Prime Minister Poll

[Brodders17]

How can you get a scheme right when you have no idea how its going to be funded?

the need to have an accurate picture of how much it will cost, they are close to this i think. then they need to have agreement with the states about who will fund what. after they have this knowledge they will have an idea how much it will cost the fed government.
i assume then as they work out the budget they will put this in the expense column. if the income side meets the expense side it will be paid for. if it doesnt they will reduce other expenses, and increase revenue.
i do not understand why this individual policy needs to specifically funded.

 

[tigergollywog]

Since 1992 when I turned 18 and was legally able to vote...what Victorian ALP state government or ALP federal government have left the finances in a better condition than when they found it?

Then your old enough to know better Livs. I thought you may have been one of those really creepy 17 year old young liberals who look like whats his name ....... that filthy little unscrupulous weirdo adelaide attack dog who you would NOT let babysit your daughter......Christopher Pyne !

On the economic cycles, take a look at the data. 4 year terms dont dictate economic cycles. Politicians know that. When times are booming, people get greedy and vote Libs in so they pay less tax and the libs happily take the credit. When things are looking a bit shaky, people *smile* themselves and think to themselves "if I lose my job or get *smile* or something, I want those blokes who spend money on welfare looking after blokes, rather than the other mob who cut taxes and leave everyman for himself" and they vote labour in, and the libs carry on from cross benches about economic vandalism knowing full well it was nothing to do with either of them. Keating was an exception to this rule. His grasp of economics and his years-ahead-of-his-time engagement with Asia gave us the recession we had to have, which we did, and cost him his job.

 

[lukeanddad]

Keating was an exception to this rule. His grasp of economics and his years-ahead-of-his-time engagement with Asia gave us the recession we had to have, which we did, and cost him his job.

I agree that Keating was a brilliant politician and a very good PM. Unlike Gillard, he allowed the country to have '... the recession we had to have'. In all likelihood, Gillard and Rudd did not allow this to happen (by pump-priming the economy with money they did not have) because it would have cost them an election.

 

[KnightersRevenge]

Then your old enough to know better Livs. I thought you may have been one of those really creepy 17 year old young liberals who look like whats his name ....... that filthy little unscrupulous weirdo adelaide attack dog who you would NOT let babysit your daughter......Christopher Pyne !

On the economic cycles, take a look at the data. 4 year terms dont dictate economic cycles. Politicians know that. When times are booming, people get greedy and vote Libs in so they pay less tax and the libs happily take the credit. When things are looking a bit shaky, people sh!t themselves and think to themselves "if I lose my job or get *smile* or something, I want those blokes who spend money on welfare looking after blokes, rather than the other mob who cut taxes and leave everyman for himself" and they vote labour in, and the libs carry on from cross benches about economic vandalism knowing full well it was nothing to do with either of them. Keating was an exception to this rule. His grasp of economics and his years-ahead-of-his-time engagement with Asia gave us the recession we had to have, which we did, and cost him his job.

Bit tough on Keating. The black Monday crash of '87 preceded a global shock that plunged everyone into a recession. He might have chosen his words better but he didn't cause the recession.

 

[Liverpool]

On the economic cycles, take a look at the data. 4 year terms dont dictate economic cycles. Politicians know that. When times are booming, people get greedy and vote Libs in so they pay less tax and the libs happily take the credit. When things are looking a bit shaky, people sh!t themselves and think to themselves "if I lose my job or get *smile* or something, I want those blokes who spend money on welfare looking after blokes, rather than the other mob who cut taxes and leave everyman for himself" and they vote labour in, and the libs carry on from cross benches about economic vandalism knowing full well it was nothing to do with either of them. Keating was an exception to this rule. His grasp of economics and his years-ahead-of-his-time engagement with Asia gave us the recession we had to have, which we did, and cost him his job.

Tigergollywog (pictured above) giving his interpretation as to why the evil Libs get into power and take the credit from that fiscally-responsible mob called the ALP :hihi

By the way, just a little confused here...if "When times are booming, people get greedy and vote Libs in so they pay less tax and the libs happily take the credit"....why were some of the anti-Libs on here telling me that taxes (and rates) under Howard were at their highest, yet you are more or less saying they pay less?

So which is it?

 

[AngryAnt]

Since 1992 when I turned 18 and was legally able to vote...what Victorian ALP state government or ALP federal government have left the finances in a better condition than when they found it?

They have always left the country in a worse financial state than what they found it....this Government is no different.

So by "always" you mean just the times that you've been interested. Good definition!

 

[Liverpool]

So by "always" you mean just the times that you've been interested. Good definition!

Well, don't know many 9 year olds interested in national fiscal management but once you get into your later teens and 20s you start taking a little more notice of such things.

Anyway, what about the question:
Since 1992 when I turned 18 and was legally able to vote...what Victorian ALP state government or ALP federal government have left the finances in a better condition than when they found it?

