Well, only 8 days to go before we get to see if the people punish the Libs like you say they will.
Scott Ludlam - new generation politician!
- Thread starter sash
- Start date
Well, only 8 days to go before we get to see if the people punish the Libs like you say they will.
Well, there's 7 minutes of my life I'll never get back.
I agree that this speech has gone viral but I have no idea why. These are all well worn themes from the Greens - there is nothing new here?
Perhaps it's just that his voice is far less annoying than Christine Milne or Sarah Hanson-Young, who are the ones we are used to hearing. That alone is usually enough to put most people off. Christine Milne is to the Greens what Julia Gillard was to Labor. They have far better options than her in their team.
Scott's a really nice guy in person and usually listens more than he speaks, which makes a welcome change for a politician but probably also explains his lack of profile.
But I agree his Senate spot looks very shaky without Labor preferences. I was sitting next to Louise Pratt at a function the other day and she visibly flinched when someone mentioned how much they admired the ethical stance of the Greens on a lot of issues. There is no love lost between those two I have to say! But her spot is in as much doubt as his. Neither looks likely to get a full quota on their own so we are in the hands of the micro party preference whisperers again, a system that just has to change... those last two spots could go to anyone. It's hard to see democracy at work if someone can get elected when nobody voted for them!
I agree that this speech has gone viral but I have no idea why. These are all well worn themes from the Greens - there is nothing new here?
Perhaps it's just that his voice is far less annoying than Christine Milne or Sarah Hanson-Young, who are the ones we are used to hearing. That alone is usually enough to put most people off. Christine Milne is to the Greens what Julia Gillard was to Labor. They have far better options than her in their team.
Scott's a really nice guy in person and usually listens more than he speaks, which makes a welcome change for a politician but probably also explains his lack of profile.
But I agree his Senate spot looks very shaky without Labor preferences. I was sitting next to Louise Pratt at a function the other day and she visibly flinched when someone mentioned how much they admired the ethical stance of the Greens on a lot of issues. There is no love lost between those two I have to say! But her spot is in as much doubt as his. Neither looks likely to get a full quota on their own so we are in the hands of the micro party preference whisperers again, a system that just has to change... those last two spots could go to anyone. It's hard to see democracy at work if someone can get elected when nobody voted for them!
You are welcome to him, because WA certainly doesn't want him!
FWIW, I live in a very safe Liberal area in Perth and was surprised yesterday to have a Greens volunteer knock on the front to promote the Greens and Scott Ludlam.
After listening to her spiel for a while , I asked her to explain about the Greens Policy on supporting the reintroduction of Death Duties.
She told me she didn't know anything about this policy ...........then quickly added that anyway she didn't care about taxes and such stuff and that she supported it as she was a socialist.
Pretty much sums up the Greens IMO.
Socialismo or Muerto....comrade. Viva la revolution!
If there are Death Duties...over by dead body!
If there are Death Duties...over by dead body!
Hi Joe
Just because I like facts, I have to reluctantly point out that the Greens no longer have that policy and a few more besides that were previously rather ridiculous...
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...stream-with-policy-rework-20121226-2bwl4.html
Have you decided what canapes to serve at your election win party yet?
Very much looking forward to the day.
Still deciding on that, but have a few spares of leftover bubbly from some other ocassion... oh that's right, federal election day
.Just joking but do have a few bottles of bubbly ready to go.
On the subject of canapes... I'm good friends with someone who's VERY close to Jay - and she likes him very much as a person - but she'll also be serving canapes on the day too
.May even drop in there for a bit since she's only a few doors down.
Still deciding on that, but have a few spares of leftover bubbly from some other ocassion... oh that's right, federal election day
Just joking but do have a few bottles of bubbly ready to go.
On the subject of canapes... I'm good friends with someone who's VERY close to Jay - and she likes him very much as a person - but she'll also be serving canapes on the day too
May even drop in there for a bit since she's only a few doors down.
Moet and scotch on stanby.
That doesn't surprise me. I've met and had quite enjoyable experiences with quite a number of the current Labor members and the Party higher ups, but in the end there is just general ideological differences.
I've known our Labor candidate for years. Older son is friends with his son and has dad as a fb friend, but son is voting Liberal... if he can get to the aec in Perth CBD (working there at present and didn't organize a postal vote).
HE
Thanks for the link to the article which serves to reinforce the hidden agendas of the Greens.
The Greens haven't actually changed their ideologies or principles, they have merely locked some of their policies away so they are hidden from public scrutiny.
IMO if Green supporters were forced to read past the cover page of Greens paraphernalia I'm sure most would be surprised (and shocked) with what they are actually supporting.
But then you knew that already.
HE
Thanks for the link to the article which serves to reinforce the hidden agendas of the Greens.
The Greens haven't actually changed their ideologies or principles, they have merely locked some of their policies away so they are hidden from public scrutiny.
