I would just like to say that if Labour wins the federal election then this country is f***ed.

I concur.

edit: I just don't think Labout can be responsible when they are backed by someone like the unions. They obviously have an agenda, and considering only around 20% of the workforce are supported by the unions, why should they have a say in the running of our country?

last edited by mongie at 15:59:50 08/May/07

your political insights are incredible.. no wait, not credible.

As much as I think of Howard as a bit of a cockroach at the moment, we don't vote in Australia for the guy we want in power - we vote to keep the other guy out. And, frankly, having Labour in power is even worse.

My vote will be going Secular, One Nation or Democrat just as it always has, though our local Liberal candidate (and the previous one too) is actaully a pretty top bloke.

Really? And this is based on what. Can you prove this beyond reasonable doubt. I am not a Rudd supporter but how can you say this. They have been out of power for a long time now they have not really been given the chance. Howard is a master manipulator of the people in this country and it seems he has you fooled. Go watch Yes Minister and learn who really runs this country.

I like John Howard. I vote Liberal.

Like most people I've been bought up with there households politics. Though I honestly think at the moment Australia's moving towards becoming a great country. There are so many great things in the works. Although this government has had heaps of hiccups, I no doubt think that if labour was in power things would be much worse.

john howard made my overtime and public holiday pay go away !! booo

I am a union member and I follow politics. I think atm Howard has done a good job and if Rudd gets in I will need to sell my house as we will be f***ed in less than 4 years.

Not jumping into the argument, because frankly I don't know what the f*** I'm talking about, but can we please have some sort of civilised discussion as to why Labour are so terrible, and Liberal are so awesome?

I vote Labour because I come from a Labour-voting family. I don't bother to research my vote - but I will this time. Someone sell me on the idea of keeping Labour out of power for 4 more years.

I would just like to say that if Labour wins the federal election then this country is f***ed.

You're an idiot.

I just don't think Labout can be responsible when they are backed by someone like the unions.

Unions gave you the working conditions you used to enjoy and took for granted. Howard is taking them away. So in fact you're an idiot too.

considering only around 20% of the workforce are supported by the unions

The election before last 51% of the people voted for Labor, the last election 48% voted for Labor, so they are not dominated by unions but by mums and dads and at least 50% of workers in this country. You're an idiot also.

I no doubt think that if labour was in power things would be much worse.

Wow! this place is a fools paradise.

I guess you fools like being manipulated, lied to and laws introduced by stealth and coercion. Good to see you have no ideals nor thinking capacity. Time you traded in your tiny brains for something worthwhile like a toilet brush.

Howard is a master manipulator of the people in this country and it seems he has you fooled.

f***in oath he is

seriously though, how can you not like kevin rudd

anyone who watched him on sunrise will agree

It is sad to see that fear has won.

vote 1 Labor!

Somehow I think it would be interesting to have a change in government... especially if they s*** up Australia.

Like Mark Latham, the country wanted a nutcase that couldn't handle s***.

PAGING INFI TO THIS THREAD

looking forward to the budget tonite to see how much cash johnny throws at me, coz he knows hes going to lose next election unless he pulls two rabbits and a big tax break out of his hat

he still wont win

its labours time and kevin is our man

Anyone who thinks either will be better then the other is an Idiot SFB.
It's politics.

I'm still in limbo about whom will receive my vote.
If Sleazly was head of Labor it would be an easy choice.

Also, Under the new IR laws, I got more money. I'm not saying that they are good for everything and everyone, but they're not as bad as the Scare Tactic ad's that the Unions are putting on for you.

Also, Labor. Labour it is not.

it's worth noting the whole political spectrum has shifted very very far to the right in say the last 15 years (probably longer)
I like to think of myself as a moderate but I am probably on the left of the right(make sense?)
as a loyal US sheep I also think with a likely democrat win in 08 a more US "aligned" govt. can't help.

The Labor party is trying really hard to present itself as being modern and progressive, environmentally friendly, blah blah blah, but what credibility does the ALP really have?

70% of their front bench are union officials, Kevin Rudd has no concept of what small business is going through because he has worked in a politically sterile vacuum all his life. Julia Gillard is another one of those out of the box lefties who joined the ALP at uni based on her false assumptions of the labour market spewed out by her lecturers.

I don't know a single business figure that actually takes the ALP seriously, but they are all seriously worried about if they win.

Did you know that the ALP secretly wants all non-union member to pay a bargaining fee for collective agreements struck on-site for union members? What a disgusting abuse of power. ALP is of the unions, by the unions and for the unions. If Rudd gets in, unions will run this country like a Mafia.

Why is Rudd so damned popular in the opinion polls? f***s me. All I can see is that inexplicable Australian fascination with something new and shiny - I see so many parallels to the rise and disintegration of Mark Latham it's unnerving.

In any case, the policies that ALP are coming up with are sloppy policy on the run, that are not well thought out and in most cases designed to capitalise on populist sentiment. Policy without principle in the end spells electoral loss.

And finally, when has an Opposition leader ever declared they are going to win?! This guy's megalomania is slowly consuming his mind and body much like that part in the Spiderman 3 trailer. I await his inevitable self-combustion...

I feel like this thread should be deleted because it doesn't back up its initial bold declaration with any interesting facts, like the policies of the labour party that justify such a claim

Well opinions (much like politics generally) rarely contain any facts interesting or otherwise.

trog with the double slam out of no where

Trog: The ALP has no policies.

The ALP's only leg is that they promise to rollback the IR laws.

Unemployment is at a 30year+ low, costello is the man and delivers a surplus every year. I'm pretty young, but all my memories of labor being in power consist of deficits and recession.

Howard has already agreed to soften his IR laws. The economy is storming ahead - what more could u want? The only way to go from here is down if Rudd and Gillard get power.

All the f***ups in government over the last few years have been Labor State governments. The only thing saving the country was Howard and Costello in the front seat.

I will never vote of a party who is nothing but a puppet of the unions. Rudd asks the unions to permission to breathe. If labour gets in you can say goodbye to a decent exchange rate and economic growth.

Yes this is a tough one. I am traditionally a Labor man, and a huge Kruddler fan. But at the same time, the economy/unemployment, etc are going great guns at the moment. I voted liberal last time partly due to theses reasons, partly due to Latham being hopeless. It was kinda like the Southpark episode 'Douche and Turd'.

I want to see Howard loose just so I can see all the hippys start whinging about Rudd and hence prove my point that they just hate whoever is in power.

John Butler will have to rewrite all his songs.

I'm pretty happy having an awesome aussie dollar, lowest unemployment rates in like 20 years and job security.

cheers howard!

Wow! this place is a fools paradise.

Thats nothing new.... :D

Trog For PM
===========
Policy Platform: More Dragons


He just got 500,000 WoW voters on side.

Just to clarify, there is no U in Labor Party.

The thing with IR is that unions are bullies who have consistantly pushed the boundaries of legality over the years with their one-eyed counter-productive bulls***. This is despite the fact that their very existence is outdated. Unions are a relic of the 50s, no matter how hard they try to force their will on business they are losing out.

A system where both the employee and employer work towards a more productive and fruitful outcome is the way forward, not that Howard's plan is perfect and its obviously shifted the balance back in favour of business, but at the same time there really aren't any stories of people being far worse off under AWAs than they were 2 years ago. And thats not to say they aren't being taken up, i think equal numbers of workers in australia are covered by AWAs to that that are union members.

The often hostile actions of unions often cost jobs in my opinion, they certainly don't seek to create more jobs as a primary objective.

And as someone said, a fair go at work starts with a job.

I like John Howard. I vote Liberal.

Like most people I've been bought up with there households politics. Though I honestly think at the moment Australia's moving towards becoming a great country. There are so many great things in the works. Although this government has had heaps of hiccups, I no doubt think that if labour was in power things would be much worse.

australia was a great country, still is... but its going downhill... if you don't know why do your research.

i agree with some fat bastard.

I honestly don't think it actually matters that much which mainstream party is in power.

Its been said elsewhere, but a great deal of the Liberal party's economic credibility stems from the roaring resource sector. This has next to nothing to do with Government policy, and everything to do with global economic forces.

Basically, China needs s*** that we have in relative abundance. This is generating massive wads of cash in Australia, and is the single greatest cause of growth in the domestic economy. f***, half the country is in deep drought and even today our economy is still heavily agrarian - the severe kick in the nuts that the primary produce sector has received from mother nature should flatten our economy and instead its booming?

I'm yet to see anyone from the Liberal party come out and put some reason behind their claims to superior economic credibility. What policies did the Howard Government put in place that makes things apparently so good?

Why do we think that we have it so good? Household debt is at record highs, housing in Australia is the least affordable that it has been in history?

I was listening to the ABC the other day (clearly an unbiased source of political commentary!). Basically, the claim presented was that the Hawke-Keating governments delivered the economic reform and repaired the economy following mismanagement by the Liberal party.

John Howard is the first to stand up and say what a wonderful economic history he has, however...

From wikipedia:

When Hawke won the March 1983 elections, Keating became Treasurer, a post which he held until 1991. Keating inherited the position of Treasurer of Australia from John Howard, and with it an economy that needed much attention. Just one year previously, under Howard, interest rates in Australia peaked at 13.5%, a very high level.[1] (see: RBA: Bulletin Statistical Tables). Keating also attacked Howard for allegedly lying to Parliament about the size of the budget deficit that had been left by the outgoing government.

After a difficult start, Keating mastered economic policy and was soon acknowledged as the driving political force behind many of the microeconomic reforms of the Hawke government, including floating the Australian dollar, substantial cuts in tariffs, the deregulation of the banking system and taxation reforms, all of which modernised the Australian economy and increased its competitiveness. In 1985, Keating proposed a value-added tax (known in Australia as in New Zealand and Canada whence it was directly copied as the Goods and Services Tax or GST), an option seriously debated before being dropped by Hawke, after it was clear the tax was highly unpopular in the electorate.

!

The Labor party post-Keating has allowed the Liberal party to demonise the ALPs time in power as some sort of period of economic disaster. This preconception follows through to today in the sort of rhetoric delivered by the OP.

Economically, it really doesn't matter who gets in power. Either party will make judgements regarding the economy that they believe are the right call to encourage growth and prosperity. As always, by far largest factor in the performance of the Australian economy is external and beyond the control of our Governments. If our export industries like primary produce & resources are in demand, then we do well. Don't let them fool you - if and when the resource sector contracts or slows, there isn't s*** they can do about it or the follow-on effects.

You probably wouldn't think so from my post, but I'm a conservative and have voted Liberal for the past ten or fifteen years. I don't like bulls*** though and a lot of the political arguing (from both sides) over economic creds is simply that.

Try not to be bulls***ted by your politicians. If you are Labor / Liberal for lyfe, then you are probably foaming at the mouth now about how much your party pwns at economies. If you are a swinging voter, have a look at the policies on offer and determine what will help you (and the things you care about) the most in detail and vote that way.

Next time you complain about having to deal with an overseas call centre, just remember that it's good for business and its the unions that have spoken out against overseas outsourcing.
Sure the unions are losing relevance in this day and age. I mean what have they done for us lately? Award level wages, eight hour days, overtime, that ridiculous holiday you just had on Monday... definitely things we don't need.

How about you negotiate individually (because all unions do is get in the way of proper working conditions) with your employer every single working condition, from holidays to sick pay to parental leave to flex time... and if you don't get any of that already you probably don't work in a unionised work place so that's too bad for you. Even worse for you if you're a new migrant who has no idea about signing an AWA and can't afford a lawyer to check the terms and conditions of the rights you just signed away to suit the employers business priorities. Oh and you've not been working here for 12 months? Well I'm restructuring so clean out your desk before you leave today. And I'd like to thank the Federal Liberal Government for giving the employer this flexibility.

Ah but our Prime Minister is very canny. The union scare campaign is starting to erode his vote and Rudd's folksy "I'm here to help" line is starting to make inroads into the two-party preferred percentage that the media hold so dear. Time to not take such a strong line on the WorkChoices policy and reassure voters that they won't be worse off, and that we'll put in a process to ensure that they won't be worse off, even if Labor asked for this two years ago and we didn't at the time because we were riding all over that oversized Opposition Leader Beazley.

And remember the Liberal Government has only done good things for this country. Some good tough economic decisions - the GST, bracket creep, low inflation, low unemployment and low interest rates - well maybe not that last one. And some great social policy too. Remember the Schonell Theatre? Not any more. University sports clubs and other societies? Bet they cost a lot more to operate now. You shouldn't be forced to pay money to an organisation, so why should you have to pay taxes? Oops.

John Winston Howard, your prizes - an index linked pension, free travel and office space plus a number of other taxpayer funded benefits - will be waiting on your departure. You've certainly earned them. It's a pity you didn't get to negotiate those conditions with your employers because I doubt they'd be so generous.

See you can say Keating was a great treasurer and yet, with him at the helm australia slid into the worst recession in 60 years. Fair enough that was brought on by external sources, but since then australia hasn't followed Japan into recession (our biggest export market), we survived the failure of a few major australian companies and the fallout from 9/11, etc.

I'd say that Howard's government, though mainly due to Costello, has been one of the most financially competent in recent australian history.

I always thought I would vote Labour.

I reckon I could be Kevin Rudd's best friend, but I just wouldn't want him as my PM. The guy is ready to blame every single Australian for climate change, doesn't have the science to back him up, and tries to make fun of John Howard for not doing the same. I strongly believe that tax payer funded programs will not stop climate change. Rudd can pretend to have the power to save us, but there is no evidence that people, let alone beaurocrats, can stop climate change by forcing us to reduce greenhouse emissions and such. I'd love if cleaner fuel was available etc.., but that kind of change will come about as a result of the commercial industry, not 2 minute government ads everywhere you go. I don't need those a******s having control of yet another thing.

Labour also portray's Liberal's IR Laws as something they're not.

Labour wants to create more laws for things we don't need laws for, and I think they will really baby us if they win this election.

I don't really understand if John Howard will even be PM again if the coalition wins, but I guess I don't have a choice but to go for them.


Another lesser of two evils vote. I don't reeeaaally get to have my say on politics in these elections... option A and B doesn't really do it for me...

Costello is the f***ing man.

He could be making MILLIONS in the private sector but instead he keeps it real and reps for the green and gold.
AUSSIEAUSSIEAUSSIE

FFS THERE IS NO U IN LABOR, NO NO NO U

everyone should just remember, that the last time you could afford to buy a house, was when labor was in power!

i think thats something for all you kids to think about, if johnny stays in power, ull rent forever

FOREVER, muhahahahhaa
muauHAHAHAHAH
MUAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

I strongly believe that tax payer funded programs will not stop climate change. Rudd can pretend to have the power to save us, but there is no evidence that people, let alone beaurocrats, can stop climate change by forcing us to reduce greenhouse emissions and such.

