2007 Federal Election - Coalition or Labor/Howard or Rudd? (7 Viewers)

[Muz4PM]

Last time I checked, the coalition 'vision' included work choices, sitting on your ass in regards to climate change and faking interest in aboriginal affairs.

Last time I checked Workchoices has actually done some good. However, you don’t hear that from the ALP and ACTU as they continue their shrill Chicken Little defence and claiming that the “fair go” has gone out “the back door”. We don’t hear from them how millions of Australians have had pay rises, better working relationships because of Workchoices. LCollins, please answer me what ever happened to those union promises about how we would see mass sackings immediately after Workchoices was introduced, how wages would spiral down and how industrial disputation would increase? Please, tell me.

Sitting on ass in regards to climate change? Well, just because the Coalition doesn’t all adhere to the same pro-Kyoto rhetoric that has romanced others does not mean that the Coalition I sitting on it’ backside. If you were aware the Coalition has invested in initiatives such as clean coal, renewable energies such as solar power stations. The Coalition has instituted a Climate Change Fund for investments so as to see a transition to a low-carbon economy and to reduce the impact of a carbon price on households. As it currently stands, the Coalition does not see benefit in a partying Australia to the Kyoto Protocol, what some claim to be a flawed document as it currently stands. Australia has done a lot to face the impact of climate change, for you to make the charge that the Coalition is sitting on it’s backside is a claim with no quantifiable backing.

Faking interest in Aboriginal affairs? What occurred previously in NT was abysmal, something needed to be done to try and curb some of the injustices that occurred in the area. It took a tough and committed government such as this Coalition Government to step in and try and rectify the inherent problems in these areas. Oh yeah, wasn’t this one of the things Mr Rudd went tick to? The referendum too? Didn’t he go tick? Seems if the Coalition were ‘faking interest’ in Aboriginal affairs as you charge, then Kevin Rudd too seems to have the same ‘faking interest’.

Interest Rates, John Howard claimed that they will always be lower under a Coalition Government, we can look at the record. In this coming election, and term, it appears as if inflation is set to increase, proving a problem for both the Coalition and Labor if elected. I believe that a Coalition government would be in a better position to fight the scourge of inflation. Heck, the ALP’s IR policy will see something like a 2-3% hike in inflation, putting a lot of pressure on interest rates, slugging Australia’s working families no end. I do not see how the ALP are in a good position to fight inflation and interest rates with such proposed spending and changes.

Mr Rudd seems to tick yes on alot of things that suit him, Aboriginal Affairs, tax cuts, education endowment fund, Afghanistan, yes he even said tick to Iraq, and now he walks both sides of the road on the issue. Mr Rudd has said tick to alot, and when he doesn't, he doesn't, it proves how deficient the ALP and ACTU would be at running the country if elected.

 

[LCollins]

Last time I checked Workchoices has actually done some good. However, you don’t hear that from the ALP and ACTU as they continue their shrill Chicken Little defence and claiming that the “fair go” has gone out “the back door”. We don’t hear from them how millions of Australians have had pay rises, better working relationships because of Workchoices. LCollins, please answer me what ever happened to those union promises about how we would see mass sackings immediately after Workchoices was introduced, how wages would spiral down and how industrial disputation would increase? Please, tell me.

Sitting on ass in regards to climate change? Well, just because the Coalition doesn’t all adhere to the same pro-Kyoto rhetoric that has romanced others does not mean that the Coalition I sitting on it’ backside. If you were aware the Coalition has invested in initiatives such as clean coal, renewable energies such as solar power stations. The Coalition has instituted a Climate Change Fund for investments so as to see a transition to a low-carbon economy and to reduce the impact of a carbon price on households. As it currently stands, the Coalition does not see benefit in a partying Australia to the Kyoto Protocol, what some claim to be a flawed document as it currently stands. Australia has done a lot to face the impact of climate change, for you to make the charge that the Coalition is sitting on it’s backside is a claim with no quantifiable backing.