IMO if Green supporters were forced to read past the cover page of Greens paraphernalia I'm sure most would be surprised (and shocked) with what they are actually supporting.
But then you knew that already.
I agree. I might start to believe they are changing their ways when they stand up in the Senate and say "we are sorry we got it so wrong on refugee policy".
I reckon I could be waiting awhile...
SHY is too busy watching through the Sea Patrol series to see if there is anything else she can blame on the Liberal government.
Hello HiEquity,
I'm not so sure about that. That link you provided to a Sydney Morning Herald newspaper article isn't the source of the Australian Greens political policies. It's just an article written by a Fairfax journo. No more, no less. It certainly isn't definitive.
Having just wasted 20 minutes of my time reading the details of their published policies on the Australian Greens website, a lot of the former points raised have simply been "smoothed over". It doesn't definitely state one way or the other what their position on death duties is.
What it does state on point # 25 of their Economic Justice policy adopted November 2012 is this ;
What does "reducing asset inequality" mean exactly ??
I wouldn't have any confidence whatsoever that the Greens wouldn't implement death duties if elected, and strip away most assets from hard working people upon their death to feed their voracious Communist philosophies. Make no mistake, these folks are watermelons - not greens.
We - as a world population - saw that Communism as an economic model is an utter failure. Didn't the USSR amply demonstrate that to us ?? Good for ants, not much chop for humans.
Their agenda doesn't work without revenues from Carbon and Mining Taxes, which are strangling investor confidence. No country has ever taxed their way to prosperity. Capital just gets up and goes elsewhere where it is treated more kindly.
The Greens don't understand that, and never will, it is totally against their philosophy. That's why they will never be taken seriously by the voting public in Australia and will never have the opportunity to govern.
We've all seen what happens to an economy when the Greens have a say in the decision making process (Tasmanian state and federally after 2010) and it turns out very ugly indeed.
I honestly think their high water mark was the 2010 Federal election just prior to Bob Brown quitting, and they are now sliding back down to the irrelevant slop amongst the micro parties.....just like the Democrats did.
Let's have a squiz this time next week after the speculation stops and the definitive numbers are in for both SA and Tas.
My humble prediction is that it's going to be very ugly for the Greens. We don't have to wait long.
Last edited:
But the outcome of the Greens/CMFEU/Paper companies/logging companies/wildlife fund agreement on the Tasmanian Forestry industry was largely supported by all involved. Isn't this a positive? Most pulp mill producers have signed an accord that means that timber from old growth forests is no longer purchased. So the politicisation of the Tasmanian Forestry Agreement is just that. Politicisation for ideological reasons. And, combined with the farce of the Cadbury factory, is an indication of the federal sphere influencing the state sphere once again.
As for no country never taxing their way to prosperity, have you heard of Norway? Sovereign wealth fund. High personal taxes. Good government services. Highest standard of living and quality of life in the world. Seems a bit of a success story to me.
The Carbon tax has been named by Abbott as a major reason for recent business closures - Qantas, Alcoa, etc etc. In each of these examples, the companies have come out and said that it actually had nothing to do with the impacts of the Carbon Tax - or are these companies lieing?
You mistaking the idea of socialism for communism says it all. You have an ideological view point that is so at odds with the Greens that you will exaggerate and use hyperbole. Just as they do with those who are of a neo-con bent. Extremists/fundamentalists on both sides use inflammatory language to push their ideological agenda. And it demeans us all.
As for no country never taxing their way to prosperity, have you heard of Norway? Sovereign wealth fund. High personal taxes. Good government services. Highest standard of living and quality of life in the world. Seems a bit of a success story to me.
The Carbon tax has been named by Abbott as a major reason for recent business closures - Qantas, Alcoa, etc etc. In each of these examples, the companies have come out and said that it actually had nothing to do with the impacts of the Carbon Tax - or are these companies lieing?
You mistaking the idea of socialism for communism says it all. You have an ideological view point that is so at odds with the Greens that you will exaggerate and use hyperbole. Just as they do with those who are of a neo-con bent. Extremists/fundamentalists on both sides use inflammatory language to push their ideological agenda. And it demeans us all.
As you admitted in the past as someone who votes for the Sex Party of Australia, I cannot take your political views seriously.
Someone who wastes their vote by voting for the comedian Austen Tayshus when he stands as a joke demeans us all.
I guess we'll see in 7 days time whether my opinion is correct or not.
Someone who wastes their vote by voting for the comedian Austen Tayshus when he stands as a joke demeans us all.
I guess we'll see in 7 days time whether my opinion is correct or not.
And thanks for proving my point.
Love your robust defence of democracy. Especially those you don't agree with. An inspiration.
I have voted for the coalition. So I guess that makes my views laughable as well.
And if the greens vote does go down (as predicted) that then proves your opinion that the Greens are communist is correct.
Last edited: