Talking Politics

[Ian4]

While I mostly approve of the IR changes

what the...? you're joking right?

don't get me wrong, i'm no labor supporter either, but they're the lesser of 2 evils. i despise the liberal party because of what they stand for. what this country is crying out for is a new polical party... one that is not right-wing not left-wing, but more central. one that doesn't have an agenda of supporting certain ideals depending what side of the tracks you come from... one for the general masses.

 

[jb03]

I keep hearing news reports about record unemployment. But IIRC, the definition of 'employed' was changed by the Howard government. Whereas before 'employed' was considered to be working at minimum 24-26 (maybe it was 20?)hours a week. Now, if I am not mistaken, the definition of 'employed' means someone who works a minimum of 10-12 hours a week.
Can anyone clarify this for me please?
If it is true, it is an example of 'spin'. But the ignorant majority believe it because it was on the news, or in the paper. It must be true.

IT doesn't really matter by what measure you use TD as under Howards reign it is relative. The fact is unemployment rates under Howard have dropped and further, they have dropped since the introduction of Workchoices.

I know we all like to kick Little Johnny but this is one area where he shouldn't be.

But is it a fact? Or is it just the playing with of figures?
If what Anduril said is true and you are regarded as being 'employed' even if you only work one hour a week, what would the figures look like if calculated in the old way of measuring 'employment' status.
Of course they would be quite different. Maybe still marginally improved in a real sense.
But the point remains the same. Most people don't know that the employment figures are calculated differently now and so believe the Government's spin and think 'they must be doing a great job'.
Why Labor doesn't make more of an effort to have things like this countered in public in an effort to educate the voting population, I will never know.

No TD your point on this one is not valid, it doesn't matter what method Johnny uses at is the same method throughout his term as leader and the UR has fallen. And as mld points out the method is hardly different. The reason that the Labour Party don't make this as an issue as it is one of the few left that is working for the Libs.

Some of you left wingers need to take a leaf out of Rudds book and not simply criticise everything the Federal Government does simply because it is a liberal government.

I really like Rudd. One of the few politicians that I can remember that acknowledges the opposition do have some good ideas or at least, the opposition are not 100% bad/evil as most leaders try to have you believe of the opposition party.

Defeats the purpose of the two party system if the policies are bi-partisan.

Though the parties may be more ideoligically similar now more than ever, Australia is still a strong two party system. That is why it staggers me anyone would vote for anyone other than the two major parties, especially in the lower house, as your vote will end up with one of the majors.

 

[an_oxford_man]

Though the parties may be more ideoligically similar now more than ever, Australia is still a strong two party system. That is why it staggers me anyone would vote for anyone other than the two major parties, especially in the lower house, as your vote will end up with one of the majors.

I will vote Green in the seat of Wills in the next federal election. So my vote will inevitably go to the ALP, and the ex shadow attorney general, Kelvin Thompson. It is really just a protest vote, JB. The more people who support traditional Labor values, like myself, vote Green... the more likely it is that the ALP will ratify their centrist right position on the political compass.

 

[jb03]

Though the parties may be more ideoligically similar now more than ever, Australia is still a strong two party system. That is why it staggers me anyone would vote for anyone other than the two major parties, especially in the lower house, as your vote will end up with one of the majors.

I will vote Green in the seat of Wills in the next federal election. So my vote will inevitably go to the ALP, and the ex shadow attorney general, Kelvin Thompson. It is really just a protest vote, JB. The more people who support traditional Labor values, like myself, vote Green... the more likely it is that the ALP will ratify their centrist right position on the political compass.

I understand the protest vote scenario Gyps but to me it is still a waste (MO of course). The Greens really need to change their name - no one in the prime environamental areas or country votes for them at all, usually only guilty conscience inner city leftists who wouldn't know the first thing about saving the environment. (Yourself excluded from that woefully over the top gross generalisation)

 

[an_oxford_man]

I understand the protest vote scenario Gyps but to me it is still a waste (MO of course). The Greens really need to change their name - no one in the prime environamental areas or country votes for them at all, usually only guilty conscience inner city leftists who wouldn't know the first thing about saving the environment. (Yourself excluded from that woefully over the top gross generalisation)

No worries, bro. Well, I'm not voting for the Libs by voting Green... so it isn't a complete waste.

