadn’t been for the Rudd government pumping billions of dollars into the economy we’d have joined the rest of the world in a deep recession.

    Neil, I’m sure you could find better reasons to dislike Labor. By choosing to attack the government at its strongest flanks, its economic record, you do come across as a bit of a dill.

  183. …you do come across as a bit of a dill.

    Won’t stop him playing or being the dill, he excels at it and uses it to throw in nonsense and diversions.

    Note how he never addresses the Liberal side of the equation whenever he’s asked about their failures or facts are bought out about them that doesn’t shine them in a good light.

    Neil is all about straw men and look over there at Labor. His other tactic is to quickly change tact or topic when something he raises is lucidly answered and facts are presented that shows he’s wrong.

    Honestly you are better off debating a brick wall than Neil.

    Having said that one of the Neils (and multiple Neils has been speculated for a while) can bring up very good points and take part in coherent discussions, rare though that is.

  184. “Honestly you are better off debating a brick wall than Neil.”

    I think that’s right ME.

    Neil however probably reflects the prejudices of a substantial chunk of the un-thinking/uneducated electorate, and as such provides us with a window into that gloomy other-world.

    With that in mind, I’m happy to spell out the basics, as simply as I can knowing there are others who hang around, window shopping at C/W, but never comment. It’s for them mainly. So Neil may be a lost, but not entirely useless, cause.

  185. ME MJ I hope that if we keep saying it often enough, we are giving some who lurk, as you say, the words to say to those, who they hear ranting debt,

    Along with the information we keep repeating on the lie that was not a liar.

  186. Yes true MJ and Cu. If we keep showing Neil the facts and showing where he’s wrong whilst importantly acknowledging the rare times he has it right then you never know, one day he might see a light.

Leave a Comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s