Want to have a stab at it or doesn't that interest you enough either?

 

[tigergollywog]

Bit tough on Keating. The black Monday crash of '87 preceded a global shock that plunged everyone into a recession. He might have chosen his words better but he didn't cause the recession.

of course he didnt cause it KR, but like lukeanddad said, he let it run its course. Like giving the nation a dose of castor oil. Also like lukeanddad said, Rudd just shovelled money to the middleclass to delay the inevidable, focussing only on his own grasp on power. PK took one for the team.

Livsy, when I say people vote Libs when times are sweet so they pay less tax, that is the perception, not necessarily the reality. Having said that, I dont believe tax is a dirty word. If properly spent (on poor people who need it, teachers, nurses, coppers and not on maternity leave for a Vaucleuse mum so she can play tennis on Tuesdays and Fridays), I like paying more tax and giving the poor fella a hand. Who IS that bloke you cut and paste? Im guessing its pretty funny.

 

[KnightersRevenge]

of course he didnt cause it KR, but like lukeanddad said, he let it run its course. Like giving the nation a dose of castor oil. Also like lukeanddad said, Rudd just shovelled money to the middleclass to delay the inevidable, focussing only on his own grasp on power. PK took one for the team.

Livsy, when I say people vote Libs when times are sweet so they pay less tax, that is the perception, not necessarily the reality. Having said that, I dont believe tax is a dirty word. If properly spent (on poor people who need it, teachers, nurses, coppers and not on maternity leave for a Vaucleuse mum so she can play tennis on Tuesdays and Fridays), I like paying more tax and giving the poor fella a hand. Who IS that bloke you cut and paste? Im guessing its pretty funny.

Im an unabashed Keatingite but I am not sorry we took the route we did. This GFC dwarfed black Monday and the recession, which we all paid for, could have crippled us. I agree if we could have managed it but taken a bit of a shock we would likely be better off but that is a big if. The electorate can be pretty short-sighted and stupid.

 

[Liverpool]

Livsy, when I say people vote Libs when times are sweet so they pay less tax, that is the perception, not necessarily the reality.

:cutelaugh stop your backtracking!

You were not talking about perception at all...

When times are booming, people get greedy and vote Libs in so they pay less tax and the libs happily take the credit.

I think most of what you type isn't reality and only YOUR perception

 

[tigergollywog]

:cutelaugh stop your backtracking!

You were not talking about perception at all...

I think most of what you type isn't reality and only YOUR perception

if overuse of cute laugh is meant to be disconcerting and paint a picture of a fella with a classic Hooray-Henry, Adelaide money head, bent over the keyboard, with a pin up of christopher pyne in the backgound, then the operation is most certainly a success. Unfortunately the patient died.

 

[AngryAnt]

Well, don't know many 9 year olds interested in national fiscal management but once you get into your later teens and 20s you start taking a little more notice of such things.

The word "always" is not a relative term. Look it up.

Anyway, what about the question:
Since 1992 when I turned 18 and was legally able to vote...what Victorian ALP state government or ALP federal government have left the finances in a better condition than when they found it?

Want to have a stab at it or doesn't that interest you enough either?

I might - what's the criteria for "leaving finances in a better state"? I imagine we could debate that for a few days whatever wacko criteria you come up with.

 

[MB78]

I might - what's the criteria for "leaving finances in a better state"? I imagine we could debate that for a few days whatever wacko criteria you come up with.

How about debt to income ratio? Measurable and a key KPI in business finance.

 

[Rosy]

just taking the p!ss...

There's a bit of it around.. Possibly an overflow from all the pee and importance...or maybe a lapdog just cocked it's leg in the corner.

I'm not requiring "balance" from anyone, to be honest.

I just ask that people who persist in posting anti-[insert name of party I hate here] don't make out they are "balanced", thats all...when they are far from it.

What do you mean by people "making out they are balanced"? Who are you to make requests about their posting habits? Maybe those who aren't programmed for a particular party might judge them on their merits at the time.

..Gillard a socialist sexist-card incompetent liar.

An example today:

Ms Gillard today admitted she didn't know how to fund the $8 billion National Disability Insurance Scheme. The Opposition used the admission to stir up speculation that death duties could return.
http://www.news.com.au/national/death-taxes-feared-as-payment-for-ndis/story-fndo4eg9-1226528873907

Is that clear enough for you now?

How is that a clear example of Julia being a liar? It's a claim you make repeatedly but don't provide evidence when requested to do so.

 

[AngryAnt]

How about debt to income ratio? Measurable and a key KPI in business finance.

Perhaps, but is a for-profit business KPI appropriate to govt finance? I think Livers is trying to refer to fiscal policy in his usual imprecise way. We'll have to see what his mighty brain comes up with.

