Yeah, Vote {HARD} Labour.....NOT!

"Dr Sir John Howard, AC, WSCMoF"
<""Trollene.has.had.more.kook.outs.than.ive.had.hot.dinners\"@kangarooistan.com.au
.."> wrote in message news:4c63c3f3$0$11125$...

What do Americans have to do with anything you fucking retard?

 

Our local primary school is finally getting proper classrooms in place of
the demountables that were placed as a temporary solution about a decade ago
and I'm pretty happy about that. The pink-batt scheme was good in principle
but they fucked up the implementation, they should have rolled it out over a
longer period and made sure that the installers were existing, reputable
people. They left the gate open for shonks, that's where they fucked up.

Paying unemployed people 35k for 2 years in an exponentionally growing
problem is clearly a sound method for leading the country straight down the
gurgler.
A lot of infrastructure spending was needed to fix what had been neglected
by the Howard government for over a decade anyway. Granted they could have
spent it more wisely and thought out their schemes more thoroughly.

On the other hand the Liberals are scrooges and don't spend a dime on
essential infrastructure and services in the name of sound economic
management.
Ofcourse sound economic management means finding the right balance and
unfortunately neither of the major parties seem to be capable of doing that.

Just look at the fucking mess the Libs have created in the West at state
level. Economic mismanagement, cancelled essential projects, massive
increases in electricity and water prices... yet they still manage a
substantial surplus and they have just given themselves a 4+% payrise and
their entitlement claims have doubled.

 

It had a massive impact on Europe, whole countries have gone bust or close
to it. Portugal, Spain, Greece, UK, Italy and others.
The unemployment rate in Spain has doubled with an overall unemployment rate
of 20% and amongst young workers 40%. That's not sustainable and other
countries are in danger of the same.

And now it's even worse, that's the point.

LOL Noddy the economist has spoken... mate, you're clearly out of touch on
this one.

 

"Dr Sir John Howard, AC, WSCMoF"
<""Trollene.has.had.more.kook.outs.than.ive.had.hot.dinners\"@kangarooistan.com.au
.."> wrote in message news:4c63c433$0$11125$...

No, that makes you a donkey voter.

 

"Dr Sir John Howard, AC, WSCMoF"
<""Trollene.has.had.more.kook.outs.than.ive.had.hot.dinners\"@kangarooistan.com.au
.."> wrote in message news:4c63c3a3$0$11125$...

Nobel prize winning economist's opinion of Labour's stimulous package:

http://www.businessspectator.com.au...-Australia-Nobel-economist-833N4?OpenDocument


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Labor saved Australia: Nobel economist
Published 11:40 AM, 6 Aug 2010


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

QUICK SUMMARY | FULL STORY

AAP

The federal government's economic credentials have received a timely boost
from Nobel prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz, who suggested Labor may
be best placed to take the country forward.

Professor Stiglitz, a former World Bank chief economist and economic
adviser to the US government, said federal Labor did a fantastic job of
saving Australia from the global economic crisis.

At the same time Prof Stiglitz criticised right-wing politicians for being
the "architects" of the downturn.

"One of the reasons why the debate about ... Australia's stimulus ... is
so important is not because we're historians and we're trying to grade but
because we're trying to make a judgement about going forward who is likely
to do a better job," Prof Stgilitz told AAP in Sydney on Friday.

"What are the economic theories, advisers they are likely to draw upon?
Labor's done a good job."

Prof Stiglitz said economic advisers who had been praised by "the other
side" of politics were the ones who had designed America's "economic mess".

"To praise the people who were the architects of the global financial
crisis suggests that your economic ideas might lead this country into
difficulty," he added.

"Whereas the others (Labor) actually did a fantastic job of saving your
country from problems."

Prof Stiglitz said he supported the objectives of the government's mining
tax but was not surprised resource firms objected.

"The clear objective is one that I supported when I was in the Clinton
administration and our attempt to do a very similar kind of thing," he
added.

"Having watched what happened in the United States I'm not surprised at
all what's happened here; the mining companies do not want to pay their fair
share."

But he said he was surprised at the resonance the resource firms'
arguments have had.

