JC Political Thread - For all things political Part 2

[Rufys]

What's the bet the ALP jumps on this bandwagon?

US lawmaker proposes tax on violent video games | Information, Gadgets, Mobile Phones News & Reviews | Herald Sun

[monkeys437]

So if you're not a fat child that gets bullied do you still pay the tax? Why don't they just cut the crap and say "we're going to tax video games because we're broke and running out of things to tax"

[DAKSTER]

Talk about making the wrong decision!!!

Fair Work orders pay rise for community sector - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

So you arent keen on the thought of a few more people making 80k annually for a difficult job? I guess you wouldnt care much, you say you dont know anyone who earns less than that.

I get what you're saying, its extra money spent. Many of these people are just as well qualified at their job and considerably harder working than you. Perhaps you need to be taxed more to make things fairer? That should balance the budget a little better.

[minux]

Dakster, what I am not keen on is a union armed FWA jacking up 41% payrises on an entire sector. That is ludicrous. Who will fund these pay rises eh? I can tell you now, it wont be the businesses, it will be peoples jobs that fund it.

I did laugh at you saying perhaps Rufys should be taxed more to make things fairer. Fairer on who? Those who havent done as well in life?

As the saying goes, socialism is great, right up until you run out of other peoples money.

[Rufys]

So you arent keen on the thought of a few more people making 80k annually for a difficult job? I guess you wouldnt care much, you say you dont know anyone who earns less than that.

I get what you're saying, its extra money spent. Many of these people are just as well qualified at their job and considerably harder working than you. Perhaps you need to be taxed more to make things fairer? That should balance the budget a little better.

You obviously don't get it. This will push the cost of the services they're providing higher. Meaning less people will be needed and jobs will be LOST!

It also sets a scary precedent that other employees could follow in order to be given massive pay increased by Fair Work Australia. This in turn pushes inflation up and makes the Australian labour market even more expensive, in a global market where Australian labour can't compete with foreign labour. So more jobs end up going overseas and even more people end up without a job. The government stops receiving as much tax revenue when unemployment goes up and have to pay more in welfare. That means the national debt goes up.

THAT is what I was thinking when I saw the Fair Work Australia outcome. BASIC ECONOMICS. Something Labor and their naive followers can't seem to grasp, ever!

If you want to earn more money, move into a job that pays more. Don't just expect to be paid more for the same job because you think what you're getting is unfair. There's always ALWAYS going to be someone else willing to do your job for the same money (or less) than you're on and they're likely to be more inclined to work harder than you too if yours is an attitude of entitlement.

[Rufys]

Get ready for the NSW flood levy...
Flood-hit NSW residents prepare to evacuate | News.com.au

[DAKSTER]

Hey, I agree the money has to come from somewhere. Most of these jobs are either government jobs or government subdisided though, so the loss of jobs theory just doesnt cut it.

Basic economics certainly dictates that what is spent in one place has to come from another place, agreed. However, the people we are discussing here are generally qualified, hard working individuals. In fact, I have no doubt that they work considerably harder than you.

If they do as you advocate, and move into another field, then there will be no-one to fill the gaps. There is already a shortage of suitably qualified people due to them doing exactly that. There are also shortages in many other industries for similiar reasons.

You guys need to remember the words you have all spoken before. If you pay peanuts, you get monkeys. This is not a socialist attitude, its a pragmatic one. These roles need to be filled. As you've said, if you dont get paid enough, you move on. These roles are not paid enough.

Minux, I totally agree that such a jump is pretty huge. Divide that 40% over the 8 years it is being phased in though, and its a 5% annual rise. After they get their 5%, they will get no more, they have struck their deal.

In 8 years time, I am willing to bet your own income will probably have climbed by a similar amount.

I hate unions, strikes, and the general thuggery tactics often employed by these groups. In this case, there has been no strike action, no thuggery, no holding the general public to ransom. All parties have agreed its a good thing. Even the libs have said, yeah sounds good but where are you going to get the cash from. Thats about as positive a response as you are likely to ever hear from the opposition.

The arbiter has made a decision, now its up to the government to apply it, and yes they will have to find money from somewhere.. over the next 8 years. If the arbiter decided to raise your pay, you sure as hell wouldnt turn it down, and you would be pretty peeved if for some reason you were told you couldnt have it because someone richer than you objected.

Basic economics... Is it cheaper to provide quality services to allow people to function at home, or is it cheaper to institutionalise people because they cannot care for themselves?
Is it cheaper to pay carers a better wage, or move all the services they provide into hospitals or hospices? Where are you going to get the staff to manage this extra load on the system?

