Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Social > Jet Blast
Reload this Page >

War in Australia (any Oz Politics): the Original

Jet Blast Topics that don't fit the other forums. Rules of Engagement apply.

War in Australia (any Oz Politics): the Original

Old 4th Feb 2015, 01:01
  #16141 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Gold Coast, Australia
Age: 72
Posts: 4,248
Originally Posted by Ethel the Aardvark View Post
apparently Bishop is unhappy that she was forced to declare her loyalty for Downturn Abbott.
Not good leadership material if she can so easily be duped!
Always good for a laugh is our little aardvark

Now, remind me again about the loyalty to Rudd shown by your fearless leader, Shorten?

Remind me again about the loyalty to Gillard shown by your fearless leader, Shorten?

Apart, of course, from not knowing what she said but agreeing with it unreservedly. Before deciding that knifing her was the better option
John Eacott is offline  
Old 4th Feb 2015, 01:25
  #16142 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Darwin, NT, Australia
Posts: 737
The ABC doesn't rate as high because it doesn't loudly pander to the easily influenced populace.
And NT news can kick the CLP as much as it likes, NT labor doesn't stand a chance of election so they know the CLP would be victorious if an election were held today
Ummm, Doc. We appear to be communicating from parallel universes.
CoodaShooda is online now  
Old 4th Feb 2015, 01:53
  #16143 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 158
Originally Posted by parabellum View Post
Or could it be that the expectations of the 'average Australian' in this day and age are unreasonable and geared more to Whitlam than reality?
Unfortunately I think this is true. Coupled with a ridiculous 3-year term that can be shortened at the ruling parties will, it means that we cannot get structural reform that will cause the voters any discomfort, no matter how badly it's needed A great start would be a move to fixed 4-year terms (like that will ever happen )
david1300 is offline  
Old 4th Feb 2015, 02:01
  #16144 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Australia
Posts: 14
Just because you think reform is needed, doesn't mean it really is.
Kodachrome is offline  
Old 4th Feb 2015, 02:05
  #16145 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 158
Originally Posted by dr dre View Post
... Obama has managed to turn around the economy and enact the bare beginnings of a quality healthcare program...
Do you know many Americans? None that I know (and I've traveled there a few times during Obama's time in office) that are in business have much good, if any, to say about his economic policies, are highly critical of the education policies, and see the ObamaCare as a financial millstone that will one day in the not to distant future become just unaffordable.

Originally Posted by dr dre View Post
...I think the problem in Australia is that we've had it too good for too long, riding on the back of a mining boom that's now over. This has allowed both sides of politics to ignore real structural issues with our nation and constantly fight amongst themselves and each other for political point scoring.
The natural outcome of our 3-year election term.

Originally Posted by dr dre View Post
...(and trust me, the Coalition waste money on policies just as much as the other side of politics)
Care to list some examples? You've got a long list from the ALP to compare against

And whenever anyone says
Originally Posted by dr dre View Post
...(and trust me...
I have to wonder about the veracity of whatever they say next. Why should we trust you?
david1300 is offline  
Old 4th Feb 2015, 02:15
  #16146 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 158
Originally Posted by chuboy View Post
... But frankly, doom was prophesied and that hasn't happened - I'm not surprised that people don't buy the need for Tony and Joe's cuts anymore. Especially when no effort has been made to tackle how big businesses operate and pay tax in this country.
I don't think the doom that was prophesied was 'imminent doom' - but correctly, it was articulated that we cannot go on accumulating debt and believeing there was not going to be a future problem. Amongst the business owners I see regularly (all small business owners, but all employers) there is a very real feeling of pessimism - not immediately impending doom, but recognition of longer term pain.
david1300 is offline  
Old 4th Feb 2015, 02:25
  #16147 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Back too the hot bits again
Posts: 78
At least this is a nice distraction from all the failed policy attempts and endless expensive royal commissions that never seem to go anywhere.
it looks like Turnbull's phone bill is mounting. as I said, he is the only logical alternative. I might even vote Lib if he goes well.
Ethel the Aardvark is offline  
Old 4th Feb 2015, 02:32
  #16148 (permalink)  
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,066
For instance, you'd think if the "debt situation" was so bad, the implications of that would be clearer by now. But frankly, doom was prophesied and that hasn't happened - I'm not surprised that people don't buy the need for Tony and Joe's cuts anymore. Especially when no effort has been made to tackle how big businesses operate and pay tax in this country.

Chuboy
- You are joking aren't you? Try and imagine what good could be done for Australia with the billions of dollars that are currently being used to pay off the massive, (and unnecessary), Rudd/Gillard/Rudd debt they bequeathed us.
parabellum is offline  
Old 4th Feb 2015, 03:38
  #16149 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Sunny side up
Posts: 1,205
I might even vote Lib if he goes well.
IMO that's why he won't get party room support; he's not Liberal enough. There's centralist and then there's 'sounds suspiciously like the opposition' , and I think Turnbull sits squarely in the latter camp. I've always had the view that one day Turnbull decided to join a political party, so he flipped a coin and said 'tails, okay Liberals it is then'.