Well, no, but there's strong evidence that people are causing climate change, and one of the things that has clearly been identified is carbon dioxide emissions. It seems to follow that reducing those might reduce the impact we have on the environment?

I don't think its deniable that we're f***ing up the planet. Anything we do that stops, or at least minimises, that should be factored into your voting, and if the government doesn't lead the way then no one else will.

Now for my post.

Liberal's have been in power for 10years, and somehow we are still doing well economically. despite external pressures. sure the resources are still doing well, but without the right managment of policies external buyers can and would go elsewhere. interest rates are still 10% lower then when labor where at the helm. local debt is at an all time high due to people knowing that the economy is in good hands. if you borrow to 100% of what you can afford your an idiot and deserve to loose your house, if there is a .25% interest rate rise.

Rudd is riding the new is good wave still and will crash and burn as soon as he has to actually prove hes worthy. Gillard has done everything she can to f*** labor up, shes an idiot and will become pm if rudd doesnt stackup (which he wont) can you imagine gillard as pm? unions run labor, and gillard just pissed them off really badly, hopefully this will cut them down enough to stop the "we need a change" vote so labor DONT get in. i have grave concerns they will, but truely hope australian's are smart enough to look at the whole picture and vote libs back in. (you may not like howard, but atleast he makes a decision and sticks by it. labor change their policies more often then their underware, when will they realise there isnt a policy that will make EVERYONE happy, and start makeing some of the hard choices and sticking with it. one good thing will come from labor getting in if they do, it will show the state labor governments for the useless wankers they are and get rid of them so the country can really start moving forward, once the libs win the election after, which they will when everyone sees how dredful labor are. (beatie is slowly killing qld and noone is stopping him)

spook, imagine if labor was still in the interest rate in australia would be aroun 30% by now. can you afford that? and dont give me you cant afford to buy now, sheesh my little family could buy into the market now with only 1 income if we wanted. you wont be able to buy a mansion in the best suburb in town but its doable.

last edited by Anono at 19:34:47 08/May/07

f*** yeah. an additional $1500 for those who made the $1000 super cocontribution in 05 or 06.

much love for pete right now

Two things will make you look ignorant in any Aussie politics thread; mispelling the Australian Labor Party, and not understanding the difference between liberal politics and the Liberal Party. If you want people to seriously consider your viewpoint stop f***ing those up.

See you can say Keating was a great treasurer and yet, with him at the helm australia slid into the worst recession in 60 years. Fair enough that was brought on by external sources, but since then australia hasn't followed Japan into recession (our biggest export market), we survived the failure of a few major ustralian companies and the fallout from 9/11, etc.

I'd say that Howard's government, though mainly due to Costello, has been one of the most financially competent in recent australian history.

That's the thing - Australia is in the middle of a pretty good time economically, but why? What did Costello do that caused this? I see a lot of financial and economic commentators mentioning burgeoning resource sector as the cause of our growth. I just don't see a lot of commentary on how the Government's policy cntributed to it.

Can anyone enlighten me on this? Point out some good policy changes from the Government that have helped Australia ride out the global downturn?

I've been paying attention to what's being said by financial commentators in the media. For the past few years they seem to have been saying that the Government's economic track record is more a case of not f***ing up our place in the resource boom than particularly wondrous management. I distinctly recall an interview prior to the last election that went just like that.

I consider myself pretty up on political s***, but I can't think of much that the Howard Government has done in 11 years that I can particularly applaud.

Fair Enough:
The GST seems to be working out well enough? Note though that this was a Labor policy first. Kind of a meh though, not a big fan of new taxes. I guess it helped to reduce other State & Federal taxation some maybe?

Oh wait, by all reports we're being taxed more than ever. Hard to tell who is to blame though given the divide between State & Federal; income tax has gone down tho which is good.

VSU f*** the Student Unions. It might have been handled more gently but they didn't exactly do anything to plan ahead for the most party. They knew it was coming.

Dubious:

Privatisation of Telstra this seems to have been a cockup for the most part? The partial sale has left thousands of Aussies out of pocket (rofl T2) and left the company in a s***ty position, respoonsible to both shareholders for profits and the community as some sort of provider of equal telecommunications rights.

Workplace Reform Not exactly lauded by the community as a reform Controversial at best despite millions in advertising.

Outright Dodgy:

Tampa rofl. How the f*** did they get away with that anyway?

Iraq & Security they nearly got off scot free. We prolly couldn't have avoided taking part in the war dur to alliance issues, but we could look a bit more independent about it maybe?! Though Johnnie and Bush are both conservative politicians, I guess they have a lot in common.

One thing is for sure, the Howard Gov. has had a good run on instability. Its almost unanimously held that a good reason for the GOvernment's staying power has been fear of global instability.

AWB Scandal cover up much?

On October 2005, the Volcker Inquiry into the United Nations Oil-for-Food Programme revealed that Australian company AWB Ltd had paid the single largest illicit "kickback" to the Iraq regime. Howard, resisting calls for a Royal Commission, subsequently established a Commission of Inquiry under Terence Cole QC to determine if Australian companies had broken the law.[52] Howard rejected criticisms that the Inquiry Terms of Reference were too narrow (i.e. did not permit adequate investigation into the role played by Government Ministers and their delegates).

David Hicks Terrorist or just plain stupid, we should have been in their faces about holding an Australian citizen without trial. Simple fact, we're apparently allies, and have certain common values that we hold that include the presumption of innocence.

We sucked enough cock as a nation in Iraq already, we didn't have to take it up the arse as well.

Changes to Disability Laws this one is a personal pissoff, because I have MS. While I'm happy to (and want to) work full-time for as long as I can, they've made it too rough on people with disabilities.

Example: if you work 20 hours or more then you are considered part-time unemployed, regardless of your situation. That's f***en stupid, its quite likely that I will eventually have to cut down on hours because of my chronic incurable neurological condition you pricks, why be arseholes about it? Cut me a break kk?

I'm all for giving dole bludgers and cheats a hard time, but I have MRI scans showing deterioration of my brain.

The more I think about it the more I think I'm gonna vote against em for the first time in ages. I'm not in love with Rudd or the ALP although I liked the way he handled himself on Sunrise. The ALP did very well snaking him on there while they worked out how to hang Beazley.

last edited by Hogfather at 20:02:03 08/May/07

The liberal party has been in power for too long. They are one sided against certain issues, the same way labor is - put any one party in power for too long and the entire system gets f***ed up...just look at the IR laws, Australia's "international relations". Time for a different approach me thinks.

tell me, how have the new IR laws hurt you?

tell me, how have the new IR laws hurt you?

We're planning on having another kid, but my wife is scared to fall pregnant because she might lose her job. Her workplace has under 100 people so she can be sacked without reason. She's been told if she goes on maternity leave there might not be a job for her.

So while it hasn't hurt us yet, it sounds like it might. That said she's good at what she does and there is a demand for qualified childcare workers, but its a s*** of a position and more worry than I need atm.

I vote trog for prez

edit: But small companies probably can't just keep paying all the dirty pregnant women to not come to work for 6 months or whatever maternity leave is. Not like a big company with 10000 employees and a safety net.

I don't know why people keep bitching and moaning about it, I'd like to see those same people start up their own small business and pay someone who isn't even at work earning money & still cover the rent for the place, stock quantity and get all the work done on time.

last edited by whoop at 20:10:14 08/May/07

I want to be able to vote for a prez :(

greens

That's perhaps why the government should offer paid maternity leave 'incentives' for small business instead of just saying "look you can shack the preggo women if you can't afford it". The IR laws haven't affected me because I'm with a great company with about 1800 people. They don't need to hurt me though for me to be concerned about it.

edit: But small companies probably can't just keep paying all the dirty pregnant women to not come to work for 6 months or whatever maternity leave is. Not like a big company with 10000 employees and a safety net.

Yeh ... dirty pregnant women. You kiss your mother with that mouth whoop? I'm just gonna assume you weren't talking about my wife and be civil.

It doesn't matter mate - maternity leave, as inconvenient as it may be, is a generally good thing and worth protecting. Its the right thing to do. Australia is (supposedly) a socially responsible country. We have s*** like Medicare, HECS, parental leave & a Social Security System. Hell its not like maternity leave is paid time off.

Being vaguely humane and not outright worshiping the almighty dollar what separates us from hardcore capitalist places like the States. Or do you want to shift further right and abolish Medicare, disability pensions and the like as well?

i was primaraly for Rudd due to IR windback/removal .... i liked when he mentioned looking at wind/solar power but i this far to expensive to implement... wouldn't happen...

f*** TEH IR LAWS OFF BUT!!@!

last edited by Zylox at 20:28:01 08/May/07

im very interested to see what the budget offers me in the way of childcare

id like a bigger baby bonus and then more money for kiddy care during the day, so i can get wifey back to work pronto

lets put that surplus to work johnny

labour ftw,

Yeh me too Spook (re. childcare stuff).

The current system is a bit dodgy. This year we'll be able to claim on money we spent in the 2005-6 financial year. Doesn't seem to make much sense, aside from saving some money for the Gov.

pay someone who isn't even at work earning money

You're an idiot. It's not paid maternity leave for 12 months, it's just leave without pay with the security of knowing you will have a job to go back to. You can still employ temp staff in the meantime, if you so wish. You're an idiot and idiots shouldn't be allowed to vote. Hopefully they'll lose your vote come election day. Hopefully some smart person will wipe their arse with it cause that's about all yours is worth.

last edited by Some Fat Bastard at 20:39:21 08/May/07

The other thing to consider is that Costello is most probably going to become the PM during this term.

I for one would fully support Costello as PM, I also really like Downer.

im for helping with chialdcare expenses ...but f*** this pump kids out for money bulls***... or lumpsum payments

GST has/is working.

VSU Awesome, f*** paying $240 a semester for s*** I didn't use.

Telstra has been a cock up.

Tampa I'm still not 100% sure what happened there. I wasn't there. I doubt you know either.

Iraq Something had to be done, They went around it the wrong way, but the world is better without Sadam

AWB Not their fault someone else cocked up

Hicks are you f***ing Kidding me? This guy fought against Aussie Forces/Allies and you people want to save him? Get f***ed.

Don't know much about the Disability so I wont coment on it.

I for one would fully support Costello as PM, I also really like Downer.

Costello has the personality of a lump of wood. Downer is a rich prick who never has known what it's like to do things tough. He has about as much life experience as a piece of concrete.

Yeh I pretty much agree with the GST and VSU. Not a fan of new taxes but whatever gets the job done. Agreed on telstra.

Tampa I'm still not 100% sure what happened there. I wasn't there. I doubt you know either.

Ahh but Wiki tells me what to think. They do have a pretty good overview of events. The big thing for me was that the Government pumped the issue, especially re children being thrown overboard.

The claim was first announced by the then Minister for Immigration, Philip Ruddock on 7 October 2001, and repeated in subsequent days and weeks by senior Government ministers, including the Minister for Defence, Peter Reith, and Prime Minister John Howard.

The motivation of those allegedly throwing their children overboard, according to those who reported the incident, was to effectively "force" the Royal Australian Navy to rescue the children and their parents. The claim was used to cast doubt on the passengers of SIEV 4 as genuine refugees, instead characterising them as people prepared to use unscrupulous means to gain illegal entry into Australia.

A subsequent inquiry by a Senate select committee found that not only was the claim untrue, but that the government knew the claim to be untrue before the Federal elections, which were held one month later.

I don't think that the event itself is a huge deal, but its handling was way dodgy and just stinks of manipulation of the electorate. It was also IMO unbecoming of the PM to leverage the incident for political gain. I don't think its really disputed that they did that.

Iraq Something had to be done, They went around it the wrong way, but the world is better without Sadam

Does 'the world' include the Iraqis? We have a few here on this forum who have a different opinion, rofl. We went about it the wrong way, it made us look like lapdogs, but hey we killzored Saddam so its OK. I lean that way myself on the issue, but its still annoying, I feel like vaguelly something isn't right about it.

History might judge us more harshly :(

AWB Not their fault someone else cocked up

Did you miss the bit where I quoted that the Commission into the affair didn't have the power to properly investigate politicians? We don't know that it wasn't their fault, because nobody was allowed to look into it extensively.

Hicks are you f***ing Kidding me? This guy fought against Aussie Forces/Allies and you people want to save him? Get f***ed.

I don't want to save him, I think he's a d******* and should be prosecuted under law. I also believe in the presumption of innocence, and the right of all citizens to a free trial.

You just can't remove the right to judicial trial from someone accused of crimes because you don't like what they allegedly did. That path just gives too much power to Governments, and is directly against the fundamental tenets of western democratic society.

Its not about Hicks at all, its about the precedent. Think about it some and don't be emotionally engaged about the crime, the process must be followed, especially in the case of heinous acts. Justice must not only be served but be seen to be served.

The simple fact that nobody thinks Hicks got a fair trial is the problem. The fact that so many people are cool about it is the travesty :(

Don't know much about the Disability so I wont coment on it.

Its f***ed up :) Had a meeting with the MS Society dude a while back and he explained it. Government just slipped a little too far to the right in that case, hopefully there'll be a shift back left at some point and it'll be fixed for the poor f***ers trying to get by.

In a World without Leaders, who would start all the Wars?

the people.

Let's put it this way.

If Costello's budget was an old dirty man with candy in the back of a black van, How many retards here would get in?

Can anyone enlighten me on this? Point out some good policy changes from the Government that have helped Australia ride out the global downturn?

Repaying $96b of Labor debt? This represents annual interest repayments of $6-7b per year that would have come straight off tonight's $10b budget surplus. But the fact is that without repaying that debt Australia would never have reached its current strong fiscal position.

By repaying debt, private businesses and homebuyers no longer compete against the government to borrow the same dollars, making it cheaper to borrow. In fact government is returning more credit capacity to the economy, and by improving its credit rating, restoring confidence to the finance sector.

Keating ran successive budget deficits and drove up interest rates as a result.

So too would Rudd. He would have to, to honour all the outrageous promises he is making, and the fact that the unions will cripple the economy with their antiquated employment systems.

Costello is awesome but my money is on Nelson. This guy is as charismatic as he is brilliant.

Haha, I love how some people in this thread are ripping on Rudd. Do you even know anything about the guy?