Faking interest in Aboriginal affairs? What occurred previously in NT was abysmal, something needed to be done to try and curb some of the injustices that occurred in the area. It took a tough and committed government such as this Coalition Government to step in and try and rectify the inherent problems in these areas. Oh yeah, wasn’t this one of the things Mr Rudd went tick to? The referendum too? Didn’t he go tick? Seems if the Coalition were ‘faking interest’ in Aboriginal affairs as you charge, then Kevin Rudd too seems to have the same ‘faking interest’.

Interest Rates, John Howard claimed that they will always be lower under a Coalition Government, we can look at the record. In this coming election, and term, it appears as if inflation is set to increase, proving a problem for both the Coalition and Labor if elected. I believe that a Coalition government would be in a better position to fight the scourge of inflation. Heck, the ALP’s IR policy will see something like a 2-3% hike in inflation, putting a lot of pressure on interest rates, slugging Australia’s working families no end. I do not see how the ALP are in a good position to fight inflation and interest rates with such proposed spending and changes.

Mr Rudd seems to tick yes on alot of things that suit him, Aboriginal Affairs, tax cuts, education endowment fund, Afghanistan, yes he even said tick to Iraq, and now he walks both sides of the road on the issue. Mr Rudd has said tick to alot, and when he doesn't, he doesn't, it proves how deficient the ALP and ACTU would be at running the country if elected.

Why WorkChoices is bad (obtained from a submission made by 151 Academics to the Senate, found from http://larvatusprodeo.net/2005/11/17/151-academics-present-research-on-workchoices-to-the-senate/)

Overall this report presents a damning picture on WorkChoices, but I will restrain myself to just quoting the conclusion to you:

Submission to Inquiry into the WorkChoices legislation

There are good arguments to reforming Australia’s workplace arrangements. Australia faces labour market challenges that need to be addressed, including labour and skill shortages, work-family tensions, production issues in a globalised economy, and the growth of precarious employment. We recognise these challenges.


However, when we analyse the Bill and evidence in relation to its proposals to address these and other issues, we find that the case is not made. The Government asserts that jobs and productivity will grow as a result of the Bill. On the evidence available from existing research there is no solid research basis to give confidence that this Bill will address these economic and social problems. However, there is persuasive evidence that the Bill’s provisions will contravene long established international labour standards, strengthen employer prerogative, create new hazards for many working Australians, widen inequality and disadvantage the most vulnerable.
Submission to Inquiry into the In sum, the evidence we have provided suggests that these proposals will:

• undermine people’s rights at work;
• deliver a flexibility that in most cases is one way, favouring employers;
• do little or nothing to address work-family issues and exacerbate problems on several fronts;
• have no direct positive impact on productivity and, through it, wages or employment growth;
• disadvantage the individuals and groups already most marginalised in Australian society;
• widen inequality;
• add levels of complexity to the regulation of industrial relations, that both employers and employees will struggle to understand and apply;
• intrude, uninvited, into the workings of State industrial relations systems in a 'one-size-fits-all' approach.

These effects will not all happen immediately. Many of these changes will take time to manifest themselves in changes in behaviour at the workplace. Some, such as the capacity of employers to unilaterally terminate agreements and cut terms and conditions, have a built in lag. The pressure on firms to cut labour costs through the mechanisms provided by this Bill will be manifest over time. Initially, many employers, concerned about maintaining good relations with their workforce, will decline to take advantage of the opportunities provided by the Bill. But as other employers obtain an apparent competitive advantage through cutting labour costs, they will be forced to follow suit. The long run consequences will be much more serious than those apparent immediately after the legislation takes effect. It is these long term effects, and their consequences for Australian workplaces and society that provokes our shared, grave concern and opposition to the Bill.

Do I honestly need to say more?

