1. Welcome, Guest

    Upcoming events: Supanova: Adelaide (21-23rd November) | Brisbane (28th-30th November)

Oceania ELECTION 04 - Who *will* win? (Official Discussion of 2004 Federal Election)

Discussion in 'Oceania Discussion Boards' started by Ender Sai, Feb 10, 2004.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Ender Sai Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Feb 18, 2001
    star 9
    Sorry, only the Liberals lie, the ALP is for honesty and truth.

    And the Unions.

    E_S
  2. MarvinTheMartian Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Mar 31, 2002
    star 5
    Those marginal seat polls published on the weekend made me feel nice on the inside :)
  3. Ender Sai Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Feb 18, 2001
    star 9
    Ladies and gentlemen: I've decided, that there will be no more posts by MarvinTheMartian. Signed; E_S. My mum would be pissed if I reneged upon this deal!

    Wow, it's fun to make promises I can't keep. Weeeeee!

    E_S
  4. MarvinTheMartian Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Mar 31, 2002
    star 5
  5. Ender Sai Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Feb 18, 2001
    star 9
    Latham's tax plan; anyone like it?

    E_S
  6. stinrab Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Jul 9, 1998
    star 5
    I believe the amount of responses to your post is conclusive enough, Ender ;)
  7. Ender Sai Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Feb 18, 2001
    star 9
    Can someone explain to me the logic in this?

    Mark Latham accuses the Government of mounting scare-monger campaigns this election, and continually ******* persists with the PM Costello myth despite repeated denials by the Prime Minister he'll hand over after this election to Peter Costello?

    Firstly, how think are you Mark that you can't work this out? Let's say the value of your claim about Mr Howard is equal to one. Mr Howard's counter-claim about not retiring equals -1. Now, I know Mr Crean actually had the audacity and hubris to say the ALP is and always has been an economically responsible party*, so you're not in the company of mathematically sound people, but let's say the entire statement plays out like this.

    1 = Value of Mark Latham's claim about John Howard retiring.

    -1 = Value of PM's denunciation.

    1 - 1 = 0

    Thus, Mr Latham's claim about the PM is negated, and I'm not even going to factor in the variable "x", where x = claim the Libs are the ones scare mongering.


    * = And yes, Simon Crean did say that. And I admit, I giggled when I heard it.

    So I wonder, is this the same Labor party that gave us Whitlam's deficits, Simon, or the same ALP that gave us the recession we had to have? Or a different ALP? Or are you really as ******* stupid as you look mate?

    I said it before, and it still stands: I wouldn't trust Crean to manage $20 of mine, much less the entire treasury. Stuff Latham's sympathy, sack the idiot from the Shadow ministry and sit him in the backbench with a Gameboy or something bright and shiny until he retires.

    E_S
  8. id_10t_ERROR Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Sep 10, 2004
    bejesus!

    Does it really matter -
    no matter who wins there will be half truths, a budget that hides the real state of teh finance, pork barreling and self interest. Neither of the major parties have a vision such as Menzies or Whitlam did.

    I dont care which side of politics they were on both had vision.

    What have we got - Latham - who knows what he beleives, he may have learnt from Whitlam, but he does not have the fire.
    Howard, the worlds second greatest treasurer whos policies came home to roost after he lost the job, as the recession we had to have.

    Then we get to the alleged Major minor party ( or was that the minor Major party) - the Chippies (democrats), who's first publicly staed policy was 'Keep the bastards honest' - LOL

    Dont get into a debate about the GST its water passed under the bridge.

    No mater who wins in October, a poly with no vision and no fire will get elected.

    Soly my view and do not represent anyone, corporal or otherwise, elses
  9. Ivo Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Oct 10, 2002
    star 1
    As I'm not an economist and dont fully understand what interest rates mean to the economy. But I like the way the Liberals always quote that the interest rates under the last labor government reached 19% which is true but what they should do is quote how our interest rate stacked up against other economies such as the USA(20%) Hong Kong(23%) so therefore with my limited understanding of economics Id say that Keating did a alright job.

    On another issue as ole honest John got pummelled in the debate last night( I havent seen the debate but read the reports about it on the net) when are we going to see another Tampa crisis or children overboard???
  10. Ender Sai Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Feb 18, 2001
    star 9
    The PM got pummeled from Latham for the most idiotic things, which may appeal to the more common denominators but in terms of accuracy and whatnot, it's purely craptastic.

    For example, that the Indonesian bombing is related to Iraq? Please, Mark, just because you don't pay attention during your briefings...

    The Indonesian bombing was not successful, and so it's more than likely it was planned fairly quickly, contrasted with the 2+ years it took to hit the US embassies in Nairobi and Dar-es-Salaam. A basic recee would have worked out that the fence was a major obstacle - for example, in 1983 when the US embassy in Beirut was blown up, a GMC Pickup rammed the gate and ended up halfway through the lobby before blowing - and it would have been dealt with accordingly. The minutes of the details are absent here, thus to suggest it's reciprocity for last year's military action in Iraq is at best, utterly vapid and worse, completely idiotic. None of which are qualities we expect in a leader.

    So when the PM says Latham would "cut and run" from Iraq, Latham "cleverly" (Note: We have a 12.5 on the Sarcasm Richter scale here) turned it back on the PM saying he would "cut and run" from leadership. Despite previous assurances the PM would remain PM so long as the voters and the party wanted him to. Repeated previous assurances.

    So Mark Latham plays to his strength, i.e. convincing the proletariat how bad John Howard is, and pandering to their prejudices. W00t Mark, teh roxxxxxxx0rz!

    Look I'm sorry I expected a debate when substance, not style, mattered and didn't get that. Mark, you're so full of ********, I hope your tongue is firmly in cheeky when talk about "honesty in government", you cheeky sod you.

    E_S
  11. Katana_Geldar Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Mar 3, 2003
    star 8
    9.09 pm 12/9/04

    My views on the debate ? Katana_Geldar


    I decided to write while the debate is fresh in my mind, being right after it, than just before I post so I can remember more. My short-term memory is awful. Also my spelling and punctuation will be good, as some people know my most people would know I post before I think and hardly edit for spelling at all.

    Throughout this, primarily for amusement, I?ve kept a running scire on each based on what I say about them. A point against Howard equals a point for Latham and vice versa.

    DISCLAIMER: These words are only my opinion, nothing more or less, based on what I saw and remembered tonight. If you want to dispute it PM me as I don?t want to be responsible for a flame war (again).

    Speaking in General

    If I was going along by this alone, Howard would get my vote as I think he was a much better speaker and a lot better at outlining his argument than Latham. While Howard could cite examples and give reasons Latham just said the ?party-line? and gave no real strong reasons behind what he was proposing, he also seemed to run in circles, Howard did as well but not as much as Latham.
    However I will say that it is Latham?s first debate, as the Age reporter pointed out (probably the only good thing she did ;)) so he is inexperienced and Howard is not. Nevertheless Latham looked more confident at the beginning of the debate than Howard.

    In terms of tone and style, Howard?s argument was a lot more intelligent than Latham?s. (Compare Brutus?s funeral speech in Julius Caesar to Antony?s ?Friends, Romans, countrymen?? and you?ll see what I mean.) Howard?s tone of voice was a lot more relaxed, more settled than Latham?s who constantly gave the impression he was being interrogated. This was more apparent as the debate continued -not at the start- when they were arguing (if you can call it that) over the sore issues of health care and education.

    In terms of the dirtiness of the debate, and both took several shots at each other throughout the time they were speaking, Latham threw the most mud. Continuously jabbing at Howard over several issues, ignoring his responses (which were quite sound, even for a polly) and parroting the party-line again and again. Howard did throw a few hits below the belt, but by that time he?d taken so many for Latham that I couldn?t blame him for doing so:

    Mum: Why do you have that black eye? Have you been fighting?
    Timmy: Yes, I hit him, but he hit me first! :p

    Score: Howard: 2 Latham: 1

    Concerning National Security

    Latham became the unwilling victim of the Socratic approach in this area; it was almost funny if it wasn?t such a serious issue. Howard?s argument was like a bowl of thick soup, you could stand a spoon up in it and the liquid would support it. Latham was going this way and that all the time that by the end I wondered what Labor?s policy was on National Security. Was this his intention? A ?Billy Flynn? type ?Razzle Dazzle? way of hiding your real intentions? Yes Coastguards, yes Homeland Security (I hope it never happens, the name sounds a bit scary;)), but what was the real stance on it?
    He said he wanted troops out of Iraq, fine we knew that all along it was going to be an election issue. He said he wanted to focus mainly on Australia?s near vicinity rather than on the other side of the world. Good point, but remember the US had that view before WWI and II (currently a hot topic when I was last in the holocaust thread in the Senate) and look what happened. He said he was thinking long term (which turned into a bunfight to define ?long term? being longer than an election term), but how long term do you want to think. Yes we don?t want terrorists coming here; yes we want to have safe borders and all the rest; but that was at the back of my mind the entire time during those arguments and I couldn?t help but comment on it here.
    As for the American Alliance (if that is what it is called), that?s where I was wondering what his position was, he was being very slippery and this is a
  12. Ender Sai Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Feb 18, 2001
    star 9
    This was really Howard?s Waterloo, I found Latham?s arguments a lot better than Howard?s but this is purely based on the fact that I am a Uni student. The Libs did take away the textbook rebate, they did promise to hike-up HECS fees. Latham?s promised (emphasis on promise) lower HECS, more uni places etc. etc. etc? He?s also promising abolishing full-fee paying courses for Australians which I agree with as it puts all Aussie Uni students on the same level. Though he didn?t really answer Howard?s question of how he was going to fund the Unis if he does this, then again what polly ever answers a straight question?

    Well that's because the ALP has only costed for half of the amount of money it would cost to do this each year. IIRC, 3 years of this policy would run up AUD$1bn of debt, which would eat into surplus each year.

    And of course you have to remember with HECS it's a 25% Student/75% taxpayer arrangement, so most people aren't terribly fussed about education. Furthermore, students don't constitute a voting block in any seat(s), so they're not courted effectively for votes which the ALP hasn't been told, apparently. It's OK, it'll give the bloody USyd socialists something to whine about.

    E_S
  13. Sith Magician Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Sep 14, 1999
    star 5
    So, what's the thoughts on free health care for the over 75's?
  14. DarthAttorney Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Nov 8, 2000
    star 6
    "3 years of this policy would run up AUD$1bn of debt, which would eat into surplus each year."

    God forbid we spend that excess money ;)

    I think the over 75's is a dicey move, considering it's obviously a vote winner when the maority of Liberal support is 55+ and Labor only need a 2.5% swing their way to win Government. They're clearly hoping part of that swing is from this policy. The policy itself isn't a bad idea, especially since it amounts to lowering private health cover for younger Australians when the burden of treating the 75+ range is removed from the private system. But I'd like to see it in practice, I don't think it's going to be as easy as getting hold of the three quarters of a million beds required for elderly patients straight away.
  15. Smart-guy Jedi Padawan

    Member Since:
    Sep 30, 2004
    It's too hard to tell.

    I think the Deomocrats and One Nation are on their way out and that the Greens will have a major impact and may win the balance of power.
  16. Ender Sai Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Feb 18, 2001
    star 9
    God forbid we spend that excess money

    The problems are many;

    1) Will all his other multibillion dollar shallow election grabs, Mr Latham will be following his should-be-forgotten mentor Mr Whitlam into the "massive foreign debt" record book, of which

    2) We still owe money, and

    3) It's always good to have money for a rain day, not just for a 3-year Labor term.

    I think the over 75's is a dicey move, considering it's obviously a vote winner when the maority of Liberal support is 55+

    Ah, not the majority of; whilst most elderly will vote Liberal, your average Liberal voter is an educated, middle-aged, middle class person.


    and Labor only need a 2.5% swing their way to win Government.

    Yes, but they're more often than not targeting existing Labor demographics.


    They're clearly hoping part of that swing is from this policy. The policy itself isn't a bad idea, especially since it amounts to lowering private health cover for younger Australians when the burden of treating the 75+ range is removed from the private system. But I'd like to see it in practice, I don't think it's going to be as easy as getting hold of the three quarters of a million beds required for elderly patients straight away.

    Of course not, but if even 40% of Mr Latham's election promises translated into results I'd be most surprised. I'm just disappointed the coalition isn't trying harder, considering a man with Mr Latham's short temper and inexperience, coupled with his spurious promises and declarations, should be an easy target for a season team of politicos like the Liberal leadership.

    E_S
  17. DarthAttorney Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Nov 8, 2000
    star 6
    Well the "massive foreign debt" you seem keen to blame on Gough Whitlam has actually doubled over the past 8yrs of Liberal Government. One of Howard's election promises in 95/96 was to lower foreign debt, his little "Debt Bus" stunt should ring a bell. And here we are, with a Government claiming to have the experience needed to take the nation forward.....and they've doubled out national debt in under a decade.