 

[mld]

While I mostly approve of the IR changes

what the...? you're joking right?

Hmm, I disagree with you therefore I must be joking, all people must think the same. Right.

IR desperately needed reforming, there is no doubt about that. Aspects of the current reforms have swung too far the other way (going from too much to too little unfair dismissal protection in small businesses, potentially exposing unskilled workers to AWAs) but on the whole haven't led to diminishing of conditions or mass sackings.

Don't read this as endorsement of the current Liberal party though, there is much I detest about what they have done, but this just isn't one of them.

don't get me wrong, i'm no labor supporter either, but they're the lesser of 2 evils. i despise the liberal party because of what they stand for. what this country is crying out for is a new polical party... one that is not right-wing not left-wing, but more central. one that doesn't have an agenda of supporting certain ideals depending what side of the tracks you come from... one for the general masses.

I'm not convinced current Labor is the lessor of two evils as it swings back to its consrevative, protectionist roots.What we need is a party that is liberal both in an economic and social sense. The Liberal party provided this once, the Democrats attempted to provide this but were over-run by socialists trying to change the world. Hopefully when the Liberal party goes into opposition the conservatives and protectionist factions running the party at the moment lose influence.

 

[mld]

The more people who support traditional Labor values, like myself, vote Green...

Hmm. Traditional Labor values are based on the union movement, hence employment and fair conditions . I would have a hard time equating this with the anti-development anti-mining and hence anti-employment stance of the Greens. Labor traditionally opposed immigration to 'stop them taking our jobs' and is leaning that way again with their attacks on working visas these days. If anything the Greens represent the opposite of many traditional Labor values.

I can understand why you would want to vote Green, but it is supporting Labor's left, not its tradtional values.

 

[an_oxford_man]

support traditional Labor values, like myself, vote Green...

Hmm. Traditional Labor values are based on the union movement, hence employment and fair conditions . I would have a hard time equating this with the anti-development anti-mining and hence anti-employment stance of the Greens. Labor traditionally opposed immigration to 'stop them taking our jobs' and is leaning that way again with their attacks on working visas these days. If anything the Greens represent the opposite of many traditional Labor values.

I can understand why you would want to vote Green, but it is supporting Labor's left, not its tradtional values.

Never said anything about the Greens upholding traditional Labor values. In fact, a lot of their policy is unrealistic which is why they aren't a viable alternative.

 

[Liverpool]

Even more proof that Rudd may be the most 'articulate and smart' ALP leader they've had for years, with a visit to the US to try and repair the damage that Latham caused with his crude remarks when he was the ALP leader.
Rudd knows that a healthy Aussie/US alliance is important, especially if he is to become PM:

http://www.smh.com.au/news/opinion/us-trip-a-chance-for-rudd-to-prove-alliance-in-safe-hands/2007/04/15/1176575667911.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1

I quite like this bit:

In 2004, Labor leader Mark Latham planned a US trip, then cancelled. Latham cited the risk of an early election but it was also clear such a trip - aimed at dispelling the (accurate) impression Latham was anti-American - would be awkward. Rudd is very pro-American, which the visit will reinforce. This is important when Labor is confronting the Bush position on Iraq but equally, with the Democrats strongly critical, Rudd will be able to get some reinforcement for his lines from his talks on Capitol Hill

 

[Tigerdog]

If what Anduril said is true and you are regarded as being 'employed' even if you only work one hour a week, what would the figures look like if calculated in the old way of measuring 'employment' status.
Of course they would be quite different. Maybe still marginally improved in a real sense.

No TD your point on this one is not valid, it doesn't matter what method Johnny uses at is the same method throughout his term as leader and the UR has fallen. And as mld points out the method is hardly different. The reason that the Labour Party don't make this as an issue as it is one of the few left that is working for the Libs.