I guess we need to start growing more peanuts, real fast.

[DAKSTER]

Get ready for the NSW flood levy...
Flood-hit NSW residents prepare to evacuate | News.com.au

On this subject, we agree.

I strongly object to the various handouts which have been given to people because they didnt bother taking out flood insurance. That includes governments... a levy is a compulsory handout taken from you without your consent.

This of course brings us back to Basic Economics though. If the infrastructure is damaged, the government has to find money from somewhere... in my view it should come from insurance companies, not levies. The various levels of government are under-insuring.

For individuals, in those areas which are prone to flooding and which the insurance companies will offer no insurance, perhaps some thought needs to be put into moving those populations to areas which are not flood prone.

If you live in an area thats prone to flooding, and you are aware you cant get insurance, move. If you can get insurance and you dont, tough cheese.

[Reaper]

Sigh.... ."There will be no carbon tax under a government I lead"...............................

Gillard's carbon tax gets wings | Adelaide Now

Why do I get the feeling this is the first of an avalanche of carbon price rises. I should take comfort that we are saving the world. Imagine how stupid we'd be if it made no difference at all

Reaper

[minux]

Sigh.... ."There will be no carbon tax under a government I lead"...............................

Gillard's carbon tax gets wings | Adelaide Now

Why do I get the feeling this is the first of an avalanche of carbon price rises. I should take comfort that we are saving the world. Imagine how stupid we'd be if it made no difference at all

Reaper

LOL,

"There will be no rain under a government I lead"
Australian Floods Feb 2012 - YouTube

Didn't the ALPs climate advisor tell us we wouldnt get anymore rain like this lol?

Oh wait I forgot floods AND droughts are part of global warming...heads I win tails you lose!

[Full Spectrum]

Reap, i don't think anyone's ever claimed they were going to turn black sheep into white sheep. Just slow the effect, because stopping it is impossible - lessoning the impact is plausible.

Qantas could have also bought those planes that promised 20% better fuel economy but didn't.

[Reaper]

Reap, i don't think anyone's ever claimed they were going to turn black sheep into white sheep.

Rubbish.
"There will be no carbon tax under a government I lead" = Black
Clean Engergy Bill October 2011 (Contains an explicit carbon tax) = White

Just slow the effect, because stopping it is impossible - lessoning the impact is plausible.

The express purpose of the bill is to lower Australia's contribution to global warming yet not once has the government quantified what effect the legislation will have. Further to that, *nobody* has addressed the carbon emitted by outsourcing our emissions via further exporting Australian manufacturing, not to mention the extra carbon emissions due to freighting all this stuff around the world.

Qantas could have also bought those planes that promised 20% better fuel economy but didn't.

Don't know anything about them. With fuel being such a huge cost for any airline, carbon tax or not, I'm guessing there must be a compelling reason why they didn't buy such a plane though.

Reaper

[Rufys]

Michelle Grattan gave me a laugh today...

The view from the back
February 3, 2012
OPINION (The Age)

Gillard's marginal-seat members fear for their political lives.