 

[Liverpool]

Perhaps, but is a for-profit business KPI appropriate to govt finance? I think Livers is trying to refer to fiscal policy in his usual imprecise way. We'll have to see what his mighty brain comes up with.

Oh, what MB78 has asked for is a good start....then you can give us a rundown on ALP surpluses federally since 1992 as well (compared to the Libs)...is that precise enough for you?

What do you mean by people "making out they are balanced"? Who are you to make requests about their posting habits? Maybe those who aren't programmed for a particular party might judge them on their merits at the time.

If that is true and these people aren't programmed for a particular party, then we should see 'stories' posted either promoting or chastising BOTH parties.

If I see a poster continuously posting negative stories about one party and defending the hypocritical actions of another and claiming they "are not programmed for a particular party", then I think I am right on the money to question their integrity.

How is that a clear example of Julia being a liar? It's a claim you make repeatedly but don't provide evidence when requested to do so.

I have but of course, it gets ignored so here are two you can start with and flip-flop around with the usual excuses:

LIE 1:
Gillard dismisses leadership talk
May 17, 2010
Ms Gillard said there was no chance she would launch a bid for the Labor leadership.
She said she was more interested in making Australia a better place than becoming prime minister.
"What gets me up every morning to do my job is my passion and enthusiasm for making this a strong and fair country," she told reporters in Brisbane.
"There's more chance of me becoming the full-forward for the Dogs [Western Bulldogs AFL team] than there is any chance of a change in the Labor Party."http://www.smh.com.au/national/new-poll-sees-growing-support-for--gillard-as-leader-20100517-v6nd.html


A month later she was PM



LIE 2
"There will be no carbon tax under the government I lead."
-- Ms Gillard, August 16, 2010

A year later on the ALP webpage:
The Gillard Labor Government has a plan to build a Clean Energy Future for our children by taxing our biggest polluters – and return every cent to assist households, support jobs and tackle climate change.
http://www.alp.org.au/agenda/environment/carbon-price-mechanism/

 

[Brodders17]

Meanwhile, prominent Liberal frontbencher Tony Abbott says he wants Mr Turnbull to remain Opposition Leader and that he won't challenge him for the leadership.

"No, I won't be challenging for the leadership," Mr Abbott told the Nine Network.

"I think Malcolm Turnbull is a very substantial individual. We are very lucky to have him in public life."

Mr Abbott said yesterday's partyroom brawl was not about leadership but about policy, and said that had now been resolved.


Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/environment/im-ready-to-challenge-turnbull-andrews-20091125-jp7t.html#ixzz2EERk0PY6

a week before Abbott became leader of the Libs.

edit: i only include that to show, IMO, probably every leader of every political party has denied they were interested in the leadership until they actually make a move.

 

[Liverpool]

Meanwhile, prominent Liberal frontbencher Tony Abbott says he wants Mr Turnbull to remain Opposition Leader and that he won't challenge him for the leadership.
"No, I won't be challenging for the leadership," Mr Abbott told the Nine Network.
"I think Malcolm Turnbull is a very substantial individual. We are very lucky to have him in public life."
Mr Abbott said yesterday's partyroom brawl was not about leadership but about policy, and said that had now been resolved.
Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/environment/im-ready-to-challenge-turnbull-andrews-20091125-jp7t.html#ixzz2EERk0PY6
a week before Abbott became leader of the Libs.
edit: i only include that to show, IMO, probably every leader of every political party has denied they were interested in the leadership until they actually make a move.

No problem Brodders....Rosy has asked for Gillard lies and I have provided two of them...let's see what her defence is this time

 

[KnightersRevenge]

No problem Brodders....Rosy has asked for Gillard lies and I have provided two of them...let's see what her defence is this time

If that is true and these people aren't programmed for a particular party, then we should see 'stories' posted either promoting or chastising BOTH parties.

Nah that is not balance. If all the evidence says one scenario is 95% likely and the other is 5% likely it isn't balanced to give each equal coverage. That is lunacy. If a person finds one political leader's statements compelling and the other's fallacious nonsense then it isn't balanced to present both equally. Your posts can even the score if you like but that doesn't compel anyone else to consider your arguments as equal to those of the other side. I have pointed out that it isn't proven that either of your postings were lies. Gillard said in the quote you use that she would price carbon, she has, and that she wouldn't introduce a carbon tax, and I and others have explained how it isn't a tax. Even if you don't accept that, there is conjecture so you haven't caught the PM in a lie. Ditto on the leadership. It is widely accepted, not by you but you are hardly the voice of reason, that the leadership spill was initiated by a cabinet majority not by Gillard so there is no lie in the statement. And if there is so what? Surely the post of Abbott's statement makes you equally outraged at his bald face lying? No?

 

[Brodders17]

Surely the post of Abbott's statement makes you equally outraged at his bald face lying? No?

i doubt anyone bothers getting outraged when Abbott lies anymore. happens too often.