 

I'm sure there's been some good has come out of it, but for every good story
there seems to be ten tales of woe. Like the school who had 27 hot water
heating units fitted to their change rooms that had three showers

How they fucked it up is irrelevant. The point is that they fucked it up,
and it became a *huge* mess that lead to the deaths of some people and a
number of houses destroyed by fire.

It was an *appalling* episode in government bungling.

It's certainly not without it's problems, but on the other side of the coin
throwing money at everything in the hope it makes it better isn't much of an
alternative, and that's all that the present government seems to have done
in the last three years without anything much to show for the exercise other
than going from a healthy surplus to a sizable debt.

Such as?

In all honesty, most of what this current government has done in the last
three years could have been better organised by a primary school commitee.

I don't think one side is any better than the other in terms of ability to
do what the people actually *want*, but then given the choice between one
bunch of fuckwits who throw money around like confetti and **** up
everything they touch and another bunch of fuckwits who think it's better to
save it rather than throw it down the toilet I'll take the savers any day
thanks.

We've got the exact same things happening over here under a state Labor
government.

 

All of those countries, with the exception of the UK, have economies that
are heavily based on tourism, and while a slowdown in the tourism trade has
hurt them considerably their own incompitence has played a significant role
int heir troubles. That's particularly true in the case of Greece.

England is the odd one out in that their economy has been fucked for
*decades*.

Not really.

The strong economies of Europe are *still* strong. The ones struggling now
are those who have *always* struggled, but now find the going tougher than
usual. It's a pattern that is often repeated. They survivie on the fringe of
booms, and crash when the boom busts.

It's *always* been bad. Our economy is okay compared to most, but we've had
better days as well. That doesn't mean we're going down the gurgler, just
that we've seen better days.

The point is that the Global Financial Crisis was being hailed by all and
sundry as the worst economic depression of all time and it was *nothing*
like that at all. The recession of the late 80's was significantly worse for
most countries.

Just because my opinion differs from yours doesn't mean I'm wrong and you're
right, or visa versa

 

More importantly, how many of those infrascturcture projects were actually
*needed* in the first place?

Well, not everyone

I'm not in favour of "buying votes" for the sake of it, such as with the
school spending programs for example. Building swanky new over-priced
classrooms may make a few mums and dads think their money is being well
spent, but it won't make our students any smarter. It's also hard to fathom
how they can justify the waste when our public transport & health systems
are in complete decay and need a *massive* investment of capital to bring
them into the 21st century.

To my eyes it's all been a case of "throw lots of money at the quick and
easy things that'll make us look all warm and lovely, but do **** all about
the hard tasks that'll be really expensive to fix and will only bring about
any benefit for the *next* government in power".

 

There is absolutely no doubt that there was a world wide recession that
impacted on many people. However whether it was one that required the
government to gaurantee bank savings or throw billions at the population in
the form of a stimulus package is extremely debatable.

You don't present as an idiot, so I would figure as much

Nor do I, but then I feel for the people who aren't in control of their own
destinies, and get a little miffed about how my tax dollar is wasted.

I'm sure it will.

Agreed.

I was having a conversation with a girlfiend of the wife's a few weeks ago
about the affordability of housing in Victoria. Her opinion was that it's
out of control and the dream of owning your own home is one that is rapidly
becoming an unrealistic one for most people, wheras my opinion was (and
still is) that there is *plenty* of affordable housing out there but just
not in the areas where everyone *wants* to live.

Like many, she wants the 5 bedroom McMansion in Williamstown with the
waterfront views, tree lined streets, driveways full of Benz's and BMW's and
nearby wanky cafe area but doesn't have the 3 million squid to splurge on
it. What she *can* have is a three bedroom brick vaneer in Laverton for
under 300 grand, but then it isn't anywhere near as desirable as
Williamstown.

She wants X, but can afford Y. To me it's a very simple problem but to her
it's the end of the world.

It is.

I don't either really, but the amounts being sought were extreme in my view
and I could completely understand the mining industry being pissed off about
it.

That's a fair point, but then when your tax rises it's not by 40%.

As surely as night follows day.

You'd think, although if this government has anything to do with that
they'll buy 75 years supply of the stuff having a use-by date of just three
weeks, and they'll pay so far over the average for it that our
grand-children will be paying the bill

 

I think it' the complete opposite of ignoring it. If they ignored it we'd be
in the same shit fight as the US and much of europe. Greece tried to ignore
it when they realised no one would lend them the money they needed. They are
now pretty well fucked.

It was poorly implemented that's for sure, i got my mums place done for her
(cost $200 out of my pocket) and the first mob that turned up asked me if i
had a ladder and a decent torch or light and extension cord they could use.
I told them to pack their batts back in their truck and piss off, no way i
was going to let them in the roof.
The second mob were brilliant, turned up on time in and out without any fuss
and insisted i get up in the roof and check their work before they left. No
one died and the house hasn't burnt down.

I haven't heard anyone suggest un-conditional support of people who don't
want to work.

I wouldn't like it one bit, but who's saying that that's what will be
demanded of me?

I keep hearing this sort of thing but i don't understand by what measure
i've been fucked over?
My life has not changed one iota. The people i work with did have an 18
month pay freeze but they are back in front now. I'm a contractor so my rate
moves as and when i think the market will allow. I've upped my rate twice
(with the same company) since the GFC kicked off.

I think the way it was done was the big mistake with the mining tax.
In essence the mining companies are renting, i don't have any issue with
raising the rent in line with their profits, given that when their rental
period is up the property is gone and can't be re rented to the next
tennant. And also given that a large percentage of those profits go straight
offshore and don't put anything back into the economy after the bills are
paid.
But Call it a tax and you're pushing shit up hill to get anyone to agree.
And i've spent some time in some of those mining towns (thankfully short
stints) and i reckon it takes more than just balls. Some of those places are
slightly better than hell on earth, but the payoff, as you say, can be very
good.

Not when you paint the picture you have, but not everyone sees it the same
way.
And I've never been on the dole.

Y.

 

Much of Europe is in deep economic trouble Greece, Italy, Portugal and Spain
to name a few.

That's true

I'm not an economist and i'd guess by that comment neither are you.
Not even the coalition believe that.

But my tax hasn't gone up?
Debt is not always a big bad bogeyman that the media and opposition would
have you believe.
If you had lived your life debt free you would not be building yourself a
nice new house with enviable shed right now.

Y.

 

Haha you might be right but i like cars, and bikes.
I generally don't care if a discussion breaks out or not.
Just one mans opinion is all i bring.

Y.

 

I would like to see that story and it's source. For every bungle, there are
likely 10 stories of alleged bungling that aren't real.

It is relevant how they fucked it up because it clearly shows that the
shonky profiteers need to be excluded from any projects and it needs to be
managed much better in the future.

I think they would agree with that themselves, but the idea was quite sound.

Like our main roads which were in desperate need of upgrading, and it's
finally being done.

I like to live in a reasonably liveable society, with decent social services
and essential services. To that end I prefer Labor, I only wish their vision
was realised with more restraint and better economic management. A 7b gap
between what Hockey and Abbott announced doesn't fill me with much
confidence that the current Liberal clowns would do any better a job at
managing the economy.

Should we be surprised when we allow glorified used car salespeople loose
with our tax dollars?

This just reminds me of the last election, though not really related I'll
share it anyway A member of the Green party has plastered a great big
sign up on the side of road proclaiming the virtues of better environmental
management blah blah blah. Well, about a week after the election my other
half spotted the same sign in a creek that runs to the Swan River, it had
been left out and the wind must have blown it off it's mount. She stopped
and got the name of the dickhead from the sign, looked him up and found his
number and then rang him to give him a serve about the virtues of not
letting your election crap contaminate the Swan River

 

Economists and those studied in these things don't seem to agree with you
much either ;-)

 

Both Ireland and Greece had been booming for the ten years or so before GFC
and are both in serious shite now.
Not saying they didn't bring it on themselves. The greeks in particular made
some fundamental mistakes and also got rorted every which way when times
were good. It's the greek way.

Bugger, here's me thinking they're all good honest upstanding types

I haven't heard any of the so called qualified experts quoted as saying that
we would have weathered the storm without a hicup if the gov had done
nothing. Quite the opposite in fact.