Some of you left wingers need to take a leaf out of Rudds book and not simply criticise everything the Federal Government does simply because it is a liberal government.


[/quote]

 

[Hey Pesto!]

If what Anduril said is true and you are regarded as being 'employed' even if you only work one hour a week, what would the figures look like if calculated in the old way of measuring 'employment' status.
Of course they would be quite different. Maybe still marginally improved in a real sense.

No TD your point on this one is not valid, it doesn't matter what method Johnny uses at is the same method throughout his term as leader and the UR has fallen. And as mld points out the method is hardly different. The reason that the Labour Party don't make this as an issue as it is one of the few left that is working for the Libs.

Some of you left wingers need to take a leaf out of Rudds book and not simply criticise everything the Federal Government does simply because it is a liberal government.

[/quote]

Point of order: our current govt is not a 'liberal govt', it is a Liberal Govt.

 

[newyorktiger]

Rudd knows that a healthy Aussie/US alliance is important, especially if he is to become PM:

Are the CIA still getting involved in Australian elections?

 

[Hey Pesto!]

Rudd knows that a healthy Aussie/US alliance is important, especially if he is to become PM:

Are the CIA still getting involved in Australian elections?

natch!

 

[tigersnake]

Though the parties may be more ideoligically similar now more than ever, Australia is still a strong two party system. That is why it staggers me anyone would vote for anyone other than the two major parties, especially in the lower house, as your vote will end up with one of the majors.

I will vote Green in the seat of Wills in the next federal election. So my vote will inevitably go to the ALP, and the ex shadow attorney general, Kelvin Thompson. It is really just a protest vote, JB. The more people who support traditional Labor values, like myself, vote Green... the more likely it is that the ALP will ratify their centrist right position on the political compass.

I understand the protest vote scenario Gyps but to me it is still a waste (MO of course). The Greens really need to change their name - no one in the prime environamental areas or country votes for them at all, usually only guilty conscience inner city leftists who wouldn't know the first thing about saving the environment. (Yourself excluded from that woefully over the top gross generalisation)

what? is your point that the only people who understand and care about the environment live in rural areas? If it is, I'm dissappointed. Oldest, simplistic red hering in the book. Campaigning for reform in urban areas where the vote are does infinitely more than planting a few trees somewhere. Also, agriculture is the biggest baddie in my book that needs the most reform, mining, no problem, logging, I think old growth logging in Aus's has been reduced and hopefully, its days are numbered.

 

[jb03]

Though the parties may be more ideoligically similar now more than ever, Australia is still a strong two party system. That is why it staggers me anyone would vote for anyone other than the two major parties, especially in the lower house, as your vote will end up with one of the majors.

I will vote Green in the seat of Wills in the next federal election. So my vote will inevitably go to the ALP, and the ex shadow attorney general, Kelvin Thompson. It is really just a protest vote, JB. The more people who support traditional Labor values, like myself, vote Green... the more likely it is that the ALP will ratify their centrist right position on the political compass.

I understand the protest vote scenario Gyps but to me it is still a waste (MO of course). The Greens really need to change their name - no one in the prime environamental areas or country votes for them at all, usually only guilty conscience inner city leftists who wouldn't know the first thing about saving the environment. (Yourself excluded from that woefully over the top gross generalisation)

what? is your point that the only people who understand and care about the environment live in rural areas? If it is, I'm dissappointed. Oldest, simplistic red hering in the book. Campaigning for reform in urban areas where the vote are does infinitely more than planting a few trees somewhere. Also, agriculture is the biggest baddie in my book that needs the most reform, mining, no problem, logging, I think old growth logging in Aus's has been reduced and hopefully, its days are numbered.

No, my point was the only people who vote for the Greens are inner city dwellers. It appeases their guilty conscience for actually not doing anything literally to help the environment.

 

[mld]

Though the parties may be more ideoligically similar now more than ever, Australia is still a strong two party system. That is why it staggers me anyone would vote for anyone other than the two major parties, especially in the lower house, as your vote will end up with one of the majors.

I will vote Green in the seat of Wills in the next federal election. So my vote will inevitably go to the ALP, and the ex shadow attorney general, Kelvin Thompson. It is really just a protest vote, JB. The more people who support traditional Labor values, like myself, vote Green... the more likely it is that the ALP will ratify their centrist right position on the political compass.

I understand the protest vote scenario Gyps but to me it is still a waste (MO of course). The Greens really need to change their name - no one in the prime environamental areas or country votes for them at all, usually only guilty conscience inner city leftists who wouldn't know the first thing about saving the environment. (Yourself excluded from that woefully over the top gross generalisation)

what? is your point that the only people who understand and care about the environment live in rural areas? If it is, I'm dissappointed. Oldest, simplistic red hering in the book. Campaigning for reform in urban areas where the vote are does infinitely more than planting a few trees somewhere. Also, agriculture is the biggest baddie in my book that needs the most reform, mining, no problem, logging, I think old growth logging in Aus's has been reduced and hopefully, its days are numbered.

No, my point was the only people who vote for the Greens are inner city dwellers. It appeases their guilty conscience for actually not doing anything literally to help the environment.

The voting equivalent of people 'carbon-offsetting' energy-wasteful lifestyles.

 

[evo]

I like the petard reference.
Had to look it up, very good and so appropriate for Bonsai

:hihi

yes Mini Shrub-always makes me chortle.

 

[Liverpool]

I see the unions aren't 100% happy with Ruddy's IR changes.
As I expected, there will be some changes, to help him get across the line in the election....however, not the wholesale changes that the unions were hoping for.

As many of you ALPvoters told us when he first became leader....he is 'articulate and smart'.....and I agree 8)


Rudd unveils Labor's IR alternative
April 17, 2007 - 2:49PM

Not all workers will regain unfair dismissal protection and there will be mandatory secret ballots before strikes, under massive changes to Labor's industrial relations policies announced today.
But both key policy areas have already come under attack from one of Australia's leading union bosses.
Opposition Leader Kevin Rudd used his first major speech to the National Press Club in Canberra to unveil his long-awaited plans for industrial relations, expected to be a major battleground at this year's federal election.
Mr Rudd vowed not to reintroduce the state-based industrial relations regime, insisting he would create a uniform, national system.
"Some in the labour movement have argued for the return to a predominantly state-based jurisdiction. I reject that view," he said."
A federal Labor government will achieve nationally consistent laws for the private sector.
"This will be achieved by the state governments referring powers for their residual responsibilities for private sector industrial relations or through other forms of cooperation or harmonisation."
Mr Rudd said secret ballots before strikes would be mandatory under a Labor government - the first time the ALP has demanded such a requirement.
Labor also would ban strike pay, and would restore only limited unfair dismissal protection.
The policies are in response to the Howard government's Work Choices laws, which polls show are unpopular with voters.
Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union secretary Doug Cameron said he was concerned about the new policy, announced by Opposition Leader Kevin Rudd today, particularly in the areas of strike rights and unfair dismissal.
"We don't like to see lower capacity for workers to take industrial action," Mr Cameron said.
Labor also is changing its unfair dismissal policy, Mr Rudd told the National Press Club, to make it a balanced system for employers and employees.
Under Labor's new plan, an employee would only be able to make an unfair dismissal claim if they have worked at least one year in a business with less than 15 employees.
For businesses employing more than 15 people, employees will be exempt from unfair dismissal laws for six months.
"There's some disappointment that unfair dismissal rights are not available for everyone (under the policy)," Mr Cameron said.
He also raised concerns about how bargaining will work under a Labor government.
But, Mr Cameron said, these concerns paled when placed beside the government's controversial Work Choices laws.
"The Labor industrial policy will be miles better for working people.
"Their plan to rip up Australian Workplace Agreements is a good start."

http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/rudd-unveils-labors-ir-alternative/2007/04/17/1176696818518.html

 

[mld]

The changes to unfair dismissal exemptions look good. No surprises about wanting to move to a national system rather than go back to a state-based system, Labor has always been centralist.

 

[Anduril]

Pray? Pray for rain? Is that the best you can do after 10 years? :rotfl
What a joke.