DEAR Julia,
Thanks for the invitation to us backbenchers to The Lodge barbecue on Sunday. We'll be ready for a snag and a chop, to say nothing of a drop of red, after that special caucus meeting, which could be character-building. Maybe the meeting's a good idea, but when you have a frightened party sitting on 30 per cent, talkshops can feed negative headlines and a media frenzy without yielding much.
Anyway I, as a struggling MP in a marginal seat, would find it hard to raise a delicate matter - let alone write it on the butcher's paper that one MP mentioned. That is, Julia: what should you should do, given your government looks cactus, your caucus is toey, and Kevin Rudd has a battering ram among the trees outside The Lodge. So here goes - me to you.
Advertisement: Story continues below
I know the leadership play depends primarily on the polls and is substantially in others' hands. But as I see it Julia, you have four options. To bring on an early vote. To soldier on, optimistic that the polls will change. To push ahead, even though you believe nothing will improve, determined to stay if you can hold Rudd at bay, because you want to add to your CV of achievements, even if this means more of us lose our seats. Or to set a time in your own mind when, if things are no better, you will step down to save some MPs like me.
Rushing at Rudd by inviting a challenge would, as you know, be very dangerous indeed. Anything could happen, but assuming you won, it would only be the start. Rudd would have to go to the backbench. It would be the classic two-stage nightmare, with another challenge always looming.
I presume the second option is where your head is at. Your nature is to grit your teeth and rely on things working out in the end. Last year, when the carbon tax dominated everything, you predicted opinions would change when people got used to it. Maybe this will happen - on that issue. But currently, even without the carbon tax on centre stage, you are in deepest trouble. My prediction, PM, as I am getting all that bad feedback about us - notably you - in the shopping centres and electorate functions, is that those polls are not going to jump any time soon towards that 40 per cent primary vote that would save us poor sods in the marginals.
You could also realise that it's all hopeless with the voters but dig in, if Rudd can't get the numbers, so as to implement or advance your agenda before you disappear into prime ministerial history. Be the one to bed down the carbon tax, get the budget back to surplus, push along plans on aged care and disability - even if at the end of it, MPs like me are crucified.
Very few leaders could bring themselves to take the fourth option: determining in your own mind (without sharing the thought, for then it would probably leak) that if there is no improvement you will stand aside for someone who might be a better vote winner. It is particularly unattractive when the transition would involve some chaos and you would be ceding the leadership to the man whom you knifed (so foolishly, it turned out).
As just a soldier in your ranks, Julia, I won't presume to prescribe what you should do, as this saga drags on. But let me tell you what the other troops are saying about our situation.
They don't expect anything to happen before the March 24 Queensland election. Yet such is the twitchy atmosphere that people aren't ruling out the possibility (forgive the cheap shot, PM, but who would rule out anything after your June 2010 coup?) Next week is the first of the parliamentary year; the following one is messy - it's Senate estimates, so not all the senators are in town. There are three other weeks, but two very close to the election.
You can be sure of one thing. The Rudd camp will be taking soundings when everyone is back in the hothouse. And the media will be in overdrive.
But as Rudd shows off his campaigning in the Queensland poll, most people are looking further on. (Incidentally, it's a bit of a laugh watching Rudd divide his time between trying to help out Anna and saving the world, but when you're Kevin you're everywhere.)
After the Queensland election there is a big gap until Federal Parliament sits again in May, for the budget. It's much harder for the leadership to come to a crunch when the MPs are not in Canberra, but the Rudd forces would not think it impossible if you continue to languish.
Before finishing, Julia, I must tell you how down we on the backbench are feeling about Labor's poor start to 2012. Leave aside the pokies compromise. (Many of the NSW and Queensland colleagues, who are so frightened of the clubs, love your sell-out of Andrew Wilkie. But some of us from other states are more critical of another broken promise.) We all despaired about that dreadful affair of your over-zealous staffer's action on Australia Day.
We do see your effort to make progress - especially this week's speech trying to grab some ground in the economic debate. But people have stopped listening to the good stuff, and the bad stuff keeps popping up.
Like, what was Simon Crean doing, flailing at Rudd? That just kicked along the talk and had every minister who wasn't hiding under his or her bed asked about the leadership. We presume Simon was freelancing when he said Rudd wasn't a team player and would never be leader again. We in marginal seats know Kevin's not a team player, though he's really nice when he comes to campaign for us. But never leader again? Would Simon really put his own money on that? Would you, Julia?

And I also had a chuckle at a potential reply from the PM in the comments section:

Dear Marginal Backbencher
Thank you for your wonderfall questions
Let me first tell you I am the Prime Minister of Australia
My first and only goal is to keep this job as long as i can, and i will do whatever it takes.
If you try to roll me and i lose i will simply resign from parliament and cause a by election. So you can say an earlier goodbye to your job.
I still have many more programs to implement that will provide funds to my comrades in the Union.
Please note that I already qualify for my tax payer funded pensions at my PM salary (sorry now even highr PM salary).
So look forward to your continue support, as i do believe you would like to be an MP for at least another two years. And suggest you get very cosy with the unions who could give you a job after the next election when you lose your seat.(as there will be many unemployed Labour MP fighting for these jobs)
PS I am the Prime Minister of Australia (wow i like saying that)

If you didn't know it was REAL LIFE Australia, you'd laugh it off as political satire.

From here: The view from the back

[Full Spectrum]

Reap, i don't think anyone's ever claimed they were going to turn black sheep into white sheep.

Rubbish.
"There will be no carbon tax under a government I lead" = Black
Clean Engergy Bill October 2011 (Contains an explicit carbon tax) = White

Just slow the effect, because stopping it is impossible - lessoning the impact is plausible.

The express purpose of the bill is to lower Australia's contribution to global warming yet not once has the government quantified what effect the legislation will have. Further to that, *nobody* has addressed the carbon emitted by outsourcing our emissions via further exporting Australian manufacturing, not to mention the extra carbon emissions due to freighting all this stuff around the world.