Whatever, personally I'm voting Labour just because they are the first party to actually push Australian broadband as a mainstream political issue. I don't know whether their FTTN plan is feasible, but at least they put forward a plan- one which sent the liberals scrambling to respond, after avoiding doing anything themselves for years. Actually I'm rather surprised it hasn't already been mentioned in this thread.

Also on the plus side for Rudd is the fact that as mentioned in this thread, China is one of our big export partners right now.

Taken from the age

A love affair with all things Chinese started at the age of 10 when his mother gave him a book on ancient civilisations. After high school Rudd hitch-hiked down the east coast and eventually reached Canberra where he enrolled at Australian National University and studied Chinese language and history. He is fluent in Mandarin and was posted to Beijing as a junior diplomat during his time with the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade in the mid-1980s.

And asides from the fact that he is married to an entrepreneur(you think the PMs' significant other won't affect his financial policies? think again.) he does have business experience.

Between elections he ran his own business as a Chinese consultant for Australian firms.

As for comparing him to Mark Latham, give me a break.

His most bitter enemy was Mark Latham. Their dislike of each other began in Rudd's first year in Parliament when he defended the Labor Party against criticism by Latham that it lacked policy and was intellectually bereft.

There are 37 references to Rudd in The Latham Diaries, published after his Labor leadership imploded in 2005. He variously attacked Rudd as a snake, a traitor and "a terrible piece of work". Rudd accused Latham of mocking him for weeping over his mother's death prior to the 2004 election.

I'd reckon Rudd and Latham would both be offended when listening to people trying to compare them.

To be honest this is the first time in years where I've actually even been interested in the outcome of the federal election. Labour has had a poor selection of leaders for a long time now, and seemed to spend most of it's time just throwing out negative responses to Liberal legislation. Since Rudd has been in there has been a certain element of action in Australian politics that I feel has been missing for some time.

Well that's something infi!

It was only the other day that I saw a report that Government coffers were overflowing because of extra taxation from the resource boom (I know, I keep coming back to this, but it seems important). Paying the bills after being cashed up from an external source != good economic management to me.

Because I'm lazy, I'm pulling most of my info from Wikipedia:

John Howard
Paul Keating

Now according to wiki, when Hawke came to power the economy was in a very questionable state and was actually corrected by reforms enacted by Keating as Treasurer. The quoted section is referenced on Wiki to the bureau's stats.

When Hawke won the March 1983 elections, Keating became Treasurer, a post which he held until 1991. Keating inherited the position of Treasurer of Australia from John Howard, and with it an economy that needed much attention. Just one year previously, under Howard, interest rates in Australia peaked at 13.5%, a very high level

Now does that mean that Howard was a s***ty Treasurer, or that external factors f***ed the Government under Fraser and Howard's stewardship? What I'm really asking is how the economy can be pretty messed up under Howard in one Government, and heaps good in another?

Or does John Howard have nothing to do with economic policy now; is Pete the man behind the curtain making hte calls? Sucks to be Pete...

This is my favourite:

Keating also attacked Howard for allegedly lying to Parliament about the size of the budget deficit that had been left by the outgoing government.

Does that sound familiar?

Now, there are some people (like that guy on the radio the other day I was talking about) who are saying that this was the only significant contributor to Australia's success in the mining boom:

Keating mastered economic policy and was soon acknowledged as the driving political force behind many of the microeconomic reforms of the Hawke government, including floating the Australian dollar, substantial cuts in tariffs, the deregulation of the banking system and taxation reforms, all of which modernised the Australian economy and increased its competitiveness.

Now I am not an economist but I can see a cause and effect chain here. Floating the dollar, reforming banking, all these things would seem to have a direct impact on making our economy appealing to international investment (such as building big f***ing mines etc). Keating's downfall seems to have been his overly leftist views on social reform and international politics, as well as the recession that tagged Australia. Keating would tell you that the recession was a direct consequence of reform and bought us the current prosperity - politicians will tell you anything.

Anyway, has the Howard Government done anything like floating the dollar, reforming the banking sector? Is their crowning glory really something as mundane as paying the bills? Hell, Keating can even claim compulsory superannuation as his!

Sorry don't buy it. Each Government is, IMO, able to manage the economy as best it can be. They'll each try and paint the other side as incompetents and make you believe their stories, but none of them are angels and they all have s*** in the past to drag up and paint them as economic idiots.

It in end it doesn;t really matter. Voting Labor won't ruin the country, and voting Libreal won't save it. Look at policy, make as informed a decision as you can and don't buy into the bulls***.

as much as i want super fast broadband to dl pron its a f***ing rediculous waste of taxpayer money.

also so much lol at all the DIY economics going on in this thread. infi seems to be the only one who passed economics 101

Like I said taggs, I am not an economist, I'm just parroting what I'm hearing / reading in the media and asking for information from someone who does know.

I'm curious infi as well:

By repaying debt, private businesses and homebuyers no longer compete against the government to borrow the same dollars, making it cheaper to borrow.

How the f*** is it cheaper to borrow for homebuyers? Are we in the same country?! In the last ten years especially, the relationship between household income and mortgage repayments has been shattered. Housing is at all-time lows in terms of affordability.

If you're talking about bank fees and administrative costs, wouldn't deregulation of the banking / finance sector have provided greater gains?

Yeah, because the money Labour committed to the FTTN plan from $2bn of the existing communications fund, and the rest from the Future Fund's 17% stake in Telstra was obviously going to be used for something totally unrelated and more beneficial than improving telecommunications infrastructure in Australia.

Now I am not an economist but I can see a cause and effect chain here. Floating the dollar, reforming banking, all these things would seem to have a direct impact on making our economy appealing to international investment (such as building big f***ing mines etc).

Keating didn't think any of that up, they were all recommended by the Campbell Report, a Liberal initiative under Fraser. Besides economists had been screaming at governments to do that for years. When Hawke got into power they didn't quite believe it so they started a 2nd report called the Martin report to examine whether doing this was a good idea. Not surprisingly they got told it was.

Anyway, has the Howard Government done anything like floating the dollar, reforming the banking sector?

IR reforms = deregulating labour market = microeconomic reform = f***ing awesome for the economy. i can go into more detail if you want. so to answer your question: yes, yes he has.

ps. 3rd year economics degree right here yo

edit: if you wanna see why the broadband network is a silly idea here are 2 decent article without too much heavy economics stuff:

http://www.smh.com.au/news/business/costellos-conjuring-versus-rudds-bad-policy/2007/03/25/1174761279891.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1

http://www.economics.com.au/?p=746

also wasn't picking on just you hogfather =)

last edited by taggs at 21:54:13 08/May/07

How the f*** is it cheaper to borrow for homebuyers? Are we in the same country?! In the last ten years especially, the relationship between household income and mortgage repayments has been shattered. Housing is at all-time lows in terms of affordability.

You're mistaking the cost of money with the cost of real estate. As I have said in previous threads, the prime driver in increasing real estate prices has nothing to do with the Federal Government - and everything to do with out incompetent nationwide Labor State Governments.

Land shortages and state taxes (e.g. stamp duty) have a stranglehold on land supply in SE Qld for example but similar stories can be heard elsewhere. Affordability is a bulls*** story run by the states to counter the seemingly attractiveness of historically low interest rates.

The finance industry is to blame as well for finance 100%+ loans to buy houses. Increased demand via finance liquidity will always push the cost of real estate to the max.

Regrettably the cost of housing would be high regardless of interest rates, because just as in musical chairs, when the music stops someone will not have a house - the poorest person. No policy can change this ever without distorting the economy to provide a housing glut and therefore a shortage in another market.

last edited by infi at 21:55:04 08/May/07

i will be voting for labour, and one of the main reasons is because of the new ir laws have screwed me, i don't think they need to go back to the old ones but they do need to be changed to be fairer on the workers. i work nights and have been screwed out all my penalty rates because they can. it is f***ed the reason that i work nights is for the money but what is the point if the employers can just put u on idividual work contracts and tell you to get f***ed.

why not go work for another employer who has the penalty rates? if no employers have the penalty rates then maybe they should never have been there in the first place....

Thanks for the reply infi; I'm not bulls***ting when I say I'm after info and real insight. Maybe you can shed some light on these articles:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Australia

They do seem to love Paul Keating over there; historical bias?

Australia's emphasis on reforms is often cited as a key factor behind the continuing strength of the economy. In the 1980s, the Australian Labor Party, led by Prime Minister Bob Hawke and Treasurer Paul Keating, commenced the modernisation of the Australian economy by floating the Australian dollar in 1983, leading to full financial deregulation.

Current areas of concern to some economists include Australia's large current account deficit, the absence of a successful export-oriented manufacturing industry, a real estate bubble, and high levels of net foreign debt owed by the private sector.

We've covered the real estate bubble - that's apparently not the Federal Government's fault, so if we all lose our homes we shouldn't blame them.

Hmm, what the f*** is a current account anyway?

A current account surplus increases a country's net foreign assets by the corresponding amount, and a current account deficit does the reverse. Both government and private payments are included in the calculation. The balance of trade is typically the most important part of the current account.

Sounds dodgy. Do either party have a strategy for reducing our current account deficit? It looks like a trend in Western economies, maybe not something that politicians have direct control over? ;) I can see how the lack of a successful export manufacturing industry could be implicated in the account deficit.

Hmm, Peter Costello thinks I've got a point:

Over much of the 20th century, prices for agriculture and mining commodities declined relative to prices for industrial goods. These terms of trade worked against Australia.

More recently in the last few years, prices for mining commodities have risen strongly while prices for manufactured goods have fallen. This is sometimes described as “the China effect” and it has worked in Australia’s favour.

http://www.treasurer.gov.au/tsr/content/speeches/2007/004.asp

The Germans think we've got a lot to thank for the mining boom:

Commas dont belong in links, Germans!

No doubt about it: Australia is the big winner in the resources boom that economies the world over are currently experiencing. The Australian mining industry has already exported more than $370 billion worth of metals, fuels and minerals during the past 20 years. But now that industry is witnessing the best days in its history.

For Australia, China is more than a next door neighbor. China's economic expansion has a direct impact on the Australian economy. The People's Republic has become Australia's second most important trade partner after Japan. China and Australia are linked by an almost symbiotic relationship.

...

many are concerned the economy is becoming dangerously one-sided and over-dependent on natural resources, which already account for a third of Australia's exports. "The economy has become fat and lazy," warns Chris Richardson from Access Economics, a research institute in Canberra. So what if the prices of iron ore, coal, copper and gold begin to slip? Will an economic collapse be inevitable if China's economic expansion begins to stall?

Of course, I fail at Economics 101...

last edited by Hogfather at 22:23:56 08/May/07

I liked the comment on the second link you provided taggs.

Doug Kelso
It seems that both you and Alan Mitchell miss the strategic significance of optical fibre in the access network. To put it succinctly, such optical fibre will create an enduring natural monopoly embodying technical and commercial bottlenecks never seen before in Australia. The first of this infrastructure will be the last. It is of the greatest national significance that, whoever rolls it out and however it is rolled out, the appropriate settings are achieved. There will be NO second chance to get things right. In the world of wireline communications, optical fibre in the access network can become the veritable ‘death star’ if the wrong settings are made.

I also find it amusing that Ross calls the proposal

a cynical bribe to the powerful media proprietors and to country voters, and a come-on to punters who want to download their porn faster, disguised as a far-sighted, imaginative initiative to make us internationally competitive in the productivity-oozing new world of e-everything.

1. It's obvious he doesn't take the usefulness of internet connectivity seriously, a common thread throughout all of his comments on the subject
2. Both columns were written for mainstream newspapers with a vested interest in keeping their business models viable for as long as possible. An article from the CoreEcon site you linked to goes into this aspect in more depth.
3. The FTTN network was proposed to cover 98% of the population, which covers most Australians in metro areas. I don't recall running fiber out to every isolated bush property as being a part of the proposal.

Who submits Info to Wiki?
Could said person have a Political Bias?

Well, no, but there's strong evidence that people are causing climate change, and one of the things that has clearly been identified is carbon dioxide emissions. It seems to follow that reducing those might reduce the impact we have on the environment?

No Trog, there is a lot of hysteria that supports it, but no facts. We've all seen the claims in the Al Gore documentary, which have been debunked by real scientists, though our media and politicians seem to go on as if that never happened.

I don't think its deniable that we're f***ing up the planet. Anything we do that stops, or at least minimises, that should be factored into your voting, and if the government doesn't lead the way then no one else will.

It's just a myth that blew up into a political and media frenzy, and you'll regret your tax being spent on that s***.

And the government rarely leads the way in anything. They say they do, your buddy Al Gore invented the Internet!

last edited by Idol at 22:28:13 08/May/07

Who submits Info to Wiki?
Could said person have a Political Bias?

Wiki pages are user-generated content, and open to bias. That said, pages tend to be very heavily moderated by crazy editors, especially popular 'important' pages like political figures, history etc. Dodgy comments are heavily disputed and argued back and forth like this thread!

I'd be very surprised to note that factual errors or heavy bias entered into it. I should be more even-handed, the Australian Economy page also says after the bit about Hawke and Keating floating the dollar etc:

Since 1996, the Coalition government, led by Prime Minister John Howard, continued to implement microeconomic reform policies. The microeconomic reforms of the Howard government have focussed on the labour market, and has attempted to reduce union power and involvement in the workplace.

The Coalition government deregulated numerous other industries, including the telecommunications sector, and privatised many of the pre-existing monopolies. Since the recession of the early 1990s, the Australian economy has not suffered a recession in over 14 years. As of January 2007, unemployment had fallen to a level of 4.6 per cent, the lowest level since the 1970s. The price of shares listed on the Australian Stock Exchange has also grown significantly since the early 1990s.

My point being that the telco deregulation hasn't been stellar, labour market reform hasn't been popular, and that the lack of recession is more due to China buying all our gold than anything else.

last edited by Hogfather at 22:34:27 08/May/07

Howard is an awesome liar so its natural for the weak-minded like infi to verbally masturbate about his virtues.

while you lib fanbois jerk off to your mates at the Sunday BBQ about the killing you made in real estate and how your share portfolio has grown over the last decade try and put some thought into how you are going to explain to your kids that they will never be able to afford their own home and how you will have to mortgage your own to put them through uni. fkn dips***s

I think I'll probably explain it to them while sipping from the jewel encrusted goblet I bought with my share profits :)

lol, those who choose to invest over consuming will always benefit from their sacrifice.

