Talking Politics

[Liverpool]

"Australian Peace Party"...gimme a break! :rofl


Hilaly accuses Rudd of 'Islamophobia'
March 14, 2007 12:30am

SHEIK Taj al-Din al-Hilali has accused federal Labor leader Kevin Rudd of "Islamophobia".
Sheik Hilaly said his plans for a new political party would go ahead, despite Mr Rudd's opposition.
Mr Rudd has said Australians would never vote for a man who defended gang rapists and denigrated Australian women.
Sheik Hilaly said Mr Rudd's comments revealed the Labor Party was worried.
“This is the best indication of the importance of this party and Rudd is talking Islamophobia and he is exposing his true position,” Sheik Hilaly told News Limited.
“This party (Australian Peace Party) will give society protection from such views.”
Sheik Hilaly said although the party was his vision, and he would help form a preparation committee, he would only be the figurehead for the party.
He said he hoped it would target both state and Federal Governments.

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,21379143-5005961,00.html

 

[RemoteTiger]

"Australian Peace Party"...gimme a break! :rofl

The beauty of living in a democracy - anybody with enough funds can setup a political party to contest the election and providing they get a certain percentage of the vote they get their election registration fee reimbursed.

I wonder though - Liverpool - if you and I decided to slip over to the middle-east and preach our brand of religion (AFL) then wanted to set up the neo conservative AFL political party for the next elections in Iraq, Iran, Syria etc. etc. whether we would legally be allowed?

We live in a great country - its just those extremist social lefties and red neck righties that bugger up this place - hey Livers? ;D

 

[jb03]

"Australian Peace Party"...gimme a break! :rofl


Hilaly accuses Rudd of 'Islamophobia'
March 14, 2007 12:30am

SHEIK Taj al-Din al-Hilali has accused federal Labor leader Kevin Rudd of "Islamophobia".
Sheik Hilaly said his plans for a new political party would go ahead, despite Mr Rudd's opposition.
Mr Rudd has said Australians would never vote for a man who defended gang rapists and denigrated Australian women.
Sheik Hilaly said Mr Rudd's comments revealed the Labor Party was worried.
“This is the best indication of the importance of this party and Rudd is talking Islamophobia and he is exposing his true position,” Sheik Hilaly told News Limited.
“This party (Australian Peace Party) will give society protection from such views.”
Sheik Hilaly said although the party was his vision, and he would help form a preparation committee, he would only be the figurehead for the party.
He said he hoped it would target both state and Federal Governments.

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,21379143-5005961,00.html

I reckon your a chance to vote for Rudd at the next election L'Pool.

 

[Liverpool]

We live in a great country - its just those extremist social lefties and red neck righties that bugger up this place - hey Livers? ;D

That sounds better now... :hihi

Got no problem Islams having a Party, as some of them I'm sure are Aussie citizens and that is their right here.
Their views and policies can be voted on by the public.

Just had to laugh at it being called the "Australian Peace Party", thats all.

I reckon your a chance to vote for Rudd at the next election L'Pool.

At the moment, I'll still most likely vote for the Libs....however, Rudd has surpised me.

He isn't as "anti Government" as we saw with Beazley, and certainly not as aggressively "anti-Government/anti-US" like Mark Latham was.

I think one of the main hesitations some people might have in Rudd, is his shadow called Gillard.
She does have a lot to say, for someone who isn't the leader, and I think she is a lot more ambitious than people give her credit for.
I just hope Rudd atches his back....

Having said that, Rudd has agreed (to some extent, and he suffered an outburst from Gillard about this) that the WorkChoices were not as evil and bad as the Unions had made out, and he hasn't said he would get rid of them.
He might refine them somewhat, but I think the Government itself has done the same, and will continue to do the same, as the new laws are soaked in by employers, employees, and unions.

Rudd has also dodged around getting rid of the GST, something the Libs brought in.

Rudd said some strong words when the illegal boatload of Sri-Lankans were heading to Australia last month, and stated the ALP's immigration policy, which is VERY similar to the one the Government already have, about turning boats around and processing people offshore.