    Funny that they're running on a platform of steady economic growth when exports for the last quarter fell sharply in all sectors except mining.

    Hmmmm :confused:

    "....they're more often than not targeting existing Labor demographics"

    Although it doesn't seem that way this time, what with the elderly being catered fror and the Labor leader almost personifying the educated, middle aged, middle class voter.

    Nice to see that Latham also threw out an offer to restore the funds that the Liberal Government tore from the ABC under that Shier fellow a few years back too.
  18. Ender Sai Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Feb 18, 2001
    star 9
    I'm sorry, you're saying we've incurred foreign debt under this government???

    Right.

    and the Labor leader almost personifying the educated, middle aged, middle class voter.

    Given that most educated middle aged middle class people that I know scoff and Mr Latham, and are voting for Howard because as business people, the current corporate tax structure and working environment are going to get worse under Latham. Unless of course you work for a union then, hey hey! life's gonna be sweet.

    However, I should stop scare mongering, which is defined of course by not running ads talking about PM costello after repeated insistences by the PM he's not retiring.

    If we decide to go Labor, I will be saying I told you so when the economy goes pear shaped. And maybe even nyer-nyer-nyer-nyer :p too.

    E_S
  19. Katana_Geldar Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Mar 3, 2003
    star 8
    very childish ender, but the whole thing is getting childish and I can't wait intil it's over.

    so it's one week people until the day, everyone sure on how they are going to vote?
  20. Draxtralia Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Feb 28, 2004
    star 1
    I'm very sure about my vote.

    EDIT: I'm voting Liberal, in case you wanted to know. :p
  21. Ender Sai Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Feb 18, 2001
    star 9
    very childish ender, but the whole thing is getting childish and I can't wait intil it's over.

    Thank you for once again, stating the ******* obvious. It was meant to be childish, and I believe you ruined the moment. And probably Christmas too. :(

    so it's one week people until the day, everyone sure on how they are going to vote?

    Yes, I'm still not voting for that overweight windbag Latham, and his hollow promises.

    Why hasn't he submitted his spendings to Treasury for costing?

    Oh, that's right, he doesn't want you lot what support him to know he can't possibly afford to give everything he's promises. Ooops.

    But of course, we'll have the "Ladder of Opportunity", where the Rodina (Motherland) helps get the most out of Australians by making them work better! Damn progress through one's own hard work, the State will do it for us!

    Question: How many of you guys are like me and work in business? How many of you actually want a forced, mandatory Union presence? Check out the ALP's *wonderful* industrial relations package, where the Unions will be allowed time to recruit members onsite, where they'll be given unrestricted access to employee files and payrolls.

    Let me ask you this; what is more free - the freedom to have a Union negotiate for you, or the freedom to chose whether or not a Union negotiates for you?

    E_S
  22. Sith Magician Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Sep 14, 1999
    star 5
    You work in business? You must love little Johnny for his GST he said we would never, ever have then.
  23. MarvinTheMartian Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Mar 31, 2002
    star 5
    I worked for the GOVERNMENT and I sure as well dont want some stinking union hack checking me out! :mad:
  24. Ender Sai Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Feb 18, 2001
    star 9
    You work in business? You must love little Johnny for his GST he said we would never, ever have then. /i]

    Doesn't really come up, I work in a marketing firm.

    I do however love company tax @ 30%...

    The thing about the GST is this; we had a hidden 25% sales tax, which was abolished and replaced with a visible 10% sales tax. The distributors of most goods figured out they could just make the base unit(s) more expensive and so after the honeymoon period when things were cheaper, they got greedy again.

    When I was at HMV, during Uni, we had blue price stickers which were the new GST inclusive ones, and they were around $26 at the most expensive. Then the companies got greedy and charged more, at both ends. Nothing to do with the Government at all, actually.

    So yes, I appreciate and understand why the GST > 25% Hidden Sales Tax.

    BTW, you know how it could be worse? "V.A.T" ;)

    E_S
  25. Detonating-Rabbit Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    May 23, 2003
    star 5
    Ah, the good old value added tax of which I am so familiar with... [face_plain]
    Stupid first ten years of my life being in crummy South Africa...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.