Imagine Latham as Prime minister (speaking on the International stage for us and constantly backpeddlling when put on the spot).
Crean as Treasurer (the ALP’s first real budget announcement several months ago was already 1 billion short when it was financed properly, Costello found the stuff up for them).
Beasley as Defence minister again…put us down for another fleet of those Collins subs.
I agree rates will go up under either parties but higher under labor (higher inflation).
I love it when LAtham says all those warm fuzzy things he is going to do…then i think ummmmmmmm where is the money comming from (taxes)
Has there been a labor goverment that has actually left the country in a btter financial state then when it took over office from the liberal party??
It’s Labor, folks- no u in it. I say this because it is a major Australian political party (not that I vote for them- no way!)
kay henry
Your right Kay
one means work…the other means more work
Originally posted by kay henry:Hey Ted,
We have one thing in common- interest in property investing, but it doesn’t determine who I vote for- for me, there’s many more important things to consider in governance.
kay henry
Well said Kay. I agree 100%. Appropriate appraisal of the governance of a nation can and will never be reduced to the focus on a single policy or governmental quality. We as “Informed” voters need to be more wholistic in our appraisal of government parties and in most cases determine the level at which we are happy to compromise on election issues in electing a particular government body to power.
Warrant.
Posted – SuperTed
Has there been a labour goverment that has actually left the country in a better financial state then when it took over office from the liberal party??I agree with Super Ted and Anubis, on this one. My judgement has been coloured by my experience with my parents in business. If their business was doing well, so were the employees and us.[lmao]
If things weren’t going well, then neither did we. Looking back over the years (to about 1983), when has Labour EVER produced an economic climate that is as good as that of the Lib/Nat parties? Granted things look better when you get Gov assistance as Labour used to throw money arround, but then all these other wonderful things happened to us like ” the Depression we had to have!” Why? I don’t like being depressed, and I’m sure that the nation as a whole didn’t much like it either! Record numbers of businesses failing and families loosing all – they probably didn’t enjoy that much either.
Listening to all of you experienced and prosperous investors – you all manage your money well to get a head! Why would you think running a country be any different? Would you run your investment portfolio like the ALP ran our country?I don’t thinks so Tim ][withstupid]You can’t save the environment or increase spending in schools without money. If you don’t have it, then you’ve got to borrow it! Who ends up paying? You and I do! How do we get there? Using our money as best as we can, and cash is still cheaper then Loans. Once the coffers are full(er) then we pay for improvements.
Makes sense to me…..O.K. my ‘barrow is ‘pushed’, over to you.
Cheers
C@34
Thanks for the spelling tip Kay. You are right it is kinda important to get this one right (even if they are my last choice at the moment). I have now edited my post accordingly.
I’ve also got to admit that IMHO things are heaps better for the nation as a whole since “Little Johnny” took over… but how long will he stay?
Cheers
SonjaDon’t you love how politicians fill the air with grandstanding talks about how they are going to find new interesting ways to give away the money they take from us with crafty tricks, to more and recently discovered classes of deserving recipients?
Makes you wonder in this society who are the heroes? Isn’t it confusing?… the more you produce, the more efficient you are, the better you become, the more you are punished, skimmed and robbed, plundered and constrained, banned or slowed down, by a myriad of ways that (for you own good), take away from you, to give to the new found heroes, the inefficient, the slack, the lazy and the inoperative, the one on compo, on sick leave, he one part time, the one who can’t be bothered, because they are the heroes that vote a Government who itself needs someone that can be bought with YOUR $600
Very sad.
Who to vote? I have no idea, After reading the Greenies policy of legalised marijuana and extasy, banning the caging of buggies, rescinding driver licenses to force people on bicycles, demolishing houses and ripping up roads to make way to parks, unemployment without demands of looking for work for life, errr Pauline Hanson looks better every day …What about voting for Guy? …he is an idol…
May God prosper you always.[biggrin]
MarcOriginally posted by SuperTed:Imagine Latham as Prime minister (speaking on the International stage for us and constantly backpeddlling when put on the spot).
Crean as Treasurer (the ALP’s first real budget announcement several months ago was already 1 billion short when it was financed properly, Costello found the stuff up for them).
Beasley as Defence minister again…put us down for another fleet of those Collins subs.
I agree rates will go up under either parties but higher under labor (higher inflation).
I love it when LAtham says all those warm fuzzy things he is going to do…then i think ummmmmmmm where is the money comming from (taxes)
Has there been a labor goverment that has actually left the country in a btter financial state then when it took over office from the liberal party??
Jeez Teddy,
Surely you can’t believe the state of economy was worse when Keating handed government over in 1996, than when Johnny, as treasurer, handed it over in 1983 ??
Try to think back if you can, when Johnny Dubya Howard was still in nappies under Fraser – Inflation at 15%, unemployment 12%, negative economic growth ie. recession when Labor came to power in 1983. 13 years later, Johnny Dubya inherits an economy that was already growing for 4 years !!!