Through the roof, is a massive overstatement for most and completely wrong
for me.
I'm lucky in that i work contract and can adjust my rates to suit my
situation. (I realise this is not the same for the average wage earner) and
my bottom line cost of living has barely changed since krud got in. In fact
due to the volume of work i've had for the last 18months i'm slightly in
front.
Quiting my mortgage is literaly a few months off which is roughly 12 months
ahead of forecast.

Of course they would but i think that is more a symptom of the majority of
people being scared of debt.
How many of the ten thousand would be able to acurately define "living
within your means" and demonstrate how they do it.
Debt is quite scary if you're not be able to service it.

Agreed, forget or get talked out of it by the bright shiny new stuff that
everyone "must have"
A luck bastard i worked with back in the mid-late 90s won 3 million in
powerball in 97, he went straight to the bank and borrowed as much as they
would give him. He bought his first new car, several cash positive
properties and a few blue chip shares and went to work as if nothing had
changed. Everyone that knew about his win told him he was a fucking
crackpot. He'd doubled his 3mil within a few years and has continued growing
his pile in the same way ever since. He's retired now at 55 with a stack you
couldn't jump over. Anytime i catch up with him he's laughing and joking
about finding new ways for the banks to give him more of their money.

I see plenty wrong with the way it was done, makes me bloody sick.
But i have no objection to increasing mining lease rates in line with
profits.

Y.

 

I believe you're right about private participation in major infrastructure
projects,..the fact is,most worthwhile projects are too damn expensive,..the
water from QLD is one such,..how much do you think that would cost from go
to whoa? Fuckin' heaps,..too much for a 3 1/2 yr term promise. It will take
many terms of office, which means it will be a thing which will not pay
publicity dividends to the particular gov who instigates it,..hence the
tendency to not even promise it.

Jason

 

My sentiments exactly,..should have read yoiur post first.... ;

Jason

 

Gee,..300 large! Go west young man,.. to Walgett- NSW,..housing blocks for
$4K,..bring a Nulla nulla tho

Jason

 

I agree with much of what you say Doug, dont' get me started on the 800k
classrooms.
I reckon the money they spent was well intended but poorly managed, and not
just by krud and jools. And they hit some shity patches along the way that
were poorly handled by the departments.
I'd very much like to have seen massive infrastructure projects instead but
i reckon any one of the worthwhile projects would have resulted in much
higher spending and the rorts and back handing that went with the spending
they did, would have been amplified on a larger scale. And also i believe
the days of massive infrastructure spending without public/private
partnership are long gone, thanks in no small part to previous govts, and in
a GFC private money gets very scarce very fast.
As far as long term goes, i gave up believing in long term political goals a
long time ago.
The libs were in for 11? 12 years? how many of the massive infrastructure
projects on your list above did they tick off?
Everyone stood by as they sold infrastructure to help create surplus but
everyone seems to think labor should build infrastructure to
maintain/recover a surplus.
Given that neither side will ever deliver all things to everyone let alone
all they promise, i'll vote the ideology i prefer not the policy they
peddle.

Y

 

2 problems. No government could give $35K/year to unemployed people,
because conservative rant radio would have a field day about all of
that lower class welfare. Takes away from the available pool of money
to give as middle and upper class welfare. Can't have that. Piers
Ackerman, Lawsie and Bolty would have a heart attack and die! And the
voters who listen to those gateways of pubic opinion would miss their
their regular fix and be sad, and would have to go out and vote to get
rid of the party in question.

2nd problem is that the 35000*0.05*20e6=35 billion dollars you're
allocating to said welfare[1] is about the same amount of money the
government spent on the stimulus, from memory (16 billion for the
schools, a few billion for the pink batts installed by dodgy
con-artists, and a few other smaller measures). Where the deficit
comes in, is the reduced taxation taken on the smaller amount of
economic activity that has been happening during the recession. Your
plan would have not changed this. Unemployed people do not produce
anything that can be taxed (not until we have a carbon tax and start
taxing farts). So the difference between the 2 "plans" is one keeps
the people employed and doing nominally useful and productive things
(like running banks. Ok, don't laugh. Economically "useful"
perhaps), and in the other plan, they would be sitting on their arses.


[1] Assuming you only want to give it to the extra 5% of unemployed,
not including the original 5% of people that are always unemployed
regardless of the prevailing economic conditions; double it to 70
billion if you want to include those dregs of society in the payment
too.