Speaking of broadband, Labor made it a policy of theirs that ISPs would be forced to have opt-out filtering of websites the govt decides are naughty:

http://www.efa.org.au/Issues/Censor/mandatoryblocking.html

this brain-amputated policy alone is almost enough to make me vote Liberal - current Communications minister Senator Coonan on the other hand has an informed view on the reality of internet filtering - that it would be expensive, complicated, and totally ineffective at stopping determined users from circumventing it to get their pr0ns

Assuming you don't get f***ed in a crash or recession mate :(

Still, a jewel-encrusted goblet sounds pretty awesome. Maybe I could get a jewel-encrusted Wii-mote.

I swear infi, every time I turn around someone is telling me the Government is being powered by the resources boom & criticism of the Government's economic management. I was looking into the budget a minute ago, and came across this:

So, all in all, personal income taxes and taxes on our superannuation will give the Federal Government $127.86 billion in 2007-08, more than 50 per cent of the Federal Government's revenue.
...
No wonder the Government was able to forecast an underlying cash surplus of $10.6 billion in 2007-08 after a $13.6 billion tax cuts in 2006-07.
...
Thanks larely to the mining boom and record company profits, $66.56 billion will come from taxes raised on companies, about half of the tax grabbed from individuals ... while Australia might be riding a resources boom, it’s a personal tax boom that is really filling government coffers. Year after year.

Treasurer Peter Costello claims the tax cuts announced in the Budget will improve the incomes of families and individuals.

For a person on an average wage of around $55,000, the tax cut will be around $16 a week. For those below it can be more, for example, at $30,000 the tax cut will be $21 a week.
...
But given rising interest costs and quickly rising education and health costs - growing at almost double the inflation rate - the tax cuts are barely enough to dent a sharp growth in household costs.
...
So while the tax cuts will initially make life easier, they will simply spur on spending. Low and middle income earners won't be saving these cuts.
...
Another rate rise in 2007 or 2008 would drive many housholds to the wall, especially those in the mortgage belt, who have been whipped by higher interest rates.

Is this a conspiracy to bad mouth the Government before the election? Hell, news.com.au is a right-leaning news source! Or is the Liberal Party just not the economics godsend they've painted themselves as?

Earlier in this thread I noted that interest rates being 'low' doesn't matter if the interest bill is so high - the RBA knows this and sets the rates accordingly. Interest rates are high if commentators are noting that another raise will send families ot the wall.

When it comes to international affairs, eg: iraq, they're the same s***, just different smell.

So whoever wins, i lose.

That being said, i say bring back the hawk!!

________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________777777777777777777______________________________
__________________________77777777777777777777777777777_________________________
______________________7777777777777777777777777777777777777_____________________
___________________77777777777777777777777777777777777777777777_________________
________________77777777777777777777__________77777777777777777777______________
______________7777777777777777_____________________77777777777777777____________
____________77777777777777__________##########__________77777777777777__________
__________7777777777777________####################________7777777777777________
________7777777777777777_____########################________777777777777_______
_______7777777777777777777#############################________77777777777______
______77777777777___77777777########__________##########_________7777777777_____
_____7777777777_______77777777###________________#########________7777777777____
____7777777777_________#77777777w ________________########_________7777777777___
____777777777__________###77777777a________________########_________7777777777__
___7777777777_________######77777777r _______________########_________777777777__
___777777777__________########77777777r _____________########__________777777777_
__7777777777__________########__77777777i ___________########__________777777777_
__777777777___________########____77777777o_________########__________777777777_
__777777777___________########______77777777r _______########__________777777777_
__777777777___________########_________7777777n_____########__________777777777_
__777777777___________########___________77777777e__########__________777777777_
___77777777___________########_____________77777777s########__________777777777_
___777777777_____##################__________7777777s#######_________777777777__
____777777777_____################_____________77777777#####_________777777777__
____7777777777______############_________________77777777###________777777777___
_____7777777777______##########____________________77777777#_______7777777777___
______7777777777______########______________________#77777777_____7777777777____
_______7777777777_______####________________________###77777777__7777777777_____
________77777777777______##_________________________#####77777777777777777______
__________77777777777______________________________________7777777777777________
____________777777777777__________________________________7777777777777_________
_____________77777777777777___________________________777777777777777___________
_______________777777777777777777________________777777777777777777_____________
__________________7777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777________________
____________________777777777777777777777777777777777777777777__________________
________________________7777777777777777777777777777777777______________________
____________________________77777777777777777777777777__________________________
__________________________________77777777777777________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
____#####______####_________##########___________________####__________####_____
____######_____####_______##############_________________####__________####_____
____#######____####______####________####________________####__________####_____
____########___####_____####__________####_______________####__________####_____
____####_####__####_____####__________####_______________####__________####_____
____####__####_####_____####__________####_______________####__________####_____
____####___########_____####__________####_______________####__________####_____
____####____#######______####________####_________________####________####______
____####_____######_______##############___________________##############_______
____####______#####_________##########_______________________##########_________

politics + qgl =
http://users.bigpond.net.au/ritsuko/emoticons/rolleyesbarf.gif

i was primaraly for Rudd due to IR windback/removal .... i liked when he mentioned looking at wind/solar power but i this far to expensive to implement... wouldn't happen...

Load of s***, only the other day I saw this report on the telly about a Solar Tower Powerstation up and running in Spain.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/6616651.stm

Anyway the power costs 3 times as much as regular coal power but seeing this is the FIRST ONE I was surprised that it didnt cost 10 times as much.

The cost of Johnny Howards 25 Nuke stations will paid for by you and me.

It's no secret that resources are fuelling an economic boom around the world but this can be a double-edged sword. Our current account deficit still has not really improved despite this "boom". It is very important that during this time Australia records the surpluses that Costello has achieved because one day there will not be the boom.

However we constantly hear from Labor and ACOSS etc "C'Mon Mr Costello invest some of our surplus in Australia today." The Treasurer knows better and that this money needs to go into the Future Fund to ride out the baby boomer crunch coming when more older people than younger taxpayers stretch the economy beyond bursting.

Economic management is about fundamental policy choices. What I cannot get over is how all Keating fanbois thought he was a liberal market driven genius yet ran successive $10b+ budget deficits.

Howard and Co. took the hard decisions early on before the boom and Australia was positioned well to capitalise as a result. All this rubbish about Keating's reforms are just wet dreams from Keating lovers. Those reforms were inevitable i that stage of the global econmic cycle regardless of who was in power (and the difference is that the Liberals supported every one of those measures while the ALP have opposed every one of the Liberal's reforms).

lol @ dirty ape and some fat bastard

While we're talking about censorship, how about some of the policies put in place by the liberal government.

In fact, since you mentioned Helen Coonan, might I add that the previous minister in her position for the Liberals was labeled The biggest luddite in history, and that Coonan was considering bringing in these sorts of censorship measures herself, after pressure from within her own party? Mind you, Coonan doesn't seem terribly tech savvy herself.

Example: if you work 20 hours or more then you are considered part-time unemployed, regardless of your situation. That's f***en stupid, its quite likely that I will eventually have to cut down on hours because of my chronic incurable neurological condition you pricks, why be arseholes about it? Cut me a break kk?

Yet the funny thing is, when they go and do the stats for unemployment figures, you find that anyone working at least 4hrs a week or something incredible stupid like that is considered gainfully employed, and reduce the unemployment stats.

I think howard has done a good job on alot of things, but there have been some pretty bad cock ups as well.

Time for a change me thinks.

Theres no harm in the Liberals staying in power. Let the states be Labor, and the commonwealth be Liberal.

Look at it this way, if Labor was in power, would our economy be booming as much as it is now? Maybe more? But I sincerely f***ing doubt it. I watched every interview with Wayne Swan last night, and f*** that. I don't want to see this clown running our economy.

I browsed this thread simply to see Jim relate it to 4wd's and all I got was a lol

How about you negotiate individually (because all unions do is get in the way of proper working conditions) with your employer every single working condition, from holidays to sick pay to parental leave to flex time... and if you don't get any of that already you probably don't work in a unionised work place so that's too bad for you. Even worse for you if you're a new migrant who has no idea about signing an AWA and can't afford a lawyer to check the terms and conditions of the rights you just signed away to suit the employers business priorities. Oh and you've not been working here for 12 months? Well I'm restructuring so clean out your desk before you leave today. And I'd like to thank the Federal Liberal Government for giving the employer this flexibility

LoL it's hillarious to see you say Liberals run scare campains with statements like that. my favourite part is how they run the scare campaigns about no rights, you're all still subject to the same unfair dismissal stuff. This is labors biggest selling point this election and it's just a falsified scare campaign.

We're planning on having another kid, but my wife is scared to fall pregnant because she might lose her job. Her workplace has under 100 people so she can be sacked without reason. She's been told if she goes on maternity leave there might not be a job for her.

It doesn't matter mate - maternity leave, as inconvenient as it may be, is a generally good thing and worth protecting. Its the right thing to do. Australia is (supposedly) a socially responsible country. We have s*** like Medicare, HECS, parental leave & a Social Security System. Hell its not like maternity leave is paid time off.

Small companies can't afford pregnancy leave. you want them to pay a salary for someone that isn't being productive? I'm not trying to be harsh, but it's not up to small companies to pay for it, and it's not just small business, just about ALL private companies only offer none or at best 3 months paid, and even most state government jobs only offer 6. The only real way to tackle this is to probably set up a federal pregnancy leave fund, paid into out of current taxes, or new ones imposed on everyone. Which everyone would complain about (new taxes). It's fair to say that you want paid maternity leave, and that you think small business should pay for it, but ýou haven't come up with a way for them to pay for it.

Keating ran successive budget deficits and drove up interest rates as a result.

So too would Rudd. He would have to, to honour all the outrageous promises he is making, and the fact that the unions will cripple the economy with their antiquated employment systems.

Labor have been confronted about their already largesse spending claims, and have admitted they'd have to increase taxes. Thats a great plan, lower income tax, raise all the others, why don't you just call everyone who supports you stupid up front.

No, the liberals have kept the country in great shape, you can point out all the scandals you want, but they happen in EVERY government, labor can say they would've handled those scandals differently (hindsight is a great thing), but the media would've found others just as bad, it's what they do. What you can't do is say that the liberals aren't planning for our future economically and politically (world wise). They are, and it's something labor haven't been able to prove they are doing, and thats what you want out of your federal goverment.

And yes, paying off 96 BILLION dollars of debt has been brilliant, costello can now (genuinely) lower taxes and still have large sums to throw at things like the university fund.

Oh and btw, they only time land prices genuinely go down, is when people aren't buying, which is when interest rates are too high to borrow, so you continue renting. Or when unemployement is rediculously high and no one can afford to borrow, so you continue to live in the gutter as you can't rent. There are artificial things you can do to temporarily lower prices, but land sells for what people pay.

Someone is still yet to promise me 100Mbit internet at home! Maybe then I will vote :-) My sister lives in Canada, pays the equivalent of $40 per month for unlimited 100Mbit internet, why? Because their government invested heavily in infrastructure and supported investment in affordable network access. I realise that this is shaping to be a political hot potato over "the next network" but can't we just strike a deal for all to share a network. TNZ has the right idea. They are getting out of the wholesale business by selling off the network into a separate company and then competing on a level playing field with everyone else. If the government/Telstra had any brains they would have done this before deregulation when Telstra was still a monopoly and let them compete fairly with everyone else. We wouldn't be in this mess today if the Liberal Government weren't so bloody greedy selling off Telstra as a whole.


In the end it won't matter who wins the next election I still won't have my 100Mbit :-(

imagine if labor was still in the interest rate in australia would be aroun 30% by now

I've got a bridge to sell you.

1. It's obvious he doesn't take the usefulness of internet connectivity seriously, a common thread throughout all of his comments on the subject

The reason Labor are plugging this network so hard is they think it will cause major productivity increases across the country. They are claiming these awesome things that will develop like "e-commerce", and "e-health"... what the f*** is e-health!? Hey, I'd love super fast internet as much as the next guy, but you can't honestly try and argue it will significantly increase productivity here when it hasn't done that anywhere else in the world... This is from the same article:

"Last year, the Committee for Economic Development of Australia published a paper by Joshua Gans of the Melbourne Business School that questioned the value of Australia plunging into high-speed broadband.

He pointed out that its main use in South Korea and Japan is for playing computer games - high-speed broadband does little to enhance e-commerce."

And in the regards to the comment you posted, I don't think that's right. Why does the government have to provide it in Australia when the private market has provided it successfully in other countries? There just isn't the demand for that kind of thing here yet, and as such the government is going to have to continue to subsidise it in order to generate supply. So what do we have? The taxpayer forking out tonnes of money so people can enjoy the luxury of fast internet without any kind of serious productivity increase... Seriously, I want better internet infrastructure in this country too, but the demand just isn't there atm - trying to force it through the public sector will end in tears.

Costello has the personality of a lump of wood. Downer is a rich prick who never has known what it's like to do things tough. He has about as much life experience as a piece of concrete.

Dude, get a clue.

From the Herald Sun

THERESE Rein laughs off suggestions she is the "brains of the outfit".

But as a high-flying businesswoman and multi-millionaire, she is a formidable other half to new Labor leader Kevin Rudd.

I'm pretty sure Kevin Rudd is fairly rich as well... Like, REALLY rich.

Oh yeah, thats right... KEVIN RUDD's WIFE IS ONE OF AUSTRALIAS 10 MOST POWERFUL WOMEN.

hog you posted this quote:

For Australia, China is more than a next door neighbor. China's economic expansion has a direct impact on the Australian economy. The People's Republic has become Australia's second most important trade partner after Japan. China and Australia are linked by an almost symbiotic relationship.

This article seems to suggest that Australia's long period of economic growth over ther last 10 years or so is caused by China. And most to people who know little about macroeconomics (and even to some who do) it is a logical explanation. But it isn't right. What were getting into is international business cycle correlations, effectively why do countrys peak and go into recessions in some kind of coordinated pattern. There are many things that affect this and trade is only one. And you'll find if you examine the data (i've got it and will post if for you if you like) that historically, Australia has been much more correlated with the US than with any other nation. Now why could this be when we trade more with Japan? In fact in the period roughly fromt he 60s to 80s/90s our trade share with Japan rose from almost 0 to become one of our biggest trading partners, but at this same time our business cycle correlation didn't rise at all? Australia will continue to be more correlated with the US than any other country, and the relationship we have with China is extremely similar to ours with Japan.

So why didn't we go into recession in 2000/2001 when the US did if we are correlated to them? The answer isn't trade fuelled by China, it is an extremely strong domestic economy. We have had strong domestic demand powered by productivity growth for the last 5-10 years. This has in no small part been caused by continuing microeconomic reform in Australia. The things you mentioned earlier, the NCP, IR reforms etc, have all played a big part - as well as population growth and (imo) generally pretty good ecnonomic management.