And we see today, that Rudd is also concerned, with the way the Islam population have integrated into the mainstream population, and in particular, people like Sheik Hilali and his outspoken and offensive remarks.

I might not vote for Rudd on election day....but if he keeps going, the way he is going....he isn't going to be that much different to what we have now in Government, and that isn't that bad of a thing, I reckon.
I might be in a position, where it won't matter who I vote for, I might be on a winner anyway! ;D

 

[RemoteTiger]

I might not vote for Rudd on election day....but if he keeps going, the way he is going....he isn't going to be that much different to what we have now in Government, and that isn't that bad of a thing, I reckon.
I might be in a position, where it won't matter who I vote for, I might be on a winner anyway! ;D

With one very major exception - Rudd will bring back Ministerial Accountability - and stop the running of the country by a mob of political ratbags ministers who shift the blame elsewhere within the Public Sector - when the buck should always stop at the minister's office.

I live and work with very senior public servants and have seen those people knock back promotions because they know if they take the promotion they place themselves in a position to be the scapegoat for the minister should something go awry.

As one said to me after I expressed my surprise that he had not put his hat in the ring for a certain vacant Head of Department position -"My ambition has always been to serve the Government and through it the Australian people - but I am a career public servant who has a family mortagage etc etc. - if for political expedience a minister needs a head to roll to save his own then I do not want that head to be mine and thus put my family at risk of no viable means of support"

Ian Campbell was the 1st in a very long time to get the chop under Ministerial conduct and accountability - Senator Santo Santoro should have received the same wrath of the Gods - history of this government shows there are a lot more like Santoro - Rieth and "lending" his kids a Government phone card - the numerous ministers for Immigration who blamed their department heads for the stuff ups - those Departmental Heads were only following the minister's initial orders - Downer and Vaile for the Wheat Board indiscretions - the buck stops at the Minister's office whether he/she knew of it or not - for the minister should have systems in place that pre-warn (flag) wrongful doings prior to them being leaked to the media or even prior to them happening. That is the foundation stone of the Westminster System.

What the Howard Government has done has put a layer of Minister's Aides between the Minister and the Departmental Head which means the Department Head has to advise the aides not the minister directly - hence if something goes wrong the Minister can claim he was not told - the aides slide back into the background and the Department Head is left to wear the consequences. These ministerial aides have become very clever in only providing their respective minister with good news and hold back the not-so-good news hence protecting their bosses' arse.

This has caused the ministers to become quite indifferent to their responsibilities within their portfolios - as they know they have a safety net should something go wrong. The ministers do not know what really is happening within their respective portfolios and what is worse they do not care because they know they are safe. So *smile* the country I am in power and that is all that matters.

What this really means under the Westminster System of government is that the country is being run by non-elected minister's aides who decide what way government policy should be introduced and enacted. The power behind the thrown if you like - these aides can claim "all care but no responsibility".

Meanwhile you and I have to struggle on to make ends meet - knowing that the leaders we so desperately need to run our great country are oblivious to what is really happening within their portfolios.

Arguably one of the finest Liberal Prime Ministers of Australian History Mr Malcolm Fraser even said "When Ministerial Accountability breaks down so does the Government of Australia."

This IMO this is the big difference between Mr Howard and Mr Rudd......RT

 

[ssstone]

Correct. Even though interests rates hit 17% at the last recession, because house prices were so far below their real value there were bargains to be had.

Nowadays houses are overvalued and everyone is in debt up to their eyeballs... Howard won't save anyone when the next one hits and it's gonna be carnage >

:rofl :rofl :rofl :roflready im still pissin meself.chicken little the sky is gunna fall.what a crock, obviously you have no *smile* idea what it costs to build a house in victoria let alone sydney......tell me ready how do you earn ya quid?? have you ever employed someone that you have had to pay payrole tax for or bullshite workcover premiums.have you ever had to pay an employee a TOOL allowance,turn up allowance and 17.5 % loading on holiday pay ???now do you want to justify land tax ??? .carnage?? for *smile* sake ready, w.a and queensland cant find the labour to service thier requirements,and victorian firms are importing skilled workers a rate never seen before to service thiers ! but i digress mr garrision will be elected by small minded pple like yourself and will save us from ourselves just like taxy bracksey has done I.E tax em harder to cover the cost.