As for loyalty, even at the best of times no politician will be loyal to anyone except themselves and (generally ) their party. Any declarations of loyalty by pollies regarding other pollies can safely have the words 'right at this minute, honest' added. This has probably been the case since the days of Ancient Greece.

And why should they be loyal to Abbott, anyway? Politcally he's imploding in front of the whole country, doing enormous damage to his government's reputation and pulling 100% of the focus from its political agenda. In fact, he's doing a Rudd . The paralells are uncanny; the only difference is that Rudd actually started off as popular with the electorate. Apart from that they both quickly became isolationist, both surrounded themselves with unelected Yes People with zero public awareness, both seemed/seem incapable of consulting the caucus and both increasingly look(ed) and sound slightly deranged during press conferences.

What the Coalition does about this is entirely up to them, but Abbott's not helping their cause at present. Nor (IMO) is he acting in the best interests of the party, but rather in the best interests of himself. I know Liberal ideology dictates that it is better to lose government than change leaders and I respect any party that stands by its ideology (it's becoming rare), but if he keeps going like this, I think it will come down to that.
Worrals in the wilds is offline  
Old 4th Feb 2015, 03:50
  #16150 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: BNE, Australia
Posts: 279
Originally Posted by parabellum View Post

Chuboy
- You are joking aren't you? Try and imagine what good could be done for Australia with the billions of dollars that are currently being used to pay off the massive, (and unnecessary), Rudd/Gillard/Rudd debt they bequeathed us.
Whether the debt was unnecessary is an argument I am not qualified to have - but my understanding is that most economists would disagree with you.

What could we do with the interest payments that we would hypothetically have in the treasury were it not for Rudd? Let me guess... build new roads, a shiny new fleet of poorly-designed fighter jets, a chocolate factory?

How about renegotiating a few contracts with some old acquaintances working for a large telecommunications company in which you happen to hold stock, and guaranteeing internet speeds of UP TO 25 Mbps for the punter in the street. Now that is an achievement the Coalition will be proud of.

Meanwhile, life goes on for you and I. The punter in the street has got problems of their own to worry about, namely that private debt is higher and increasing far faster than public debt. Government debt is not the same as paying off a credit card or mortgage, but try explaining that and people's eyes will glaze over as soon as you mention the word 'bond'.
chuboy is offline  
Old 4th Feb 2015, 04:03
  #16151 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Darwin, NT, Australia
Posts: 737
even at the best of times no politician will be loyal to anyone except themselves and (generally ) their party
Our local conservative pollies have just demonstrated that the last four words are redundant.

Chuboy
I confess I am an economic illiterate. I got too confused seeing economists disagree with each other, so gave up. Could you please give me a brief explanation about who pays for government debt?
CoodaShooda is online now  
Old 4th Feb 2015, 05:20
  #16152 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: BNE, Australia
Posts: 279
Originally Posted by CoodaShooda View Post
I confess I am an economic illiterate. I got too confused seeing economists disagree with each other, so gave up. Could you please give me a brief explanation about who pays for government debt?
I am no economist myself, but here's what I remember from macroeconomics 101 about sovereign debt, in a nutshell

When the government wants to borrow, they sell bonds to investors. Investors give the government cash. The investor can be a person or a company like a bank.

A bond is in essence, an IOU.

The government "pays back" its debt by purchasing back the bonds from investors, plus some predetermined interest rate, which is typically low to reflect the low risk of investing in a bond. The government gives cash to the investor in exchange for the bond.

Where things get interesting is if the investor is a central bank. When the central bank buys a bond from the government, they create "cash" to pay for it, increasing the supply of money in the economy.

When the government buys bonds from the central bank (to pay back its debt), the cash which is exchanged for the bond disappears from circulation, decreasing the supply of money in the economy.

The cash itself comes from government revenue, obtained through taxes and royalties or income from publicly-owned assets.

All this to say, paying back public/sovereign debt involves removing money from the economy - not necessarily a bad thing if times are good, but if the economy is weak or fragile, then it can make things worse.

I think that sums it up, I hope you enjoyed your nap!
chuboy is offline  
Old 4th Feb 2015, 06:22
  #16153 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Perth Western Australia
Age: 53
Posts: 808
Whether the debt was unnecessary is an argument I am not qualified to have - but my understanding is that most economists would disagree with you.
I think you find most reasonable people don't have a problem with the basic philosophy around what Rudd tied to do, just the magnitude.

The GFC was a problem, but it wasn't going to impact us as hard as other countries. Like I said at the time, yes he should have spent money, but just to buffer us a bit. Another words he should have let our economy dip a lot more than it did.