My point being that the telco deregulation hasn't been stellar, labour market reform hasn't been popular, and that the lack of recession is more due to China buying all our gold than anything else.

see above

Assuming you don't get f***ed in a crash or recession mate :(

check the ASX index, it always peaks higher than ever before after a downturn. It has a strong upward trend over it's lifetime, like with most stock indexes. Same principle as the business cycle.

I'm pretty sure Kevin Rudd is fairly rich as well... Like, REALLY rich.

Your really are an idiot. Rudd came from a pooor background and worked his way through education and hard work to get where he is today. Downer rode on the silver sperm of his father's dick.

Before you open your mouth again how about putting something in the empty space you call your head first or should I say your two heads. I can hear the whistle of the wind emanating from your ears from here.

Well if Rudd doesn't get voted in he can get his wife to get him a job. I don't want a leader that looks like I could walk up too and say give me your lunch money and probably would. I reckon he would have had been dacked so much in school. Sad as I used to vote labor but I suppose this is what happens when you let normal people try and run things.

I love that you ask him to post facts, and just generally bash him with out providing any your self Some Fat Batard, you aren't a Union leader and on the Labor front bench are you?

Your arguments fail just like labor do, you bash with out providing an actual different POV/Alternative.

John Howard is divisive, he splits the community. His tactic is divide and concur (or purchase), there is nothing great about him. No doubt tho, he is clever he will have bought enough votes with the latest set of porkbarreling. Retirees and mums, should be enough to get him over the line.

He didn't fix the economy, resource sector boom and reforms made in the 80s and 90s set the base to work off. He is benefiting (otherwise he'd still be trying to deregulate banking and float the dollar).

I'm bitter because as usual I am paying to support mums and retirees. ooo $14 a week... bargain when the interest rates or housing market goes up I'll barely notice it (or when I am paying more for my food cos of the drought or fuel prices). And when the resources sector bull goes bear and all the mine jobs disappear I'll thank the IR reforms for s***tier conditions and pay.

Downer was born in Adelaide, South Australia, into one of the state's prominent established political families. His father, Sir Alexander "Alec" Downer, also reached cabinet rank in federal politics, then was High Commissioner in London from 1963 to 1972. His grandfather, Sir John Downer, was a Senator in the first federal Parliament in 1901. His mother, Lady Downer (née Mary Gosse), is descended from early immigrants to South Australia. Downer is married to Nicola (née Robinson) and has four children, Georgina, Olivia, Edward, and Henrietta.

Because it would be totally the worst thing EVER if a POLITICIAN came from a family of POLITICIANS? OMG!

Spoiler:
WHOS THE BITCH NOW?>?>?

Your arguments fail just like labor do, you bash with out providing an actual different POV/Alternative.

Another idiot. Sort of like the Liberal mud slinging campaign of recent hey. If you can't stand the heat get out of the fire.

Member of a union, sure am, the union of the human race. When shall I expect your membership?

I love that you ask him to post facts, and just generally bash him with out providing any your self Some Fat Batard,

Never asked hom to post fact. I asked him to STFU cause I'm not the one talking s*** as if it's fact with the life experience and knowledge of a retreaded tyre.

Fools need to be told they're fools. How else are they to know they're idiots without someone pointing it out. Just think of me as the one who helps you fully understand your intellectual shortcomings, your machine gun toting fairy GodFather.

Oh, and we're meant to go along with your "life experience" Nobody even knows who the f*** you are.

Because it would be totally the worst thing EVER if a POLITICIAN came from a family of POLITICIANS? OMG!

Farout, you really must be intellectually handicapped. Downers family were not only politicians but one of the richest families in South Australia. He was born with a silver spoon jammed up his arse, had nannies to look after him and his sibling and never new a knock in his life. The nannies probably wiped his arse for him too.

By the way, googling wikipaedia is not a sign of intelligence, it's a sign of knowing jack s*** about the subject you so profoundly think you do.

Oh, and we're meant to go along with your "life experience"

Never asked you to numbnuts. You really got to do better in the art of comprehension.

Nobody even knows who the f*** you are.

I just told you, I'm your fairy GodFather and I kick butt wherever I see one needs kicking.

last edited by Some Fat Bastard at 11:16:52 09/May/07

hahahaha SFB you're the best person since hunter.

My new favourite poster

By the way, googling wikipaedia is not a sign of intelligence, it's a sign of knowing jack s*** about the subject you so profoundly think you do.

you seem to enjoy googling wikipedia in this thread: http://qgl.ausforums.com/index.php/439207?agn=thread&id=2519944&startid=20

you seem to enjoy googling wikipedia in this thread

Well, well, aren't you a clever Dick Tracy. I sure did use wikipeadia on that occasion. Looks like I'll have to kick my own butt, but I'm willing to let you lick mine this time.

Interest rates hit 10% in the mid 70s and hovered around there until some really tough decision were made that forced them up to 18-20%. That said by the time Keating was voted out, they were back down to around 9 or 10%. And they are starting to head up again towards that figure now. (so infi stop playing an old inaccurate scare card).

And despite that, a house was more affordable when they were 20% then they are now. Both the HIA and Commonwealth bank claimed late last year that "the average Australian household could not afford to buy the average home" for the first time since World War 2. Affordability is worked out how by much of a combined household salary is needed to service a loan for a house. So give me the early 90s 20% and the early 90s house prices anyday of the week...

In 2000, the first home buyers grant was 14,000 which at the time was about 5 or 6 % of the purchase price of an average home. Now, its 7,000 or about 1.5-2% of the purchase price of an average home. (ps. Not saying increase the home owners grant cos while I'd love that selfishly "soon" I don't think long term its a solution).

nah i was just pointing out how you quoted wikipedia to sound smart in that thread but didn't really know what you were talking about - hence ara's comment on the 2nd page.

but hey, you're totally kicking everyone's ass keep it up guy.

i agree 100% with SFB, because he disagrees with mongie, who im learning is wrong about most things (holden,plasma,dell,lolz)

In actual fact Ara said At&T Inc was a product of "Baby" Bell, Bell South. I was verifying my comment that it was a majority product of AT&T Corp, Bell Souths Parent, which in fact it was. Something like the Goldfish swallowing the whale comes to mind.

lol, did you read AVSForum Spook?

dtv > avsf!!!

Anyways, I'm off for the moment. Got to go to the United States of Arseholes, uhm I mean America as there is a country full of arses to kick there.

Flutter, flutter (that's the sound of my fairy wings) and in the words of our very own Queer Elizabeth the Seconded turd, ta ta. :)

ok thanks for letting us know

What?

All i know is that home interest rates were 18% in the late 80's when my parents were buying a house.... now that crazy, the liberals have knocked it down by 10% and australia were in the red now we are not... all i can say is they know what to do with the money...

All these nieve Liberal supporters.

When you no longer get your:
- 4 weeks anual leave a year
- 10 days sick leave
- anual leave loading
- compassionate leave
- berievement leave
- 7hr 21 days in a gov job
- toil
- Over time
- penality rates
- pay rises
- meal allowences
- and other basic worker rights

come back to these forums with a clue. Keeping Liberal in power will make you powerless in your work place and a sucker to their conditions.

the liberals have knocked it down by 10%

That is either a false or completely ignorant statement.

Alot of peole here have no idea what they are talking about when they speka about interest rates. There were reasons why interests rates came down after liberal got into power and it wasn't the governments doing.

ie post war depression!

any way i am pretty sure that politics are allowed on these forums :P

Before I go.

TIT, I bought my first home when interest rates were 18% and I paid it off in five years. Could you imagine a first home buyer doing that today.

We all seem to forget the large government debt we had under Labor was a gift from Howard when he was treasurer. We also seem to fotget that under Howard commercial interest rates were at 20.5%. We also forget that when we had 18% interest rates under Labor the USA had 20% and the UK had 22%. But I guess that was Keatings fault too.

The reason we had 18% interest rates and a recession was because of the glut we the Australian public and business had for overseas foriegn credit. After the de-regulation of the financial industry, people and business went beserk on credit. The recession we had to have turned that around and gave the impetus for the sound economy we have today.

Also you can't blame the worker, we had the Wages Accord which kept wages under control, little though did this stop executive salaries blowing out of all proportion. So the worker pulled his belt in whilst the fat cats just got fatter.

Another case in point that since Labor got in after Howard and Fraser, industrial disputes (strikes) became the lowest since unionism began.

last edited by Some Fat Bastard at 11:53:55 09/May/07

I can't be f***ed reading 6 pages of posts (I must belong to a union =D)to see if this has already been asked but, Some Fat Bastard how about your post under your usual account? Because your posts have too much confidence of a noob.

All these nieve Liberal supporters.

f***ing lol

Alot of peole here have no idea what they are talking about when they speka about interest rates

I'd say you have no idea about what's defined by 'basic worker rights'

I do know I appreciate the rights my parents and grand parents have fought for over the years and I wish to continue receiving there benefits. If you don't sure vote Liberal but don't come crying when you loose them.

Hahaha the fear/scare campaign you buy into about IR reform is rediculous.

You still negotiate for your contract, and no company can afford to have all of it's workers quit, and thats the reality. (and yes, you can push for GROUP contracts). And there ARE minimums built in.

don't quote "nieve liberals" if you're just going to recite "nieve labor" rhetoric your self (aimed at obes and cpato).

i love how political discussions on qgl, turn rational posters into IRRATIONAL FANBOI posters

This my one and only account on QGL and I have had it for ages. I just didn't post much in the past.

If you call a 27 year veteran of the computer industry whose been developing software since before microcomputers came about (ie when there was only mainframes and minis) and playing computer games since text adventure on a black and white text only tty terminal running at 9600 baud a noob, then noob I am.

wow. you really must be a fat bastard

i played zork and hitch hikers guide to the galaxy too!

neato

looking at wind/solar power but i this far to expensive to implement... wouldn't happen...

It's not expensive idiot and labor will show you how once they are elected.

Ever heard of opening a s*** load of uranium mines. Then sell that back to the people who actually need nuclear power.

Australia only needs a very large setup of solar panels to supply power to the whole nation. We have so much unused space in the middle of no where!

Some nations need nuclear power. We don't.

i played zork and hitch hikers guide to the galaxy too!

It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.

nieve

1. never accused anyone of being "nieve"
2. its naive

And there ARE minimums built in

Not really, in fact they are going back to put them in, because of poor public perception. What is protected atm ? they can get you to sign away just about everything. And employers can abuse that with people who don't know their value, or are in a tight situation, or are generally gullible. Remember that case in the US where some chick at a Maccas stripped and danced and got fondled by some dirty old manager to try and keep her job (because the boss said she had to)? ... well you don't think the kids will believe "an adult" when they get told you have to sign this to work here" ?

Why do you think employers like the new IR ? because it is cheaper for them, ie. they are paying workers less or getting more for the same. Which has to mean the workers are worse off. Its not rocket science.

Well Obes, you have to be naive to think that ALL workers are worse off.

All your f***ing idiots who are saying you are better off under Liberal with families have no f***ing clue.

Then when you want to start a family ill laugh at you while you struggle like all the working class is at the moment under this morons laws.

All these nieve Liberal supporters.

When you no longer get your:
- 4 weeks anual leave a year
- 10 days sick leave
- anual leave loading
- compassionate leave
- berievement leave
- 7hr 21 days in a gov job
- toil
- Over time
- penality rates
- pay rises
- meal allowences
- and other basic worker rights

come back to these forums with a clue. Keeping Liberal in power will make you powerless in your work place and a sucker to their conditions.

Absolutely correct! ^^

Like Spook or someone mentioned earlier. How the hell is a family meant to cope when their maternity leave is taken away. Im not talking about paid but leave. Should you be fired and not have a job to go back to when you decide to have a child? Absolutely f***ing not. Your job should be secure (just like it used to be).

Being a son of a Union Secretary im constantly hearing about cases where the current laws are absolutely being abused by money hungry grubs! It's bulls*** and its making it too hard for families to cope.

Your arguments fail just like labor do, you bash with out providing an actual different POV/Alternative.

You gotta be f***ing kidding me. You reckon an opposition party doesn't provide alternatives? f***ing read a little would you. Whats the point of having an opposition if it doesn't provide alternatives. Wake up to yourself moron.

Being a son of a Union Secretary

ahhh.. makes sense now.

kinda like how the kids of white supremists grow up hating black people too :(

nation of leeching lazy assed f***ers

Like Spook or someone mentioned earlier. How the hell is a family meant to cope when their maternity leave is taken away. Im not talking about paid but leave. Should you be fired and not have a job to go back to when you decide to have a child? Absolutely f***ing not. Your job should be secure (just like it used to be).

That's protected under unfair dismissal laws, which are still intact, and will never be changed. And the right to 12 months unpaid maternity leave is not under attack either.

Being a son of a Union Secretary im constantly hearing about cases where the current laws are absolutely being abused by money hungry grubs! It's bulls*** and its making it too hard for families to cope.

well then one would think that you would atleast get the above right.

You gotta be f***ing kidding me. You reckon an opposition party doesn't provide alternatives? f***ing read a little would you. Whats the point of having an opposition if it doesn't provide alternatives. Wake up to yourself moron.

Maybe you should wake up, but then, the fact that you haven't really speaks for it self. My comment is that labor don't put forth an alternative, or a different point of view, or show any GENUINE policy other than "not what the liberals are doing" which isn't policy it's just random criticism. You're just another guy on the bench on the oposite team, a team yet to walk out to the coin toss.

I should point out that my criticism of federal labor stand for state liberal/nationals here in queensland. It's all well and good to pounce on the oposition when they cock up, but if you don't run as a party with your own policies then people can't vote FOR you, they can only vote AGAINST the other guy. You need both to win.

I am 100% with you Giri. Except on the QLD Lib/Nat, they actually don't have any policies... I mean, I don't even know who the leader is these days.

It's great to want to fight for so many employment protections and entitlements. Fight for them from the dole queue because enforcing rigid employment conditions will dampen employment. I note that the first thin the new French President will be doing is repealing th e 35 hour working week because he has realised just how f***ing stupid all these artificial barriers to productivity are.

It is a real fantasy thatv a bunch of union guys just sit down the pub dreaming up all these leave entitlements and say yeah make the boss pay this, th is and this - nevermind how the boss is going to AFFORD it.

Be very afraid of the union/mafia that will be running Australia if Rudd wins. You need only remember back to pre-1998 and the strictly regulated wharves. the management couldn't take a s*** without a union organiser's permission - thankfully that is gone now and the wharves have achieved massive productivity gains.