Qantas could have also bought those planes that promised 20% better fuel economy but didn't.

Don't know anything about them. With fuel being such a huge cost for any airline, carbon tax or not, I'm guessing there must be a compelling reason why they didn't buy such a plane though.

Reaper

And she changed her mind or her party did?. Can be that simple can't it be?.

They could go on averages once its working.
What's the impact in nz Europe with the tax's.

[nathanVY]

[Jesterarts]

Bob Brown Says Attacks on Gillard Sexist

Ah, I thought it was a while since Prime Minster Brown gave his opinion on something.

Personally, I think the media attacks on Gillard because it an incompetent idiot, rather than the fact she is a woman.

And if she wasn't white, then safe to say Brownie would be saying the attacks are racist... I'm half surprised he hasn't stated the media is attacking her because she is ginger...

[monkeys437]

Bob Brown Says Attacks on Gillard Sexist

Ah, I thought it was a while since Prime Minster Brown gave his opinion on something.

Personally, I think the media attacks on Gillard because it an incompetent idiot, rather than the fact she is a woman.

And if she wasn't white, then safe to say Brownie would be saying the attacks are racist... I'm half surprised he hasn't stated the media is attacking her because she is ginger...

Next time Abbott cops it from a female Journalist in the age I hope Prime Minister Brown accuses them of being sexist too

[Reaper]

And she changed her mind or her party did?. Can be that simple can't it be?.

Gillard/ALP are the one and the same. The ALP elevated Gillard to the position of Leader and gave her the authority to make pledges on the parties behalf in the lead up to the election. She was also authorized to negotiate on the parties behalf to form government. I don't see which bit of that can somehow absolve her of the commitments she made before the election. I don't know about you, but if I make an agreement with person A and then a better deal comes along (for me) with person B that means I have to reneg on the first deal then surely it's my bad luck. The fastest way to ruin your reputation, relationships and trust in business is to start reneg on deals.

They could go on averages once its working.
What's the impact in nz Europe with the tax's.

Try getting a job in NZ. As for Europe, the ETS system has all but collapsed. Of course the carbon tax is not responsible but Europe isn't travelling so well economically these days either. Both their carbon taxes are a fraction of what the cost will be in Australia.

Reaper

[Jesterarts]

Video - Rudd & Gillard - Somebody That I Used To Know - The Sydney Morning Herald

Not anything other than a laugh...

[monkeys437]

Call To Lift Dole


More great Ideas from this socialist government.

[Rufys]

Call To Lift Dole


More great Ideas from this socialist government.

They're renowned for vote buying though. No great surprise there.

[Rufys]

Obama administration, Brown(Gillard) Government... Same same..

[minux]

'We're talking about hell unleashed': whales sue Sea World

Can we PLEASSSSEEEEE have a law introduced that any PETA members are sterilised post haste?

What a bunch of ####ing inbred morons.

[c2105026]

'We're talking about hell unleashed': whales sue Sea World

Can we PLEASSSSEEEEE have a law introduced that any PETA members are sterilised post haste?

What a bunch of ####ing inbred morons.

Despite my green/left credentials.... don't get me started on PETA (or for that matter, veganism or animal rights movement)! There are members of the PETA board who have type 1 diabetes....their insulin, yep, was tested on animals. Don't like animal testing? Don't have any over the counter or perscription meds. Don't have any surgery. Medical research relies heavily on animal testing. I have previously experimented with a vegan diet for health reasons, but unless you cook eveything from scratch you can forget about getting all your nutrients and enough protein and Iron without either having a whole heap of overly processed junk or too many calories. Forget about going into a shoe store and getting quality footwear; all leather. Last saturday evening I killed more bugs with the VX driving back from canberra than I would have had head of livestock killed for my omnivore diet - compassionate veganism is in itself pointless (unless you don't drive, but then again trains and buses also probably kill a plethora of insects). If you are even veggo, speaking from experience, you can forget about having food outside the house at a cafe, takeaway or restraunt.

[Reaper]

Wow. I never thought I'd see the day when I agree with Doug Cameron. For once he's bang on the money.

"At the moment the surplus is important politically, I'm not going to deny that," he said. "But also important economically because you need to make sure we do bring the deficit back under control, that we do have a surplus budget.
"But not at any cost. Obviously if conditions deteriorate in the United States and Europe — I'm a Keynesian — I would rather protect jobs than protect the surplus."

Read more: Doug Cameron Says Surplus Should Not Come Before Jobs

The only problem is that I have zero confidence that Swan and Gillard have the skill nor judgement to have any idea what to do.

Reaper