This would have had the effect of not giving us as much debt as we have. But more importantly if the sh!t hit the fan with the global economy, and the GFC lasted longer than it did, we still had some in reserve. And now with the local boom over where stuck
rh200 is offline  
Old 4th Feb 2015, 08:02
  #16154 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Sunny side up
Posts: 1,205
Our local conservative pollies have just demonstrated that the last four words are redundant.
And that may cost them the title. If there's one thing the electorate can spot it's self-interest, and they don't like it. People can respect (and sometimes vote for) pollies they disagree with, if they think they're acting in the country/state's best interest. They can also respect (if not vote for) pollies who do what their party sets out to do. However, once it becomes obvious that a pollie's actions are personally motivated they lose the game then and there.
I think you find most reasonable people don't have a problem with the basic philosophy around what Rudd tied to do, just the magnitude.
I'd agree with that. I also think Rudd's public personality failings and the ensuing soap opera had more impact on the electorate's opinion of the government than the economic decisions they made. Bearing that in mind I can understand the Coalition's reluctance to change leaders, but I don't think Labor would have done any better if they'd retained Rudd. Actually, I think they would have done much worse. IMO it wasn't the leadership spill that did the damage per se; it was Gillard/ the Caucus leaving Rudd in a position of power where he could relentlessly work against the leader and the government, undermining her and pursuing his own personal agenda, which was TO SHINE .

Should the Coalition change leaders, unlike Gillard and her government I think they need to remember the words of Machiavelli;
Upon this, one has to remark that men ought either to be well treated or crushed, because they can avenge themselves of lighter injuries, of more serious ones they cannot; therefore the injury that is to be done to a man ought to be of such a kind that one does not stand in fear of revenge.
(The Prince, 1513)

This is something Gillard either forgot or didn't know . Leaving a vengeful deposed leader in a position of influence is a Really Bad Idea, even if it seems friendly at the time. I don't think the actual leadership change was the problem; the problem was letting the deposed leader up for air. That was what was detrimental (and ultimately fatal, among other things) to the Labor government. Abbott will naturally claim precedence wrt changing leaders being a bad move, but I don't think it was the change that killed them. It was the way they did it. If the Libs can avoid all that (by following Machiavelli ) then history need not repeat.

Last edited by Worrals in the wilds; 4th Feb 2015 at 08:56.
Worrals in the wilds is offline  
Old 4th Feb 2015, 08:50
  #16155 (permalink)  
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,066
Upon this, one has to remark that men ought either to be well treated or crushed, because they can avenge themselves of lighter injuries, of more serious ones they cannot; therefore the injury that is to be done to a man ought to be of such a kind that one does not stand in fear of revenge.

The Thais have a nice way of putting this too,
"When you are cut off at the ankles you may then cut your enemy off at the knees, but beware, for they can still cut you off at the waist!" the application is more to do with politics and business than war!
parabellum is offline  
Old 4th Feb 2015, 09:12
  #16156 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Posts: 179
Machiavelli rarely - if ever - got it wrong, Worrals. If they roll TA, it'll be off to High Commissioner London or Ambassador to Washington ASAP if they have a modicum of sense.

The last thing they need if for him to do an Edward Heath and remain lurking like the Ghost of Christmas Past on the back bench.
Fubaar is offline  
Old 4th Feb 2015, 10:04
  #16157 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: eastcoastoz
Age: 72
Posts: 1,701
Prescient Tony.
The writing was on the wall a while back and I think he'd already foreseen the possibility of the High Commissioner posting.
Why do you think he organised the gong for Phil?
Stanwell is offline  
Old 4th Feb 2015, 10:56
  #16158 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Sunny side up
Posts: 1,205
it'll be off to High Commissioner London or Ambassador to Washington ASAP if they have a modicum of sense.
Eggacery. Do send a postcard and let us know how you're getting on.
Stanwell, do you think it was that calculated? Me I have doubts, because it would indicate a level of self-awareness that has been missing from his other recent remarks. I think Abbott made the Prince Philip call from the heart and genuinely thought it was a great idea. Abbott re-quoting Gillard's infamous 'captain's choice' quote (now included in the ALP's 'Never Use This Phrase Ever; a guide for aspiring pollies re unpalatable soundbites' publication ) without any apparent sense of irony was really terrifying.

Last edited by Worrals in the wilds; 4th Feb 2015 at 11:09.
Worrals in the wilds is offline  
Old 4th Feb 2015, 11:19
  #16159 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: eastcoastoz
Age: 72
Posts: 1,701
Worrals,

Well, let's just see.
I think it's generally agreed that the lesser of two evils would be to have him as just another (expensive) snout in the trough.
Stanwell is offline  
Old 4th Feb 2015, 11:24
  #16160 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Sunny side up
Posts: 1,205
Oh, absolutely ! No arguments from here. Arrivederci Roma...
The problem arises when said snout doesn't take the hint wrt sticking its nose in a trough Someplace Else and keeps insisting that it's relevant back home.
Rudd 101...Act II: Abbott 101...
Party Heavies aren't what they used to be . They're too busy appearing on satellite news shows and writing weekly columns to be proper Heavies any more, so pollies who should get Heavied into a new snouting career (away from anything important) keep hanging around causing political damage.

Last edited by Worrals in the wilds; 4th Feb 2015 at 11:36.
Worrals in the wilds is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.