Ok on to next topic: the Kyoto protocol and climate change (information obtained from 'PM fiddles while the world burns' Daily Telegraph, 1 November 2006' PM sceptical on greenhouse gloom' Age, 28 August 2006 'PM deaf on greenhouse' Daily Telegraph, 2 November 2006)

• The Kyoto protocol is signed by 175 countries including China. If the policy is really so crap, are you just saying us and the USA are smart enough to realise it?
• Australia is set to increase greenhouse gas emissions by 27% by 2020, and miss the Kyoto target for 2012.
• $89 million was left unspent in the latest budget.
• Only $17 million out of 75 was spent in the Government's Solar Cities programs.
• Spends $23 million however on climate change advertising during the lead up to the election.

Ok, finally to the last item. Aboriginals. The Howard government has been in government for 11 years, has not said sorry and presides over a 20 year life expectancy age gap. 20 years is a bloody lot! Imaging starting life again, wow. As to the Northern Territory intervention, I am not critical of the intervention itself, only its motives. The 'Little Children are Sacred' report was not the first report into child abuse, but after 11 years in power, after ignoring all the previous reports, in an election year, he expects us to believe that he's 'doing it for the children'? And then in the election campaign, that John Howard suddenly wishes him and the aboriginal community had a better relationship? Get real.

And that people, is why I think (not believe) we should have a change of government.

 

[katie_tully]

The Kyoto protocol is signed by 175 countries including China. If the policy is really so crap, are you just saying us and the USA are smart enough to realise it?

Yes.

Australia is set to increase greenhouse gas emissions by 27% by 2020, and miss the Kyoto target for 2012.

Well unless you know something we dont....As in, unless you can prove human interference is what's causing global warming, this target is useless anyway.

$89 million was left unspent in the latest budget

Why is a surplus a bad thing? It means tax cuts. It means the economy has been managed, as opposed to a massive deficit.

Only $17 million out of 75 was spent in the Government's Solar Cities programs.

So fucking what. You're not starving or homeless because of that, are you.

has not said sorry and presides over a 20 year life expectancy age gap.

So it's the governments fault that Aboriginals have a lower life expectancy than the rest of Australia? I don't see the Japanese apologising to the rest of the world because they have a higher life expectancy than everybody else.

Other than the Aboriginal abuse, you haven't mention anything of note. A whole bunch of useless environmental propaganda. It's bullshit. Wake up.

 

[withoutaface]

If the Coalition keeps up its "anti-business union bosses" crap I'm not going to vote for them.

They have no positive things to talk about at all.

And all the ALP is releasing are "JIM LLOYD HAS HURT LOCAL FAMILIES 23 TIMES! WORKCHOICES BAD!" pamphlets in every electorate...

 

[katie_tully]

Haha. We got those as well from the ALP, only it was something like 42 local families. I dunno, it went straight to the bin. The recycling bin you'll be happy to know.

 

[Triangulum]

And all the ALP is releasing are "JIM LLOYD HAS HURT LOCAL FAMILIES 23 TIMES! WORKCHOICES BAD!" pamphlets in every electorate...

That at least has a vague basis in fact (in the sense that WorkChoices does indeed endanger working people's conditions), unlike 'Evil unions which exist to improve the conditions of workers will destroy everything!' and 'Kevin Rudd is actually a vampire'.

 

[withoutaface]

You're saying that giving excessive power to the Unions doesn't affect productivity? Are you shitting me?

 

[Triangulum]

You're saying that giving excessive power to the Unions doesn't affect productivity? Are you shitting me?

But Rudd's IR policy doesn't give excessive power to unions. It restricts union rights of entry to workplaces, which is why the unions don't actually like his policy at all. The idea that because some of the Labor frontbench have previously worked for unions means that they will do exactly what unions tell them to do is nonsense.

 

[LCollins]

Well unless you know something we dont....As in, unless you can prove human interference is what's causing global warming, this target is useless anyway.

Are you suggesting that there's no link between human activity and global warming!? If so, it sure as hell ain't me who's asleep.