Wonder if he knows about the economic record of his pin up lawyer Coconut Howard when he was Treasurer? Bottom of the Harbour, etc etc
I see housing affordability is as it's worst since '87.

anduril its now cheaper to own a house than it is to rent !!! just the small problem of moving out a bit further than the inner suburbs.but the ME generation would rather whinge and or sook than take the steps previous generations have had to do .the word is ' compromise' .a wise old man once said to me ,YOU HAVE TO EARN THE RIGHT TO EARN THE RIGHT .

 

[tigersnake]

I agree with your point that a lot of young 'un today want the whole inner-city miami-vice pad instantly, fair enough.

thats just part of it though, across the board housing afforability is down, figures I saw was 5 times annual wage in hawke/ Keating years even with high interset, and 8 times annual wage now.

I'm sure meeting bureacratic requirements is tough for small businesses, I know its tough actually, but anyone who thinks its better under either party is deluded. I'm not sure about some of your points. Personally I think there will be a recession at some point, but when? It seems like our economy is on a bizaare treadmill with only commodities underpinning it, houses rocket, then stop so people buy shares, then shares rocket, then stop so people buy houses again. I don't see how it can keep going and going, but who knows?,

 

[Liverpool]

I might not vote for Rudd on election day....but if he keeps going, the way he is going....he isn't going to be that much different to what we have now in Government, and that isn't that bad of a thing, I reckon.
I might be in a position, where it won't matter who I vote for, I might be on a winner anyway! ;D

With one very major exception - Rudd will bring back Ministerial Accountability - and stop the running of the country by a mob of political ratbags ministers who shift the blame elsewhere within the Public Sector - when the buck should always stop at the minister's office.

I live and work with very senior public servants and have seen those people knock back promotions because they know if they take the promotion they place themselves in a position to be the scapegoat for the minister should something go awry.

As one said to me after I expressed my surprise that he had not put his hat in the ring for a certain vacant Head of Department position -"My ambition has always been to serve the Government and through it the Australian people - but I am a career public servant who has a family mortagage etc etc. - if for political expedience a minister needs a head to roll to save his own then I do not want that head to be mine and thus put my family at risk of no viable means of support"

Ian Campbell was the 1st in a very long time to get the chop under Ministerial conduct and accountability - Senator Santo Santoro should have received the same wrath of the Gods - history of this government shows there are a lot more like Santoro - Rieth and "lending" his kids a Government phone card - the numerous ministers for Immigration who blamed their department heads for the stuff ups - those Departmental Heads were only following the minister's initial orders - Downer and Vaile for the Wheat Board indiscretions - the buck stops at the Minister's office whether he/she knew of it or not - for the minister should have systems in place that pre-warn (flag) wrongful doings prior to them being leaked to the media or even prior to them happening. That is the foundation stone of the Westminster System.

What the Howard Government has done has put a layer of Minister's Aides between the Minister and the Departmental Head which means the Department Head has to advise the aides not the minister directly - hence if something goes wrong the Minister can claim he was not told - the aides slide back into the background and the Department Head is left to wear the consequences. These ministerial aides have become very clever in only providing their respective minister with good news and hold back the not-so-good news hence protecting their bosses' arse.

This has caused the ministers to become quite indifferent to their responsibilities within their portfolios - as they know they have a safety net should something go wrong. The ministers do not know what really is happening within their respective portfolios and what is worse they do not care because they know they are safe. So *smile* the country I am in power and that is all that matters.

What this really means under the Westminster System of government is that the country is being run by non-elected minister's aides who decide what way government policy should be introduced and enacted. The power behind the thrown if you like - these aides can claim "all care but no responsibility".

