2007 election 24 Nov
- Thread starter Bill.L
- Start date
I like libs but not too many seats please as they then hold absolute power and that is not a good thing. Democracy is all about everyone having a say.
Personally in the system of government that we have in Australia I like "absolute power" because with it comes absolute responsibility.
Take the GST as an example - to get the GST through the senate the coalition had to deal with the democrats (who are, imho, one of the most unreasonable "parties" [they really are a collection of independants] around).
As a result of the dems influence the GST included exclusions which may have suited their needs but made it a nightmare for retailers.
A classic case of "all care but no responsibility" - since the dems aren't in government and the only people who vote for them are [description not fit for publication].
The dems used to have a slogan about "keeping the ba$tards honest" - it would have been more accurate if it had been "screwing it for everyone else but us".
Considering the alternative - which is sectoral interests holding the majority to ransom - I'd say that absolute power is a good thing.
M
Many would argue the GST compromise was the death knell for the Democrats. This election will probably finish them off as a political party....
I agree, they'll be finished after this election.
Wonder if we'll see Pauline Hansen again???? 
My forecast:
Either Coalition or Labor by a couple seats maximum, it will takes days to establish who wins as many seats will be only a handful of votes apart.
If Coalition get up, their "scare campaign" topic will be with a Labour federal govt and all states Labour held, they will put the GST rate up...
If Labor get up, Coalition to still hold enough power in the Senate to veto everything, with one or two independants to hold balance of power.
If Labor get up, Caucus will push Gillard into PM seat between 12-18 months time. I don't know if they'd dare do it, but I wouldn't be surprised if the Coalition blocked the Senate and forced a double dissolution.
Either Coalition or Labor by a couple seats maximum, it will takes days to establish who wins as many seats will be only a handful of votes apart.
If Coalition get up, their "scare campaign" topic will be with a Labour federal govt and all states Labour held, they will put the GST rate up...
If Labor get up, Coalition to still hold enough power in the Senate to veto everything, with one or two independants to hold balance of power.
If Labor get up, Caucus will push Gillard into PM seat between 12-18 months time. I don't know if they'd dare do it, but I wouldn't be surprised if the Coalition blocked the Senate and forced a double dissolution.
How many times will the RBA meet between now and election date?
Any chance of another interest rate rise before the election?
DJ
Any chance of another interest rate rise before the election?
DJ
Once more - first week in November. I don't think rates will go up again just yet - I think if they increase the discrepancy between our rates and the US there will be an even greater influx of money into the country, which will push the AUS dollar even higher. If you want to keep inflation down, do you make plasma TVs and the like even 'cheaper'?
Actually it's more about two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for tea.
As in the above example it fails, because power groups have found out that they can vote themselves benefits at everyone else's expense. And I don't refer merely to "dole bludgers". There are middle class rorts and business rorts. And the ultimate rort: The Gov. General. LOL
why would coalition put up the GST rate? It all goes to the states and they get enough now?
And it's the more 'important' meeting, too (i.e. the one after the quarterly inflation figures come out). Stevens has said that the RBA will not hesitate to raise rates if needed, election or no election.
Alex
I realise politically I'm fairly naive, but can someone please explain to me any real differences between labour and the libs these days? I can't see Labor suddenly unionising the country again. That horse has bolted, surely. Or is Labor going to put in tariffs to support the manufacturing industries again?
More specifically, to us as investors, is having Labor or the Libs in power going to make much of a difference?
Alex
More specifically, to us as investors, is having Labor or the Libs in power going to make much of a difference?
Alex
I've been round for a while and I can't. You must go back to Whitlam's days to find a labor gov carried away by folly and exuberance, but even then you must accept that they took over from a hopeless lib government that had left so much that needed to be done. A series of bad/witless PMs could not engineer a change in a party which would not advance from the Menzies' (riding on the sheep's back) era.
I don't think there is much difference at all either. Why would a Rudd govt go around unionising the country when it was the Hawke Labour government who actually started IR de-regulation in the first place when they introduced enterprise bargaining to replace the award system and started reducing tariffs to increase competitiveness, not to mention floating our dollar so we could compete in global markets. I really believe that if it weren't for the economic groundwork laid by the Hawke govt in the 80's we would not have the economy we have today because Johnny would have had to make too many radical changes in a very short time which inevitably would have failed.