The first time around, Howard completely dithered about as treasurer and screwed the economy, yet was still given the keys to the treasury 13 years later. Go figure.
Another great lie these tory monkeys go on about is the 8 billion dollar Beazley black hole, left to them in 1996. Howard left office in 1983 with a 9 billion dollar deficit. And that is in 1983 dollars as well !!!
As for the Collins Class submarines, perhaps we can use them to transport our brand new, second hand, Abrams tanks that we are about to take delivery of, because our amphibious landing craft sure as hell can’t handle them. Thank you very much Robert Hill !! Then again, there’s always Star Wars that Robert Hill has signed us up for. That will stop those nasty terrorists(boat people). Another case of money well spent ??
Latham does say a lot of warm and fuzzy things.
But I dont hear anyone calling them lies.
As for ‘where is the money coming from’ (add winey voice), how about we start with scrapping the FHOG (I never needed it when I bought my first house when interest rates were 15% – I survived), the $600 payment to anyone with an offspring (I’ve got 2 – I can survive without it), and the $1300 baby bonus (do people really need a bribe to GET IT ON). Who said the Labor party was champion of the handouts ?As for me, I’d rather a government that makes a mistake, and is honest about it, rather than one that makes a mistake, and will stop at nothing, to cover the lies up. Note the insidious treatment that people, such as John Valder, Andrew Wilkie, Mike Scrafton, Mick Keelty, and the 43 Eminent Australians, have been dished out.
We know which one Howard belongs to, Latham could not be any worse.
To Jo: I take offense at throwing my beloved cat at either of those lying politicians!
I agree with Kay, my interest in property will not affect my vote, however health and education policies will.
But can we trust either of them?
Trisha
Originally posted by trisha007:To Jo: I take offense at throwing my beloved cat at either of those lying politicians!
That’s fair enough Trish; I have a pet cat too and I wouldn’t do that to him either!!!![blush2] My apologies puss!!!!
Originally posted by SuperTed:Has there been a labor goverment that has actually left the country in a btter financial state then when it took over office from the liberal party??hhhhmmm…Please come back Mr Bob Hawk – what a legend![biggrin]
I’ve found a way to help you save and earn whilst not selling or delivering any product. If interested, drop me an email or PM me to find out how
Try to think back if you can, when Johnny Dubya Howard was still in nappies under Fraser – Inflation at 15%, unemployment 12%, negative economic growth ie. recession when Labor came to power in 1983. 13 years later, Johnny Dubya inherits an economy that was already growing for 4 years !!!
Johnnys been running the country for years without these problems popping up again.And I don’t remember business ever being good under Labor.In fact the early 90s almost ruined my family.At the time I was a very staunch Labor supporter as well.But times change.
At this time I care about results.Not if they have been caught in a lie.Lets face it both sides dribble their fair share.For some reason I can not stand Latham.But the last time that happened was with John Howard and things worked out alright.So maybe I should consider a fresh faceIMHO Latham is just a people pleaser. He will say whatever the minorities want him to say. All promise no provision.
At least John Howard makes a decision and stands by it.
I don’t think that having a new face in the hot seat is a great justification for removing something that is working fine.
For some reason Aussies start to feel a little rebelious when power has been left with someone for long. Tall poppy sindrome?
You will always miss 100% of the shots you don’t take!
Well, Ronulas, I am not sure all Australian voters just think somneone is too big for their boots (tall poppy syndrome) and kick them out… I think voters generally look at what they believe or what they want a society to be, and vote for the Party that suits their ideology. If the main (social) issues for Australia might be: health, education, employment, environment, etc etc etc … then one looks at those issues, checks the policies of each party, and votes for the party that suits. I doubt tall poppy syndrome would have anything to do with something as serious as how the country will be organised for the next 4 years.
kay henry
Originally posted by kay henry:I think voters generally look at what they believe or what they want a society to be, and vote for the Party that suits their ideology. If the main (social) issues for Australia might be: health, education, employment, environment, etc etc etc … then one looks at those issues, checks the policies of each party, and votes for the party that suits.
Howdy Kay,
I would love to think the Australian electorate was as sophisticated as that with a “big picture” view, but I don’t think it’s necessarily the case, a lot of voters get sucked in by the most basic of things/lies. They can’t see the forest for the trees. If you asked the average voter what they thought of policy “X” of Labor or Liberal, I doubt you would elicit much information.
cheers
rrichmond, yeah, of course. I guess I was just irked at the thought of Ronulas suggesting that voters just vote a party in or out because of something like tall poppy syndrome.
Some voters make sure they find out everything they can about areas that are important to them, and know that the vote they make is a considered one.
kay henry
Originally posted by geo:My question to you all is who will be the one that will be in our favour – that will look after property investors, Latham or Howard.
Howard predicts that Latham will raise interest rates whereas Latham denies this.