Meanwhile you and I have to struggle on to make ends meet - knowing that the leaders we so desperately need to run our great country are oblivious to what is really happening within their portfolios.

Arguably one of the finest Liberal Prime Ministers of Australian History Mr Malcolm Fraser even said "When Ministerial Accountability breaks down so does the Government of Australia."

This IMO this is the big difference between Mr Howard and Mr Rudd......RT

Thats fair enough Remote...we might...you may be right.

However, with Howard, we know what we're going to get...with Rudd....look, I don't think he'll take any more responsibility than Howard does, for any stuff-ups.
I don't think Rudd's ministers will take any on the chin for any stuff-ups either.
Its all part of the political game, and is common in all Governments and big business.

I know if I did something major....say an environmental disaster....that my boss, and the one above him will be more than happy for me to take the fall individually, rather than bring them down, or see the company get bad publicity.
Its all part of the game called "covering one's

"

However, like I said, we won't know what game Rudd will play until he's in office I guess (by then, its too late)....and its just my opinion that he won't be any different to what Howard is doing now.
We'l see what happens I guess...

 

[tigersnake]

theres a whole world of little circle emotiony things that I'm excluded from, first the vomiter, then the hula girl and party dude, now the browneye, what gives? olice:.

 

[ssstone]

I agree with your point that a lot of young 'un today want the whole inner-city miami-vice pad instantly, fair enough.

thats just part of it though, across the board housing afforability is down, figures I saw was 5 times annual wage in hawke/ Keating years even with high interset, and 8 times annual wage now.

I'm sure meeting bureacratic requirements is tough for small businesses, I know its tough actually, but anyone who thinks its better under either party is deluded. I'm not sure about some of your points. Personally I think there will be a recession at some point, but when? It seems like our economy is on a bizaare treadmill with only commodities underpinning it, houses rocket, then stop so people buy shares, then shares rocket, then stop so people buy houses again. I don't see how it can keep going and going, but who knows?,

good post t.s .i also dont think any pollie is differant to the next.in common land when you rip off the taxpayer its akin to murder ?however if yor in guvvermint and meeting budget its called user pays.and both sides are guilty especially when it comes to selling out the aust manurfacorting ind overseas.8 times the wage??? check out the vic goverment taxes on new land sales.only last year taxy and his mob introduced a new tax on undevoleped blocks under the guise of infrastructure : fair dinkum go for a drive to plenty or doreen and see the houses going up that 1950's built roads are sevicing.or have a run down thompsons rd in the south east and see how that works at its busiest.there will be no recession ,rents are rocketing and those with the money to invest will head back to housing. and as for the idiots that have over capitlised ?? tuff titties welcome to the real world.your decsion to hock yourself to the hilt to have THE car,plasma,holiday/honeymoon/new furniture or a stella mc cartney dress ....learn your lesson :hihi

 

[tigersnake]

yeah a lot who are hocked to their nuts aren't smart thats for sure. I'm still wary of a recession personally, so many 'ifs' though so who the bloody hell knows, I have'nt got a crystal ball. REnts are going up yes, but from a very low base, 2%, they have to skyrocket to get to even 5% (rememembering 7-8% was common pre 2001). What if interest rates go to 8-9% which could happen, mass exodus from housing as people go for hassle-free cash, but like I said, who knows, s-s-s-single bed, not me.

 

[Anduril]

anduril its now cheaper to own a house than it is to rent !!! [/quote]

What rubbish.

 

[ssstone]

anduril its now cheaper to own a house than it is to rent !!!

