Skip to main content ↑ ↓
Topic: Shawny’s concerns about Victorian and Australian Governments  (Read 379462 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Shawny’s concerns about Victorian and Australian Governments

Reply #720 –
Quote from: shawny – on
Quote from: kruddler – on


The same 'scare tactics' were mentioned before Trump took over. I won't go further on that one....

Fraser is by far the exception, not the rule.

I think all politicians are corrupt and inept and only out for themselves and their bank balance.
Labor, Libs, ON....whoever.

Nobody gets anything for free.
You want to fix the current problems, go ahead, but it will be at the expense of something else instead. As i said, pick your poison.

yeah nah. If they are not doing the job they were elected to do they must be taken out of that position. Rewarding poor governing with extra terms is saying ok we accept the corruption, we accept the 200B debt, we accept the pot holes, the waiting lists, the crime etc etc etc. Unless you want the country to turn into the 3rd world you have to replace them and trust the new leadership will improve things. If they dont they are replaced as well.

To try and down play that by throwing in the alternative could be worse is simply showing your bias to a particular party.

Based on your thinking the yanks should re-elect Trump too cause the alternative could be worse ;)

Pick your poison.... ::)

You've got me wrong. I'm 'showing my bias' is proof of that.

I couldn't give a fat rats clacker about what happens. I've already stated they're all the same.
What i'm pushing back against is the fact that people say THIS will fix the problem. I disagree.
There are no good options.
There's a big pile of trash in the room, everyone keeps pointing at and blaming the current government for it.
Each alternative political party will highlight this big pile of trash and say they will fix it.
If/when they get into power, that big pile of trash may well be cleaned up. However, all they will do in reality is move it to another room. Or put it in the closet. Or put it in the garage. Hide it there, until its found, and the cycle repeats.
Eventually someone else will make promises that everyone falls for....the trash just gets hidden somewhere else.

Re: Shawny’s concerns about Victorian and Australian Governments

Reply #721 –
Quote from: kruddler – on
Quote from: shawny – on


yeah nah. If they are not doing the job they were elected to do they must be taken out of that position. Rewarding poor governing with extra terms is saying ok we accept the corruption, we accept the 200B debt, we accept the pot holes, the waiting lists, the crime etc etc etc. Unless you want the country to turn into the 3rd world you have to replace them and trust the new leadership will improve things. If they dont they are replaced as well.

To try and down play that by throwing in the alternative could be worse is simply showing your bias to a particular party.

Based on your thinking the yanks should re-elect Trump too cause the alternative could be worse ;)

Pick your poison.... ::)

You've got me wrong. I'm 'showing my bias' is proof of that.

I couldn't give a fat rats clacker about what happens. I've already stated they're all the same.
What i'm pushing back against is the fact that people say THIS will fix the problem. I disagree.
There are no good options.
There's a big pile of trash in the room, everyone keeps pointing at and blaming the current government for it.
Each alternative political party will highlight this big pile of trash and say they will fix it.
If/when they get into power, that big pile of trash may well be cleaned up. However, all they will do in reality is move it to another room. Or put it in the closet. Or put it in the garage. Hide it there, until its found, and the cycle repeats.
Eventually someone else will make promises that everyone falls for....the trash just gets hidden somewhere else.

That's a pretty fair assessment Kruddler.

One of the problems is that governments of all persuasions and levels are faced with ever-increasing demands for the provision of services as well as the expectation that they will lower taxes or, at least, won't increase them.  If society has to have appropriate infrastructure; housing, water, sewerage, health care, police, schools, courts, aged care, mental health care, disability services, environmental protection, sporting facilties, public transport, etc; someone has to pay.

I failed economics at university - one of several inappropriate choices - but I know enough to realise that the Reserve Bank's fixation with interest rate rises isn't the only way to combat inflation (a world-wide problem not helped by the disastrous wars in Ukraine and Iran).  Our Governments could tackle inflation by raising taxes but to do so would be political suicide unless there was a bi-partisan approach ... and that's not going to happen. 
"Negative waves are not helpful. Try saying something righteous and hopeful instead." Oddball

Re: Shawny’s concerns about Victorian and Australian Governments

Reply #722 –
I generally agree DJC. If the Government doesn't have enough money, then those services are either reduced or cut altogether, or the Government borrows the money, and essentially kicks the can down the road. And when services are reduced, it's always the poor who are most affected.
 

Re: Shawny’s concerns about Victorian and Australian Governments

Reply #723 –
I'll never understand how people see what is offered by the alternatives as vastly better, when the options are basically the same, or even worse! It's why I think the liberals are the only viable alternative at the moment, at least they have some history of governance to trade on, 

Anyone who genuinely thinks billionaire funded political parties like PHON are going to be better for Joe Average and society in general is mind-numbingly naivé.

Whether the billionaire happens to be an individual, co-operative or a union makes no difference.
"Extremists on either side will always meet in the Middle!"

Re: Shawny’s concerns about Victorian and Australian Governments

Reply #724 –
Quote from: PaulP – on
I generally agree DJC. If the Government doesn't have enough money, then those services are either reduced or cut altogether, or the Government borrows the money, and essentially kicks the can down the road. And when services are reduced, it's always the poor who are most affected.
If the government had some cohunes they would legislate to prevent selling the farm on resources, because that's what the likes of Rinehart want to do.

For example, you hear the old tune repeated that manufacturing is dead, but it's not a carte blanche argument for value adding being dead, and manufacturing is dead it's not even an accurate argument anymore especially when discussing labour costs. Advanced manufacturing is almost on equal ground globally, the labour cost differential ins miniscule. the main differences relate to legislation and governance, and all that is in control of the government. Government spending doesn't need to be a sink hole, and privatisation is not always the answer.

Call the bluff, if the likes of Hancock and Fortescue won't add value, auction off the capability internationally to those who will, of course enforced by legislation, and you'll be shocked how quickly the locals change their tune when they are no longer a monopoly!

In Victoria for example, the state signed over 100 year leases to Hancock on huge swathes of land, stretching from Leongatha to Warrnambool, without a single enforcement case that Hancock does anything with it. The resources sit there in the ground becoming more valuable with every passing day, making Rinehart richer and richer on the books, and she does nothing for that increased wealth and doesn't need to. The state can't even borrow against it! It's the same crapty deal Qld gave Palmer years ago making him billion$!

Billionaires increased holdings by orders of magnitude and then issued redundancies, that is what PHON offers!
"Extremists on either side will always meet in the Middle!"