Study or read about our IR history and you will see that Labour has done a lot more to improve productivity than the Libs have. Also, Rudd's wife is a business owner so I think he would be more on the side of businesses than unions as she will no doubt have some influence over his ideas.
All in all I think Labour have always had much better economic and IR policies than the Libs ever had - Johnny can't seem to get his head around the fact that like in previous booms we can't rely on one single industry to drive our economy whether it be wool, resources or whatever. At least Labor recognises that the mining boom will eventually end.
As for us investors, if we are astute we should be able to thrive in any political climate - those who can't shouldn't be in the game. And you certainly don't strike me as being politically naive Alex
Even if the RBA do put rates up, the Treasurer can veto, although that would not be a good look during an election...
Sorry - it doesn't read very well does it? GST rate can only be changed if the federal govt and all the state governments agree to it. I meant that I believe the Liberal Party will argue that if Labor 'get in' federally, with all the state governments also being Labor, it will be easy for the GST rate to be increased...
Not exactly sure how Howard is lining up his own pockets but will take your word for it. Whether its good economic management or just a worldwide phenomena, Australian workers really haven't had it this good. Employers are now finding it very difficult to hire workers and most are bending over backwards to find and keep good quality staff. The powers have certainly turned. But if the plebs are still whining about benefits and work rights, they really need to get off their lazy ars* and start upskilling. Our unemployment rate should be <1%. The unproductive leeches should be shipped off to Sudan to see how people over there take things for granted. Or they can be shot, theres plenty of people waiting to come into this country to make something of themselves.
This whole blame culture has got to stop! One of my tenants rang up the other week and said he may have to give his lease up on one of our shops because he can't find anyone to do the deliveries nor run his shop. He is paying more than award wages and I'm sure it'll be cash too. He tells me no one wants to work at all and this is in an area which I know have a high proportion of Centrelink benefits being paid. Riles me no end!
From a state government perspective (where I currently work), and as someone who has been around for a Coalition and Labor, there's next to no difference.
With a change of government the most senior departmental heads roll (ie the political appointees), but all the policy writers and recommenders under that level stay put and pretty much keep plugging away with the good ideas that they been trying to get put forward for years.
The reason the good ideas take forever to get into place is because pollies come up with knee jerk responses or pacifiers to the masses - end result is delays and sometimes policies that are so badly watered down they are no longer recognisable and may have no value ...
The things that are different? Management styles. Letterhead. Whether you can use 'can't' in a brief, or have to use 'can not'. Yep, value adding at the highest level. There's some political infighting with Coalition, between the parties, but usually there is a similar amount of argy-bargy between the Labor factions. ie one faction is stronger and suddenly there's a new head of department (and the previous departmental head has a cushy job someplace).
For now, the party in government will make the opposition look like fools almost continually in the leadup to the election. The reason for that is simple - the opposition has a few staff working on policy, costings, public opinion. The government has and does, direct dozens if not more of their Treasury staff into costings, and similar numbers of policy staff into coming up with spin ... and that's not including the 100's of other policy officers available across all the departments - and yes, government will redirect all their work at election time, if necessary.
The only documents the Opposition can work off are the policy and budget documents prepared by the encumbent government - and they're all spin too. That's why Labor has spent it's entire time in opposition rejecting statements from the current government (standard operating behaviour for an opposition). Then, if they get into power, they finally get to see the real situation, and suddenly they're agreeing with their predecessors ...
What I love is the election commitments. Coalition puts forward a range of commitments, many of which are currently provided services that are being rebranded for the purposes of buying your vote. Opposition hasn't the detailed information on what services the government really provides, so it makes up election commitments, and then funds those commitments by cutting back on vital services (or rebranding ...).
It's all bollocks really. Wait until they announce their '100 day plan'. You should read that as 'it'll take us 100 days to rebrand services so you think we've fulfilled our election commitments'.
DJ