I can't believe Australia really wants a return to the bad ol' days of no union ticket no job.

PS I drew something for you Keating fabois.

http://img254.imageshack.us/img254/5672/aussiedebtkeatingdh4.jpg

That's protected under unfair dismissal laws, which are still intact, and will never be changed. And the right to 12 months unpaid maternity leave is not under attack either.

1. Yes it is under attack. It can be taken away with individual contracts. DAH

2. Get a f***ing clue. Unfair Dismissal has been abolished for companies with less then 100 employees. What about them!

http://www.rightsatwork.com.au/thefacts/unfairdismissal.pdf

Bottom line is. If a boss at the moment wants to fire someone for any reason. They pretty much can.

it's funny that you have actually degenerated so far that you think that's a bad thing

employers generally hire someone because they need something done...
people don't just go around firing people for fun, they'll have to replace that person anyway. or if they don't, then that job was redundant.

tough tits, find a new job. unless unemployment suddenly spikes your theory of "you'll get fired like THAT!~!!" seems a bit exagerated.

it's funny that you have actually degenerated so far that you think that's a bad thing

Who is this to?

ahhh.. makes sense now.

kinda like how the kids of white supremists grow up hating black people too :(

Yup everyone grows up exactly the same as their parents. Your mind must be hard at work to get that one out.

Sorry Reloaded, we pay you too much. Johnny here can do your job for half the amount. You are fired!

Your conditions at work may be alright now, and still maybe alright next year, but come 2, 3, 4 or even 5 yearsdown the track when you get employeed as a casual and not a ful ltime emloyee because your employeer can do that to you. That is when you will be crying.

Employer: Sorry your casual you can't take holidays then, if you do you won't have a job to come back to. Ohh yea your casual so we aren't going to pay you while you are on holidays. Yes you may work here 40 hours a week acting like a full time employee, you still are casual and we don't like employeeing ful ltiem or part time staff. They are just a headache.


Bank: Sorry you are a casual employee so we cannot grant you that house loan. Yes you may have been working there for 2 years but you are still too much of a risk. We can still however offer you this significantly higher interest rate high risk loan if you are interested?

Employer: Sorry we don't believe that parents are allowed to look after their chilren at home when they are sick. Don't come back to work tomorrow.

ahhh.. makes sense now.

kinda like how the kids of white supremists grow up hating black people too :(



Yup everyone grows up exactly the same as their parents. Your mind must be hard at work to get that one out.

Um... You've obviously influenced by your Father's beliefs... Don't even try to deny it. Everybody is.

Sorry Reloaded, we pay you too much. Johnny here can do your job for half the amount. You are fired!

That is called productivity you fool. Tenders and contractors get shafted like this all the time. It's called business. Farmer's get told their silos of produce are worth nothing because brazil had a bumper crop, sorry plough it back into the field and try again next year.

To succeed you must be nimble and flexible, or perish. What is so f***ing hard to understand about this you job-for-life softcocks?

If there is someone happy to work for half what my employer is paying me, good on them. I'll say goodbye and work somewhere else.

I'm of the opinion that if the work conditions are s***, you will work like s***. I'm fairly sure managers clued onto this shortly after the industrial revolution :p

if you're not doing a very good job, or being counter-productive to the growth of the company - why shouldn't a boss be able to give you the heave-ho?

I refuse to believe that every boss is a c***. Thats why the Unions arguments have just bored me too tears. They are living in the past and need to understand this. And if your boss is a c*** just steal as much s*** as you can.

You can still seek a legal remedy if your employment has been ‘unlawfully terminated.’ This involves
being sacked on the basis of prohibited grounds – like discrimination on the basis of race, sex, age,
pregnancy or family responsibility.

All employees keep right to claim unlawful dismissal, if they are sacked on the basis of discriminatory grounds such as race, religion, gender, pregnancy and union or political affiliation.

My bad for terminology. So you still can't be DISCRIMINATED against. ie for being pregnant. Which is what most of you would be trying to failsafe your self under unfair dismissal for anyway.

The Government’s new laws state five conditions will form the minimum standard for all wage agreements:



A minimum wage based on job classification starting at $484 a week.
Four weeks' paid annual leave, of which two weeks can be cashed out at the request of an employee.
Paid personal/carer's leave, including sick leave, of 10 days a year, plus a further two days of unpaid carer's leave if you have exhausted all your paid leave.
Parental leave of up to 52 weeks unpaid after the birth or adoption of a child for the primary caregiver.
A standard working week of 38 hours, averaged over a year, but not tightly enforced.

Quoted from your own site.

The days of the unions are numbered and the dodgy union wankers are just worried that they might actually have to get jobs, and work for their money. At the moment they just travel from workplace to workplace inciting rebellion and hurting productivity and growth.

Unions have no place in an educated western society of the 21st century.

We should settle things in parliament like they do in Taiwan.


hahaha also this is probably the best s*** I've ever seen

Some of you are one-eyed for whatever reason will only vote one way (probably cos that's what mummy and daddy told you to, some of you because it fiscally suits you). And you automatically assume that others are that way too.

Well its not the case. For instance ...

I can't stand the current QLD Labor party. Goss yeah I had time for him, he got thrown out because of some stupid koalas (that aren't even endangered) and a road we actually needed (still need). But unfortunately their is no state opposition, Quinn was ok, except I had him as a teacher and thought he was a slacker as a teacher (used to sit in the corner reading a newspaper while we were told to do typing tutor).

Locally "Can do" is actually doing ok.

I personally don't like what Howard has done, he has divided the country on pretty much every issue that has come up. And I haven't personally liked any of his main policy/legislation, except for his work on super... that is good (despite the fact I won't be getting jack out of it). Sure we have big surpluses but big deal its being burnt on baby and grey nomads.

And I am not a huge Rudd fan either. If I had the choice I'd be vote 1 Joe Hockey (as long as he promised to revisit IR).

Um... You've obviously influenced by your Father's beliefs... Don't even try to deny it. Everybody is.

I don't recall saying I wasn't.

Quoted from your own site.

Thanks for pointing out. Too let you know I don't agree with all those minimums. You may.

you job-for-life softcocks

i love you kevin

Dear Squatters,

MEDIA RELEASE FROM THE LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION, KEVIN RUDD MP


Tonight’s federal Budget was an impressive, responsible document. We congratulate the Government on its balanced approach to financial management of the Australian economy. Whilst there are some aspects of the Budget which lacked equity, and there was a startling absence of any meaningful action on climate change or fast broadband access for all Australians, its general direction is consistent with the approach Labor would take if elected. We applaud the Government’s belated recognition of the needs of the tertiary-education sector, and we commit to continuing and building on the innovative university-endowment policy announced by the Treasurer tonight.


Just because we are in Opposition does not mean that we feel compelled to automatically oppose everything the Government does, nor does it mean that we are unable to acknowledge responsible governance when we see it. We do not believe we must always be seen as “kneejerk knockers”.


We remain convinced, however, that Labor would be a better and more forward-thinking alternative for all Australians, and if we are elected at the next federal election we commit to continuing the Government’s responsible approach as well as adding a fresh, innovative and inclusive approach.


Kevin Rudd

I'm not sure if he was giving a complete response but he should have let us know some of the fresh and innovative things that would be different.

its so hypocritical that the opponents of the IR laws claim that the 'battlers' have been screwed, they've lost their rights etc.

what about the rights of the unemployed? imposing minimums like Labor want to do basically increases the cost of labour, which causes demand for labour to fall, which causes unemployment to rise... so Labour claim they are helping the little guy but they screw the littlest guy of all - the unemployed.

that was a crikey send up from today's edition

CaPt0 (pg 6):
- 4 weeks anual leave a year
- 10 days sick leave

Wow, Thank god for my Workplace Agreement then. If thats all you get, maybe seek a better job? Or better contract.

(Would of Replied earlier, but Work text filter blocks like 95% of QGL threads >.>)

Thanks for pointing out. Too let you know I don't agree with all those minimums. You may.

You think an unqualified, inexperienced wanker off the street should earn as much as professionals?
Casual/part-time at Coles can make more then that Minimum anyway.
If you cant, you don't deserve more IMO.

the only people that should be upset about the relaxation of unfair dismissal laws are people who are incompetent.

perhaps if you weren't so useless your boss wouldn't find it so easy to fire you. hey lucky for you unemployment is that low you can find yourself another job to be completely useless at.

the idea that an employer should be forced to keep an employee against his/her will has no justification at all

the idea that an employer should be forced to keep an employee against his/her will has no justification at all

Unfair dismissal laws have nothing to do with if the person is competent or incompetent.

Sure if someones s*** and not doing what the employer needs then good bye.

The laws were there to protect people who were dealt with harshly, unjustly or unfairly. Not the incompetent.

Yeah you may be good at your job but still get f***ed by a******s.

See, there's three kinds of people: dicks, pussies, and a******s. Pussies think everyone can get along, and dicks just want to f*** all the time without thinking it through. But then you got your a******s. And all the a******s want us to s*** all over everything! So, pussies may get mad at dicks once in a while, because pussies get f***ed by dicks. But dicks also f*** a******s. And if they didn't f*** the a******s, you know what you'd get? You'd get your dick and your pussy all covered in s***!

that doesn't explain how you'd get f***ed by a******s

i cant wait to hear about this, it sounds hawt!

that doesn't explain how you'd get f***ed by a******s

Just picture the goatse man lowering himself over your head ans swallowing you, brown holes being lighter in color than black holes, the teleportation may be only a short distance.

On a lighter note, has anyone ever checked out some of the names of former parties that are now de-registered? Frankly i would have been a firm supporter of the Australian Recreation and Fishing Party or the Lower Excise Fuel and Beer Party.

Link

The Help End Marijuana Prohibition was registered on 07 February 2000 and deregistered on 27 December 2006.

Wow, Lasted almost 6 years, thats a pretty good effort.
One Nation was only 2 years.

I'm going to vote for goat.

harden up australia

Yeah we should be able to vote for a dictatorship i reckon.

That is called productivity you fool. To succeed you must be nimble and flexible, or perish. What is so f***ing hard to understand about this you job-for-life softcocks?

When your all growed up and spent more than ten minutes in the real world, let us know how wonderful your time was competeing in Chinese style labour markets.



last edited by C0deBasher at 07:31:31 10/May/07

why don't you just let us know right now

To those kiddies that don't understand why unfair dismissal laws are important.

I have seen a woman handed 3 back dated poor performance things and told she was leaving for poor performance, when in reality it was because they found out she was pregnant. And they didn't want to deal with a years unpaid annual leave. And this woman was good at her job, she had been head-hunted from our department because she was that good. It actually worked out well for her in the end as one of the companies that dealt with that company found out and employed her on the spot.

That's crap. And that was the old laws ... with the old "protections", now they are gone and she could have been fired with no reason given at all.

Australia has long service leave, its payable after 7.5 years if you get fired etc, can take it at 10. A guy who is awesome at his job has a penny pinching prick of a boss/CFO works out s*** this guy is at 7.4 years.... bam fired! not because he bad at his job or anything but because there is a 6 or 7 weeks pay they can save.

Don't assume all bosses are good or fair. There are some really useless/bad ones.

ps. don't read anything into the fact that both me and capt0 are concerned about the need to protect workers from s*** bosses, and have worked supporting a certain organisation.

try to see past your own nose obes

I have seen a woman handed 3 back dated poor performance things and told she was leaving for poor performance, when in reality it was because they found out she was pregnant. And they didn't want to deal with a years unpaid annual leave. And this woman was good at her job, she had been head-hunted from our department because she was that good. It actually worked out well for her in the end as one of the companies that dealt with that company found out and employed her on the spot.

So you're saying that she was discriminated against and would sue them under discrimination laws?

Both your cases would be discrimination obes, and would proceed under that.

Your word versus and employer giri ... And a pregnant woman doesn't want the stress of laywers and s***.
Girl : "You are firing me because I told you I am pregnant and those letters are falsified"
Boss : "No I didn't you are no good"

That's why unions can be good, they can provide the advice and backing for helping in that sort of situation. Its also why regular performance reviews are good for both the employer and employee.

After reading this thread I see no real alternative than to vote Family First.

as even your example shows, if you are good at your job you really have nothing to worry about. If your boss is an ass, you will be picked up by someone who recgonises your value.

with an unemployment rate of 4.4%, it isn't like there isn't a heap of employers looking for employable people atm.

the problem i have with labor's proposals is they want to roll back the clock on the laws weither the people employed under AWAs and individual contracts want them or not.

they also want non-union members to pay a fee to the union for any rate of pay they collectivily bargin with the employer that is greater then the award.

so you could end up in a senario where you were on a salary/wage greater then the award on an AWA/IC, Labor come in and negate your agreement, the unions come in and negotiate a salary/wage and then because you are not a union member you have to pay a fee.

they have made this policy on the run while being poked by the unions from behind.

edit: added un

last edited by ara at 15:27:55 10/May/07

so in other words obes, you have no idea whether or not that's the real reason she was fired - you're just making assumptions and using that as the basis of your argument that employers should have to carry employees instead of just pay them in return for work.

I think your energy would be better expended on a far more real and prevelant matter like ensuring people don't have to do overtime for free. In fact I demand you expend your energy on this cause instead of one of your own choosing.

unemployment rate ara :)

:(
I am expected to do overtime for free

I'll never have anything but an individual work contract, I honestly can't see the problem. Worst you can do is minimum wage for a job, if you don't like it then figure out how to negotiate a different deal / get better job.

If you're good at it and valued then you're not just going to get fired for the hell of it. If you are fired by some d******* for no reason then odds are you'd prefer to be not working with them anyway.

Same deal with maternity leave, if you're valued, you'll be had back. If you're mediocre then why should a small company have to take you back?

I've seen two very good examples under the old system of a small business trying to get rid of a problematic employees, and although it worked out ok it could have been very very difficult if they put up a fight. Meanwhile these people are sucking up resources and money that is needed elsewhere, and you can't get rid of them until the long list of boxes is ticked.

I am currently and always have been on 2 weeks notice both ways with my employers, I'm not worried as I'm not easily replaceable & quite good at what I do.

When your all growed up and spent more than ten minutes in the real world, let us know how wonderful your time was competeing [sic] in Chinese style labour markets.

Well I own and run a $15million business as contractor for the Commonwealth government, in a sector which increases its funding each year by 2.5% whilst wages and direct costs increase by more than 4% per year. You know where the other 1.5% comes from - efficiency, cost cutting, restructuring via AWAs!