Why is a surplus a bad thing? It means tax cuts. It means the economy has been managed, as opposed to a massive deficit.

My mistake, I meant $89 million to be spent on climate change.

So fucking what. You're not starving or homeless because of that, are you.

It like those other points illustrate the fact that the government does not give a shit about the environment. And it doesn't have to be about me, I can actually think about the greater good. It comes with having a conscience.

So it's the governments fault that Aboriginals have a lower life expectancy than the rest of Australia? I don't see the Japanese apologising to the rest of the world because they have a higher life expectancy than everybody else.

Damn straight its the government's fault. There could be a much greater amount of money spent on rural health, given we supposedly have a budget surplus. Imagine if you lived for 20 years less than everyone else cause you were white. Would you put up with that crap? The japanese analogy is terrible - what we are talking about here are people who live in the same country, who should have the right to medical care, and we certainly aren't talking about a margin of a few years.

 

[katie_tully]

talking about here are people who live in the same country, who should have the right to medical care, and we certainly aren't talking about a margin of a few years.

What the hell are you talking about. They do have the same medical care. They have MORE medical care than every other average Australian. I don't see any 'White Australian Only' medical centres, or services for 'White Australians', so don't try and tell me they're hard done by in this department.

Yes, they have a lower life expectancy than other Australians. You think they were going to rectify this gap in 11 years? This is a long term problem, it's not something that will be fixed with a few million dollars over a few years. Stop whinging.

It like those other points illustrate the fact that the government does not give a shit about the environment

The environment, in the grand scheme of things, is insignificant. So you believe all the global warming hysteria; doesn't make it true. So we're in a drought - it doesn't mean we're heading for an armageddon, it means everybody, Federal and State has been shit at water and land management stategies.

My mistake, I meant $89 million to be spent on climate change.

As a great group once stated; Global warming was disproved a while ago, did you miss it?

 

[Nebuchanezzar]

Muz4PM - Lol. You were pwned.

The Kyoto protocol is signed by 175 countries including China. If the policy is really so crap, are you just saying us and the USA are smart enough to realise it?

Woop. Don't forget that something like 99% of the scientific community agrees that signing the Kyoto protocol would be a good idea.

Well unless you know something we dont....As in, unless you can prove human interference is what's causing global warming, this target is useless anyway.

Well there is that pretty massive correlation between the Industrial revolution and increase in CO2 levels. But fuck, that MUST be a lie amirite?

So it's the governments fault that Aboriginals have a lower life expectancy than the rest of Australia? I don't see the Japanese apologising to the rest of the world because they have a higher life expectancy than everybody else.

Lol, because the rest of the world is under the [forced] jurisdiction of Japan amirite?

You're saying that giving excessive power to the Unions doesn't affect productivity? Are you shitting me?

Might do, but the benefits of unions by far outweight the negatives. Heaven forbid that a group of people exist who look out for the worker! Oh heavens! Oh Lordy! Unions aaaahhh!

The environment, in the grand scheme of things, is insignificant.

Mmmmm. WHAT IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN OUR HABITAT!? TEH $$$!

 

[LCollins]

What the hell are you talking about. They do have the same medical care. They have MORE medical care than every other average Australian. I don't see any 'White Australian Only' medical centres, or services for 'White Australians', so don't try and tell me they're hard done by in this department.

Yes, they have a lower life expectancy than other Australians. You think they were going to rectify this gap in 11 years? This is a long term problem, it's not something that will be fixed with a few million dollars over a few years. Stop whinging.

It really shouldn't be too hard to at least make a dint in that, seeing as average life expectancy at birth increased by 5.5 yrs for men and 4 yrs for women (ABS) over the 20 year period between 1980 and 1999 and that's when the government wasn't even trying. Imagine what the government could do if they pulled their finger out of their ass and got to work on it. You have no idea do you? Here are some other statistics for you (from journal titled 'Indigenous health: chronically inadequate responses to damning statistics' by Ian T Ring and Ngaire Brown 2002).