Well, funny thing there… I remember quite a while ago, John Howard saying the government has no control over interest rates. Now there’s an election coming, and he’s claiming FULL CREDIT for interest rates falling. And let’s not forget – they’ve been on the rise now for what? Two or more years!? LOL!
So he’s patting himself on the back – claiming the credit for something he has no control over – which is really rising anyway – and he’s saying don’t vote Labour, or interest rates will rise.
!?!? Yeah, right. [blink]
Your opinions please?1. John Howard looks like Mr Magoo or Mr Sheen.
2. Alexander Downer reminds me of a painfully shy schoolgirl – you know – the ones that always get murdered first in the horror movies.
3. Costello – the grinning chesire cat out of Alice In Wonderland.
4. Latham – a flat-foreheaded frankenstein.
5. Amanda Vandstone – Starring in a new Disney remake this summer, as the female absent minded professor, in: “Blubber.”
Well, you *did* ask for… “opinions”.
Allan.
Originally posted by kay henry:Of course, some parties preference noone. Always good to check who the minor parties are preferencing (if they are) before making your vote, I reckon.
I didn’t realise they could do this. Pity one of the larger small parties don’t do this – and advertise the fact they won’t be giving their votes to either major party. Give it a couple of elections and they’d get in.
Really, I think WE should decide if they get to preference our vote – not them.
Oh – I was going to mention too – since Howard thinks this election is about honesty, there’s a website. JohnHowardLies.com.au or something like that, I think – that folks might want to read.
Allan.
Originally posted by Jerzy Balowski:Latham does say a lot of warm and fuzzy things. But I dont hear anyone calling them lies.
Oh, give ’em time… As we know, they ALL lie. : )
As for ‘where is the money coming from’ (add winey voice), how about we start with scrapping the FHOG (I never needed it when I bought my first house when interest rates were 15% – I survived), the $600 payment to anyone with an offspring (I’ve got 2 – I can survive without it), and the $1300 baby bonus (do people really need a bribe to GET IT ON). Who said the Labor party was champion of the handouts ?Both your paragraphs above illustrate two issues that REALLY annoy me.
People have far too short memories. Howard is making this election about “who’s telling the truth”. Well, for a start, who was it that said “A GST will never be a part of our policy.” Then it was nearly the first thing they introduced once back in power. Then when they did introduce it, Howard said we’d be paying the same or less for food.
Well, I was saying to someone just the other night, I’d just realised my family hasn’t bought a BBQ chicken since the GST came in. (I joke you not.) Before GST they were about $8. I saw one the other night at Woolies for $12! So the truth was, things now cost “the same or MORE” – not less.
Anyway…
My second point of irritation – is all the gullible fools who will vote Liberal just because they recently received his bribe in their bank accounts. This WAS a bribe and there’s no other word for it – because they overpaid many people (I know several) for kids who were mature age, working, or not even at living at home any longer… Then they didn’t reclaim that money back – and acted like it wasn’t important – while they’re still chasing widows for backpayments (that were their mistake not the widows’) and rambling on about chasing those wicked dole cheats!?!?
LOL. Sounds like what Hitler did to me. Blame the country’s problems on the Jew… er… unemployed.
Anyway, what I’m getting at is – yes, Howard just gave most of us a bribe. But do people have such short memories that they forget all the money he’s stolen from us over the years? That’s where that money came from in the first place – the ailing hospital system, medicare, bulk billing, the pharmecutical scheme reduced to the point where it’s nearly useless, pensions not kept with CPI, public school funding reduced while private increased. (Funny how most politicians come from private schools, eh?)
Latham could not be any worse.You got it in one. They’re all the same, but I’m tired of seeing his eight ball head on the news – time for a change – PLEASE!
Allan.
Originally posted by Jerzy Balowski:Try to think back if you can, when Johnny Dubya Howard was still in nappies under Fraser – Inflation at 15%, unemployment 12%…
Oh and I forgot to say – John Howard is claiming reduced unemployment levels.. Well, let’s tell the truth about this one.
1. First of all, if the PERCENTAGE of unemployed people went DOWN – but the Australian population went UP during the same time – are there less people unemployed? (Hint: Nope, there are more than ever before.)
2. Governments are always shortening the yardstick on what constitutes being unemployed. Someone who works part time one day a week is not classified as unemployed. Anyone in TAFE or Uni is not unemployed. Neither are single mothers, those who have had any kind of full time job in the last twelve months… That kind of thing.
So if the percentage of people unemployed went down, it’s more likely they’ve shifted the criteria AGAIN for who is classed as unemployed. The level didn’t change – the way they measure it did.
I’ve heard them crowing about the increased number of jobs available. They especially like to do this when a supermarket or industry opens up. But have a closer look and you’ll see the “200 more jobs in the area” are really “200 part-time jobs”. Sure there are a lot more part time jobs – but there are many more less full time jobs to make those slots available.
The result is less people in full time work, and more part-time people draining the welfare system to make the difference in their pay packets.
Read between the lines folks.
Allan.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. If you don't have an account, you can register here.