As for 10 mins, lol. I repeat, man the f*** up. Australian employees are the biggest softcocks. We have had it so good for so long, now the big world of global competition kicks in and we have individual contracts and agree to trade off our precious 3x5min rest pauses or whatever other f***en antiquated bs award condition you want to moan about and its then end of the world.

Don't forget the conditions are being traded off and if some sectors have been overpaid under the award system tough s***. You can't make an award that everyone must pay $X for a Commodore, you let the market figure it out. When it comes down to it labour is a commodity which can only be paid what it is worth, not what and IRC determines it's worth.

The whole of Australia, business, agriculture, employees, charities, government, community organisations EVERYONE is being milked slowly by globalisation. If you think you can build a wall around Australia and enjoy your 64 page award filled with union goodies then think again.

Anyone who thinks you can dream up a Christmas wish list of fantastical employment conditions and not jeopardise the employment prospects in that industry must seriously have a screw loose.

last edited by infi at 16:47:23 10/May/07

Don't forget the conditions are being traded off and if some sectors have been overpaid under the award system tough s***. You can't make an award that everyone must pay $X for a Commodore, you let the market figure it out. When it comes down to it labour is a commodity which can only be paid what it is worth, not what and IRC determines it's worth.

Which is why your quality of life is pretty much based on your education and/or skills.

and that ain't rocket science right there.

in my opinion it's based more on attitude/outlook than education and possibly even skillset

So if you're an unskilled bogan, get paid what you're worth... if you can be replaced for cheaper why would they keep you?

Unlike some of you maybe i can comment from "both" sides of this discussion. I have been an employee and as a small business owner, i have had a few employees

My experiences of the Unions....

As an employee i was supposedly under the auspices of the FCU, that powerhouse of union inaction and innatentiveness that governs the clerical staff of Australia!
I had been in the job for some 5 years when one day this guy turns up and asks why we arent in the Union as apparently the company i worked for was a "closed shop".
Needless to say myself and several other staff members firstly asked "who the hell are you?!" and secondly "who says this is a closed shop?"!

This fine fellow then proceeded to advise us that he had been working tirelessly for the rank and file of the union and we could thank them for all the recent improvements in our work standard of living etc... (what improvements? we hadnt had any changes to our award at this stage for like 8 years :P)

We were then advised that we would have been told that it was a closed shop
and as such had to pay up not only the current union fees, but all the OUTSTANDING union fees for the past years we had been there.

So i immediately advised said union rep that i had not been informed of any such conditions and therefore as it was NOT a condition of employment he could take a leap of a cliff sans parachute. The other members of staff quickly followed suit and made similar suggestions of varying practicality to do with his bodily orifices

Thus thwarted he went to the Manager and advised him that unless we all joined etc he would call a strike and black ban the company....
So the Manager came to us and begged us to all join up, and nevertheless despite his pleas, we chose not to do so.

At this time i also contacted one of the Government departments that dealt with such things (who's name escapes me at this time) so confirmed we had no reason to join if it hadnt been specified as well as some other interesting and salient information

Long story short at this point, we continued to resist the exhortations of the Union rep and the boss, who in the end gave us all a nominal pay rise and then used that pay rise to fund the payments to the Union.

Funny thing is that i then used the other information i had received to choose to be a "objecter" and have all my union fees paid to a registered charity... and not a thing the union could do about it :)


My experiences of the unions - part 2

Imagine finding out that the Unions actually picketed the wharves etc to deny the army the ability to supply their troops fighting the required war materiels?
This is not a one off situation, in both ww2 and the vietnam war and again apparently just recently, so Unionists have refused to allow loading for ships destined to supply our (australian) troops fighting in which ever theater of war they were in.
Sorry but that is just about as low as u can get... wether u agree with a governments reason to go to war or not, to deny the guys that are actually sent there the ability to defend themselves etc is a bloody low scum act


My experiences of the unions - part 3

Rolling blackouts for months on end, culminating with Sequeb guys striking on the friday before a long weekend because they want 3leaf toilet paper instead of the 2leaf they usually get in the depot....


I could go on with this but u get the point by now, im not enamoured of the unions and their actions both past and present. Currently i see them attempting to regains some relevance in a society that has moved past the need to have them. Sure Unions had a place in the past, but every thing has changed (as others have noted here) and the drive globally for efficiencies at all levels, the lower unemployment etc have made unions largely redundant

I was never very Union oriented and my interaction with same to-date has never shown me that they have any value.


As an employer, all i can remember is that keeping staff was a pain. Above award wages and good working conditions (im not a prick of a boss) just wasnt enough to get 1) reliable employees who would turn up when rostered etc, 2) employees who were honest, 3) employees who would actually follow a dress code, 4) employees who werent brain dead, ... bleh lets just say that in the retail industry, finding and keeping employees was a complete pain in the ass.

Oh... and i tell u that when u catch ur staff stealing, red handed, admitting it with 4 witnesses.... dont bother phoning the police, or sacking them for the theft....

Just find another reason or 3 to get rid of them and fire them.
The system is so skewed in favour of teh employees, no matter how bad they are that its useless to even attempt to deal with it thru the appropriate means


Oh and as a business owner, the LAST thing u want is to be changing staff
It costs so much to get them trained to the level that they are productive etc that changing them is the very last thing u want.
Ideally u want them forever so that u dont have to go thru all that lack of output and lack of skill :)

All this talk of ppl getting sacked for no reason... im not saying it wont happen, but by and by, most employers want to keep their staff as its too expensive to do anything else

last edited by Agamemnon at 17:18:11 10/May/07

My experiences of the unions - part 3

Rolling blackouts for months on end, culminating with Sequeb guys striking on the friday before a long weekend because they want 3leaf toilet paper instead of the 2leaf they usually get in the depot....

f*** YOU, that was johs (one of the worst politicians australia has ever seen)fault and you know it

how is joh worse than beattie - joh built stuff.

last edited by infi at 17:29:51 10/May/07

^f***ing amen. unions for the lose.

joh was a corrupt old fool

beattie is awesome!

he can win without cheating and seems to honestly care for qld, joh only cared for what he could get for
a) himself
b) his family
c) farmers

Australia has long service leave, its payable after 7.5 years if you get fired etc, can take it at 10. A guy who is awesome at his job has a penny pinching prick of a boss/CFO works out s*** this guy is at 7.4 years.... bam fired! not because he bad at his job or anything but because there is a 6 or 7 weeks pay they can save.

As bad as that is, its not going to happen. If the guy is awesome at his job his boss isn't going to fire him after 7.5 years to save 7 weeks pay. A good employee is worth a lot more than that and any good employer knows that.

On the other side of the coin is the useless c***s who are fired for being useless, then kick up a stink for getting the arse and end up getting a few grand for their trouble. (And this does happen. A lot.)

Agamemnon, haha I feel sorry for your long post.

For one I don't even beleive your first story. Someone coming in asking you for money... come on. Has to be more to it then that. "Oh hey guys im joe blog you owe me 50 bucks".

Your 3 experiences didnt sway or move me at all. It was just a big old rant because you had a s*** delegate.

dynamite you don't really know much about the history of unions in australia do you...

yeah but what has beattie built?

haha dynamite, noob at life

I've worked on several building sites where the _exact_ same thing has happened as desribed by Agamemnon. other people working with me had seen it plenty of times before in other instances

Agamemnon: reminds me of when i was working on a construction site a few years back. Was just lagging (sound proofing) waste pipes in an apartment block. Real f***en bludgy work.

We weren't in any union so of course the unions find out and send everyone out. Yay the whole site is striking cause of us 3 blokes don't we feel like pricks.

It was at the point where the god damn union reps were fighting over us. The plumbers union wanted us and were telling us oh you guys have to join the plumbers union - you're plumbers assistants and should be on something like $33 / hour.

I mean even we knew that was bulls*** and there was no way the boss could afford to pay us that amount for the s*** kicker work and almost had to let us all go.

Ended up sorting it out and was getting about $18 / hour which to me is better than no bux :P

Sigh.

Obviously it was the Employers fault because he did not notify his employees it was a closed shop. They should go rant at him.

Hense why I dont even beleive the union delegate was so hard in demanding money from the employees. He would be prominently asking the boss.

Unions are there to help people. Not to steal money.

My experiences of the unions - part 3

Rolling blackouts for months on end, culminating with Sequeb guys striking on the friday before a long weekend because they want 3leaf toilet paper instead of the 2leaf they usually get in the depot....


f*** YOU, that was johs (one of the worst politicians australia has ever seen)fault and you know it

Mate you are entitled to your opinion about Joh and that particular season of union idiocy.... but i lived it and better yet, has a friend who was a seqeb linesman who used to boast about all the s*** they pulled to get more pay, long weekends etc etc. It was a disgrace and love Joh or not, he had the cojones to fix those f'n idiots in that union.


And i agree... Joh did more for the growth of qld than any of these recent "lilly livered, protect my superannuation at all costs, pander to the vocal minority, lefty, socialist" politicians of the last 10 years or so.
(actually dont mind beattie but he has gotten away with a fair bit thanks to some fast talking, a s***ty opposition and a labor oriented media)

has a friend who was a seqeb linesman who used to boast about all the s*** they pulled to get more pay

So when the poor get rich the rich get angry?

Well I own and run a $15million business as contractor for the Commonwealth government, in a sector which increases its funding each year by 2.5% whilst wages and direct costs increase by more than 4% per year. You know where the other 1.5% comes from - efficiency, cost cutting, restructuring via AWAs!

In otherwords, the fact is, your business is not growing (in real terms) according to your projected growth in business and you can only expect to keep level with inflation and nothing more and the only way to keep this occurring is by reducing working conditions.

Good one Einstein. So one day it is going to be probably become extinct when your services may no longer be required or the business market continues to only grow by 2.5% and seeing how you haven't diversified that when inflation rises above 4%, you will be f@cked.

So Infi are you the only stakeholder (i.e. shareholder) or are there others cause by the sound of it the return to stakeholdders doesn't seem to going anywhere as I said CPI is running close to 4% and therefore these stakeholders are not seeing any growth from their investment. In otherwords they're getting a s*** return from a business no longer growing their investment in real terms. How do you go at the AGM when you tell them this? Do they grab you by the balls and squeeze in the event they may be able to get more out of you?

Gee even putting their money into a bank account would generate a higher return than that. What a crap investment.

Can we also expect when your business is no longer worth investing in you will retrain and start at the bottom again and work yourself up the ladder and hopefully by 95 you may be earning the same as you did when you were 45. Or are you intending to do a Jodie Rich and pay yourself a hefty fee before the s*** hits the fan and then do a runner.

Now based on what you have said bird-brain my only conclusion is you're a pathetic business manager. Somewhere in the likes of Jodie Rich of OneTel. Now don't tell me because you TURNOVER $15million you're some kind of hero cause at the end of the day what really counts for both you and your stakeholders is the net ROI, not gross turnover. All we have to do is look at the Onetel debacle as they were turning over billions but at the end of the day returning zilch on investment so $15million, $15billion means jack s*** unless there is a decent return.

If the market you're in is performing so crap why haven't you looked at diversifying your business or other possible means for generating new revenue streams cause a decent businessman would be.

Finally I don't count turnover as a success I count ROI and whether it's growing in real terms.

Just another thing, the Future Fund is not about investing in everybodies future it's about the Commonwealth Government being able to grow the funds to meet their liabilities to the Superannuation Entitlements of the Federal Public Service.

How many on this forum is a Federal Public Servant? If you're not then expect jack from the Future Fund.

So once again you're a d******* and while you're at it get me another Wild Turkey and Coke.

last edited by Some Fat Bastard at 19:14:17 10/May/07

Unions are there to help people. Not to steal money.

lol

some fat bastard, you are the dopiest c***

some fat bastard, you are the dopiest c***

Let me get this straight, you're contribution to the discussion has been one syllable witless replies or one line comebacks. I can now see how you think that's worthy of reading especially if down syndrome is your bag. :P

Oh! Wait a sec, that sounds like me. :)


last edited by Some Fat Bastard at 20:03:40 10/May/07

so you're (note the correct use of you're) implying that using more syllables, lines and making more edits when forming your own witless posts, qualifies them as more of a contribution to the discussion?

pro tip: comprehend the comments of infi that you quoted

Unions are there to help people. Not to steal money.

What is a close shop apart from a way for the unions to extort employees into joining a union to work there.

If the unions were there to help the people and people saw value in what they did, they wouldn't need to have closed shops to force people to join.

How many on this forum is a Federal Public Servant? If you're not then expect jack from the Future Fund.

Let me explain this for you. The future fund is setup NOW so we don't have to pay more LATER so, hence the future fund is going to benifit EVERYONE.

Obes - you are funny.

Sacking someone because they have long service coming up is quite a remarkably stupid suggestion. It costs a hell of alot more than 7 weeks pay to recruit and train a new person to replace a good staff member.

f*** the unions.... keep those bastards down !

has a friend who was a seqeb linesman who used to boast about all the s*** they pulled to get more pay

So when the poor get rich the rich get angry?

you are a dope. inefficency is no way to earn a pay rise.

oh i do plenty of other stuff (that um diversi thingy you talk about) and the ROI is very good. but government as a funding source will not sustain that ROI so one has got to think smart.

I sure as hell don't moan about how unfair it all is. And I tell the unions how it's gonna be not vice versa.

Now based on what you have said bird-brain my only conclusion is you're a pathetic business manager.

Yup I sure am crap... Thanks for the assessment!

Sacking someone because they have long service coming up is quite a remarkably stupid suggestion. It costs a hell of alot more than 7 weeks pay to recruit and train a new person to replace a good staff member.

Thats a very good point and also imagine the effect on morale it would have. That would be commercial suicide.

fyi, i was more angry than anyone about the seqeb blackouts

i had no tv for several weeks and was incensed with rage

probably why i hate joh so much right now

no tv for a few weeks can easily do lifelong damage

Sacking someone because they have long service coming up is quite a remarkably stupid suggestion. It costs a hell of alot more than 7 weeks pay to recruit and train a new person to replace a good staff member.

It's not even a "good" staff member, it's a veteran that has a decade of training.

Yeah 7 weeks, that will break the business... though 10+ years experience won't.

Although I agree there should still be some sort of laws (or at least leeway given in judicial decisions) regarding extremely unfair dismissals... is this just a case of discrimination though when it gets to the extreme??

imagine no BB boobies

hey spook mate, i dont understand why u are angry at Joh about that blackout stuff, when it was joh that broke the power of that union and locked out the workers, bought in outside labour to fix the problems etc and stopped all the blackouts?

i mean even if u hate him for anything else u have to give him credit for that surely? :)

so you're (note the correct use of you're) implying that using more syllables, lines and making more edits when forming your own witless posts, qualifies them as more of a contribution to the discussion?

pro tip: comprehend the comments of infi that you quoted

Mate you're a d*******. What a mealy mouthed reply. Typical of numbnuts when they’ve got nothing better to say.