• The infant mortality rate is 3 times higher than that compared to the rest of Australia, 2 that of the Maoris and 1.5 times higher than the American Indians.
• Death rates are 3 times higher, with diabetes 8x, respiratory 4x and circulatory 3x. Diabetes, respiratory and circulatory problems are all preventable.
• The median age at death 51 has had no improvement in the last 10 years. In the same period, everyone else's median age has increased by 3 years.

The report also had this to say:

In the 10 years 1990–2000, despite improvements in some conditions, there has been little or no overall progress in the health of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander populations of Australia.
This is in stark contrast to the gains made in Indigenous health in other countries. The issue is one of lack of commitment to and implementation of already existing policies. We need to (i) fully and adequately fund the Primary Health Program to provide the out-of-hospital services for prevention and early treatment required to break the cycle of ill-health; (ii) implement a National
Training Plan to train the necessary health workforce; and (iii) introduce a National Infrastructure Plan to rectify the continuing deficiencies in water supply, sanitation, education and other basic services. (MJA 2002; 177: 629-631)

The environment, in the grand scheme of things, is insignificant. So you believe all the global warming hysteria; doesn't make it true. So we're in a drought - it doesn't mean we're heading for an armageddon, it means everybody, Federal and State has been shit at water and land management stategies.

So if we're heading for an armeggedon, so be it? Even if a little bit of the so called 'hysteria' comes true, this presents grave issues for us, even if you do live under a rock. Thousands, if not millions, of immigrants if the sea levels rise just a metre will have a humungous effect (duhh). But I spose your solution to that is just to let them drown.

As a great group once stated; Global warming was disproved a while ago, did you miss it?

Does your idiocy know no bounds?

 

[Muz4PM]

Muz4PM - Lol. You were pwned.

I beg to differ, there is several holes in LCollins arguement's, for example, one of the chief writers of the document put before the Senate, I think it was Brandon Ellem is offiliated with unions. Biased much you think?

 

[Nebuchanezzar]

And one of the chief authors of Workchoices was John Howard who has a history of not liking unions. What's your point?

 

[Muz4PM]

What's my point? Well, maybe, you think that from such a report there would be bias? I have nothing wrong with academics having opinions on politics, but when someone like LCollins comes in and uses it as gospel to back up his case, I would have half expected that he get something a little more fair and balanced rather than written by some close to unions.

 

[LCollins]

Muz4PM - Lol. You were pwned.

I beg to differ, there is several holes in LCollins arguement's, for example, one of the chief writers of the document put before the Senate, I think it was Brandon Ellem is offiliated with unions. Biased much you think?

Dude, even if all the chief organisers were ACTU bosses, the fact that 151 academics from the fields of Industrial Relations, Labour Economics and Law signed it speaks for itself. They are all people who get their incomes from government, are neither part of a union or a business council.

 

[LCollins]

What's my point? Well, maybe, you think that from such a report there would be bias? I have nothing wrong with academics having opinions on politics, but when someone like LCollins comes in and uses it as gospel to back up his case, I would have half expected that he get something a little more fair and balanced rather than written by some close to unions.

Where's your gospel truth that WorkChoices are beneficial? All I've heard is John Howard saying the laws are good (big shock that one) and Business councils (ie. the unions of business).

 

[Nebuchanezzar]

Hmmm, I didn't know he was a troll.

 

[Triangulum]

ACNielsen in the SMH says 55-45 2PP from 48-41 primary. Basically no change from the last poll two weeks ago.

Just to put that in perspective, assuming uniform swings that would result in Labor winning 92 seats and the Coalition 56.

 

[Triangulum]

Your really hoping for a Labor win arn;t you Triangulum

Certainly am! But I won't be on the floor sobbing or slitting my wrists or anything if Labor doesn't win. If the voters decide to reelect Howard, then that's democracy, and I can deal with it.