What rubbish.
[/quote]not really andrull go and check the repayments on a spec home in the burbs then go and rent a house in burwood or kew !!!

yeah a lot who are hocked to their nuts aren't smart thats for sure. I'm still wary of a recession personally, so many 'ifs' though so who the bloody hell knows, I have'nt got a crystal ball. REnts are going up yes, but from a very low base, 2%, they have to skyrocket to get to even 5% (rememembering 7-8% was common pre 2001). What if interest rates go to 8-9% which could happen, mass exodus from housing as people go for hassle-free cash, but like I said, who knows, s-s-s-single bed, not me.

ts i do hear you.but the powers to be now and then wont let it happen again.tgersnake my mum told me more than once "if you cant pay cash you dont need it" and i and the better half live by it.dont have a credit/suckers card and never will .the kids lack for nothing and we are on the verge of buying a country pub because of it.we dont drive the latest and greatest cars however they are well presented , serviced and reliable.including the 34 year old hq workute.rents will rocket and so to inflation to curb the gottahaves spending. but they will not engineer another recession,not matter if its little johnny or mr garrison in office

 

[zips]

anduril its now cheaper to own a house than it is to rent !!!

What rubbish.

not really andrull go and check the repayments on a spec home in the burbs then go and rent a house in burwood or kew [/quote]
Hang on, nice try! You want to compare repayments on a cardboard box design in Cranbourne against rents in Burwood or Kew? How about comparing rents in the burbs against the repayments in the burbs. Apples for apples!!

 

[Rosy]

MY daughter and her friends had a heap of trouble finding a house to rent.  They got one in Fairfield which is $480 a week, and a lot of the houses they looked at in outer suburbs close to Latrobe Uni, Macleod, Bundoora, Clifton Hill, Coburg etc were similar costs.  Even the falling apart hovels destined for eventual demolishment were demanding top $ in rent.  In fact people are offering to increase the rent and asking for longer bonds in hopes they can jump the queue.

Surely $480 a week would easily cover house repayments and leave a bit over for an ice cream?

 

[tigersnake]

That would cover a $220-260K odd loan, which could buy an older 2 bed flat, not familiar with Melb market really but I'm guessing Coburg or Preston, East Bruns say? she could rent a room. Doable, would be a smart move rosalina

 

[poppa x]

They got one in Fairfield which is $480 a week, and a lot of the houses they looked at in outer suburbs close to Latrobe Uni, Macleod, Bundoora, Clifton Hill, Coburg etc were similar costs

Been a long time since you came to town Rosy? Most of these suburbs are inner suburbs. Outer suburbs are places like Cranbourne, Gisborne, Werribee, Frankston. And rents/availability here is a lot easier than the inner boroughs because many young people prefer to rent an expensive 2 bedroom hovel in Coburg (for example) than a neat clean 3 bedroom house in say Berwick.

$500k buys you a renovator in the inner suburbs but buys you a real nice newish house further out. I choose to live in Waverley because its cheaper than closer in but with the freeway I'm just 13 minutes from Punt Road.

 

[ssstone]

MY daughter and her friends had a heap of trouble finding a house to rent. They got one in Fairfield which is $480 a week, and a lot of the houses they looked at in outer suburbs close to Latrobe Uni, Macleod, Bundoora, Clifton Hill, Coburg etc were similar costs. Even the falling apart hovels destined for eventual demolishment were demanding top $ in rent. In fact people are offering to increase the rent and asking for longer bonds in hopes they can jump the queue.

Surely $480 a week would easily cover house repayments and leave a bit over for an ice cream?

lots of icecreams in the outer subs as poppa listed.480 a week would service my mortgage 1 and half times the min we are required to pay.

 

[Rosy]

Been a long time since you came to town Rosy?  Most of these suburbs are inner suburbs. 

They're all Melbourne to me.  Good to visit and better to leave behind.  I think of Bundoora as an outer suburb but Mill Park/ Whittlesea have grown so much soon my area will feel like an outer suburb.

 

[ssstone]

Hang on, nice try! You want to compare repayments on a cardboard box design in Cranbourne against rents in Burwood or Kew? How about comparing rents in the burbs against the repayments in the burbs. Apples for apples!!
[/quote]the point i was trying to make zips is that for less money in the burbs you can own/buy your own house than renting some overpriced rundown dunghole in the inner city.cardboard box design ????yeah right a california bungalow built in the 40 s with a shotgun hallway in malvern is a much better design .that must be the reason they're worth so much more.attitudes like that are the reason today tonight will never run out of whingeing poor me stories