A bit like "You're a prick", "No you are, but what am I?”. I suppose I should have not expected more.

He stated the sector funding (which to me and everyone else is another word for REVENUE) is increasing 2.5% per year yet overall costs increase by 4% to service that market/revenue stream. The whole sector which his company being a player in that market is incurring this 4% cost increase in operations in direct proportion to the market (which is what he is implying). They are the constraints (weakness/threats) his business has to conduct itself within.

Therefore using that small peanut you call a brain should help you deduce that he was implying the sector is only sustainable by cost cutting or increasing productivity as a means to even just stabilise the return on investment for the players in that market as sales growth is insufficient. He also has implied it was through the instrument of AWA's he achieved this and accordingly by his comment.

Australian employees are the biggest softcocks. We have had it so good for so long, now the big world of global competition kicks in and we have individual contracts and agree to trade off our precious 3x5min rest pauses or whatever other f***en antiquated bs award condition you want to moan about and its then end of the world.

And this comment

Don't forget the conditions are being traded off and if some sectors have been overpaid under the award system tough s***.

He should be allowed and able to achieve in part, and probably did, this cost cutting or productivity gain by reducing entitlements. I would have thought creating growth could have been better gained through DIVERSIFICATION, up skilling and more flexible work conditions which don’t mean loss of entitlements and being considered SOFT-COCKS by your employer, ready for the raping by using AWAs is not what I consider an employer who has any of my interests at heart if I was his employee.

I wonder if Infi would give up entitlements for no extra or less pay and be expected to produce more. I don’t think so.

When it comes to Infi I am on purpose being condescending. I fight s*** with dunny paper. In respect to the rest of his post about Globalisation he is right we have to be competitive, but not at the bottom end of the scale. When China and India become wealthier states the inadvertent result is a rise in wages and living standards, all through innovation and high tech industry. Obvious I would have thought. They wish to be where we are, not we should be trying to be where they are now. A short-sighted view if any there was.

As soon as we become competitive to their base labour rates our living standards can only drop, but when these stagnate, which it eventually will reach a point that can't be sustainable at any lower rate; the investment market will move to the next cheapest market to continue the goal for growth. Somewhere like Vietnam say and when that starts to rise, move on to the next lower labour rates re: Africa and so and so on. What have we provided for the future?

What we should be doing is what post-war Asian states like Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and Singapore have done. Investment by government into high tech industry and better education for everybody, not cut working conditions. Yes by all means create flexibility in the hope of higher productivity but we still need better safety nets than what was provided by WorstChoices. It has become obvious companies are using WorstChoices not only to increase productivity but also to reduce costs. Short-term gain in exchange for long term pain for the majority of workers. We all can’t be rocket scientists. We need long term solutions. Cutting conditions is not the answer. By putting in relevant safety nets to ensure security and prosperity for all, companies will be forced to use AWAs in innovative productive ways not in a manner that is short sighted and negative.
Besides, AWAs are also not instruments for innovation and further education. These Asian States have comparable labour rates to us now and they sure aren't sinking. Where's our Sonys, Samsungs, Panasonics, Asus etc. Oh that's right we're only good enough to dig holes in the bloody ground, own newspapers and gambling casinos. A typical Menzies economic philosophy, except this time it's not riding on the sheep’s back, but the miners, shock jocks and punters. Wow that's really long term thinking.

BTW you do know there are Unions in Taiwan, Japan, South Korea and Singapore, don’t you. Obviously, they’re all not evil and stifle economic growth.

Jim, you think you're such a bright spark how about I put this to you.

Have you ever opened your ears and eyes and used your profoundly great forum response skills in finding out how to gain Federal Government support for innovation in this country. The Federal body to oversee this is AusIndustry. Have you ever approached AusIndustry to garner support and funding for an innovative idea and hopefully propagate a new high tech industry in Australia? I bet not.

The maximum financial support obtainable through AusIndutry is $1.5million for any individual venture; the average is about $60,000. That's it. Now what are you going to produce from that, nothing. When you realise that, you then understand the only way to gain further funding is through the Private Venture Capital market because even the banks are s***house at providing financial support for innovation in this country.

FFS the Queensland State Development Department provides more cash then AusIndustry for innovative start-up business ventures and the hoops you have to jump through are less and they provide an atmosphere to foster this innovation through their Inqubator programme (Yes it's not spelt incubator which is the correct English spelling, it's Inqubator to highlight Q for Queensland, like a trademark).

Examples like Locatrix received $3million in state funding for their innovative start up venture. Who are Locatrix? They're the creator of Telstra's UandMe Location based service for mobile phones. They got this all from a bloody Labor State Government you all howl down as being more short-sighted than their Federal Counterpart but they saw the potential and funded it to the full amount required. AusIndustry did not.

We approached AusIndustry for such a thing and by the time we finished we couldn't but laugh about how pathetic they are and what they were offering. We have now sought and gained external Venture Capital from Singapore and South Africa. To be exact the Singaporean Government and a large Manufacturer in SA. I mean for christ sake now we're going to help fill their coffers as well as our own pockets instead of fostering and furthering Australian Industry and Innovation.

To give you a clue of what we asked for support from our Federal Government through AusIndustry, look at the new Nokia N95. Why do you think I know so much about the bloody GPS mapping application pre-loaded in it and the add-on services for phone to phone tracking and internet tracking? A world wide application that is now in production for the global market and not one bit of the product or any of its add-on services is produced in Australia yet part of it began as a seed here.

oh i do plenty of other stuff (that um diversi thingy you talk about) and the ROI is very good. but government as a funding source will not sustain that ROI so one has got to think smart.

So you confirm exactly what I said. The market you quoted which produced you a $15million per year turnover, which you stated was Federally funded is unsustainable for ROI growth over and above inflation so you needed to cut costs, restructure and improve efficiencies in other words (according to your subsequent rant) increase output for less entitlements just to generate zero net growth in following years. Thank you.

Only later did you say that you have diversified. If you have diversified and they're giving you such a great return then why have you needed to cut entitlements as part of your AWAs? Are what you have diversified into not applied to this federally funded venture. Is it outside of the function and scope of this original venture i.e. another venture which you solely benefit and not the employees or stakeholders of your original venture?

BTW am I supposed to be a mind reader about your diversi thingy when you stated no such thing in your post. But then again that wasn't your intention. It was to use your $15million turnover as an excuse to say "LOOK, LOOK, I AM SO MUCH f***ING SMARTER THAN YOU, SO STFU". Even Stefan turned over more than that and he AIN'T NO f***ING ROCKET SCIENTIST.

Sorry but I am afraid that just doesn't cut it with me.

...and for the record I'm a f***ing rich c***, but I don't need to sprout it as some way to prove my credibility for the s*** I dribble on a forum designed to serve f***ing gamers. Just because I'm rich and just because you're rich doesn't mean we both know all that goes on in the world and other people who don't hold yours or my POV are dumbs***s. Some maybe but not all and I don't consider Unions or Labor voters are all dumbs***s. Just like I don't consider all Liberal fanbois are dumbs***s either, Oh! Wait. Yes I do. :P

Now I'm friggin tired and rambling so I shall desist. If you can't make sense of what I have posted, then suck s*** for all I care.

This election is really about voting for Treasurer.

I mean most ppl even Lib lovers have had enough of Johnny Howard. He's had a good innings but we live in dynamic times and I think someone new is needed for the top job.

Therefore i reckon most ppl would give Kev a go.

However, I agree with most ppl that Peter Costello is the better choice with regards to the Treasury Position. I just dont have confidence in Swan.

CBF reading 12 pages. I just wanted to make a comment about the IR reforms etc. A lot of people have very negative feelings towards the employment changes brought about by the Howard government. Won't these reforms play into worker advantage in the coming decades? With our aging population, there are going to be more jobs than people soon.

heh you still don't get it some fat bastard
this is pretty funny, talk about a storm in a teacup. did you go back and read the post of infi's that you quoted? did you notice the yellow block of writing above it?


and to top off that entire pain-inducing, misguided ramble:

...and for the record I'm a f***ing rich c***, but I don't need to sprout it as some way to prove my credibility

that's classic

ok SFB so we Australians are just supposed to cherry pick the best most profitable industries to work in. all the labour intensive, low paying industries, we just shut them down cos we cannot compete with the Chinese etc. mate you have no f***en idea. Every day every business in every industry must find ways to operate with cheaper overheads. Labour is an overhead.

WorkChoices helps that to happen, the unions do not. All they care about is maximising pay rises for their members of the club.

we have to be as competitive as the next country in a global world.

So you confirm exactly what I said. The market you quoted which produced you a $15million per year turnover, which you stated was Federally funded is unsustainable for ROI growth over and above inflation so you needed to cut costs, restructure and improve efficiencies in other words (according to your subsequent rant) increase output for less entitlements just to generate zero net growth in following years. Thank you.

So are you saying all the contractors in this industry should resign and stop trying? Wrong, we try to get even more efficient faster.

I wonder if Infi would give up entitlements for no extra or less pay and be expected to produce more. I don’t think so.

I been there done that mate, as a grad, working 60 hour weeks for $30k. It's called give a little get a little and it's not rocket science. Then I left that c*** employer to get a better job.

The bottom line SFB is that all your protectionist ranting does not stop the fact that a flexible labour market allows more people to find jobs easier. Some people will get ripped off and shafted but that is life in general without that there would be no Today Tonight or ACA.

WorkChoices is to workers what RSVP.com. is to nerds, and myspace is to emos. Once you have the tools in place to allow more transactions to take place for lower cost, less fear of litigation and less bureaucracy, business will charge on in.

Under Rudd business will have their union organiser on speed dial to check every business decision is ok with the union. I bet you would like that.

last edited by infi at 08:04:42 11/May/07

nF, spidz and others .. you don't get it... You are applying your judgement to those of a bad/useless boss.

Not every boss out there is good.

What happens in the global market when there is no more room for growth? Do all majour business' require growth to sustain themselves?

growth is neverending, the potential for growth is unlimited.

growth is neverending, the potential for growth is unlimited

And there are different ways to do it.

heh you still don't get it some fat bastard
this is pretty funny, talk about a storm in a teacup. did you go back and read the post of infi's that you quoted? did you notice the yellow block of writing above it?

Friggin pathetic. Blah, blah, blah. At least you're true to form.

and to top off that entire pain-inducing, misguided ramble:

Blah, blah, blah. f***in pathetic.

that's classic

Blah, blah, blah. More of the same s***.

Kevin Rudd's $2.5 billion toolkit

Great idea. This would be absolutely great for high schooles. I know a s*** load of people I went to school with who would have taken up a trade in school and been ahead of the game in seconds.

Many many people just dont want to go to Uni young anymore. Would rather wait a few years or take up a trade. To be able to do this years earlier is pumping tradies into the country.

Great Idea. Hi5

"I did not come into this place tonight to outspend the Prime Minister, and I have not.

"Instead, I came here to offer an alternative plan for Australia's future."

last edited by dynamite at 10:05:43 11/May/07

...and for the record I'm a f***ing rich c***, but I don't need to sprout it as some way to prove my credibility

isn't this an example of sprouting it to prove credibility? otherwise, why did you say it at all.

I just read that Rudd will turn every secondary school into a trade college. This is kinda funny. Right now all the tradies are earning s***loads of money because of the shortage of skilled labour. If Rudd goes ahead then there's gonna be a flood of tradies in the next 5-10 years and they'll all be on s***e money again.

Doesn't worry me, but aren't the majority of labourers well, meant to be labor supporters?

I guess it's a good idea for the nation, but if i was a tradie then I'd hope like hell rudd doesn't win cos your pay packet will be cut in half in 10 years.

Man there are a lot of good corporate citizens on this board. It is just work and at the end of the day who f***ing cares. If you want to spend your life dedicated to making somebody else a lot more money then you go for it. While you do that I will work an honest days work for an honest weeks pay. I couldn't give a flying f*** about big or small business your job or mine. As Homer Said "another day another box of stolen pens".

Le Cock we have a major shortage of tradies going to be a long time before they are flooding.

Also more tradies more things can get done for Australia as well I guess. More built etc.

last edited by dynamite at 10:09:12 11/May/07

Great idea. This would be absolutely great for high schooles. I know a s*** load of people I went to school with who would have taken up a trade in school and been ahead of the game in seconds.

I don't know about the TAFE system in Queensland or how equipt your high schools are up there but the public school I went to was completely kitted out in all those areas. Furthermore, students who wanted to start trade certificates while at high school already could via OTEN. I know quite a few guys in my grade that did this and it was counted towards their HSC and TER.

But yeah, great idea. Pity like most of Labor's it wasn't new or their own.

Right now all the tradies are earning s***loads of money because of the shortage of skilled labour. If Rudd goes ahead then there's gonna be a flood of tradies in the next 5-10 years and they'll all be on s***e money again.

you make a very good point. the market and educational institutions are already well equipped to supply trades, it's just that the market did not expect the extent to which construction would boom in 2003 and we are still catching up. boom bust will happen here too as it does always.

Think back to 2001 with the GST, Australia didn't have enough accountant then and now they are oversupplied again.

Even today there is an article on 612 about how you cannot get a bore drilled for 12 months!

However the country will most certainly benefit from more tradies. To entice them to choose a trade over uni the salary has to be there to start with.

Ara for whatever reason there has been a move away from vocational based education at high schools in the last few years.

I don't know about the TAFE system in Queensland or how equipt your high schools are up there but the public school I went to was completely kitted out in all those areas. Furthermore, students who wanted to start trade certificates while at high school already could via OTEN. I know quite a few guys in my grade that did this and it was counted towards their HSC and TER.

My experience has been, if you're determined the majority of schools can easily arrange training.

Some people bludged Voc at our school, others got 1.5 years of hospitality apprenticeships and traineeships.

he stated the sector funding (which to me and everyone else is another word for REVENUE) is increasing 2.5% per year

seeing as he said he was a government contractor i would've thought it was obvious he meant government funding - no one else had problems comprehending it...

ps. that rich c*** comment was awesome dude, comedy gold.

yeah, it gave me a lol

yeah u know what gives me a lol s***head?

pieces of s*** like you who back Howard yet at the same time would be the last bloke to don a slouch and walk into battle. fkn stain.

keep talking out of your arse infi, you're good at it.

it gives ME a fkn LAWL c***.