- Banned
- #326
Gough Whitlam: Messiah or Very Naughty Boy?
- Thread starter Ice-Wolf
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Riseupaustralia
Club Legend
- Oct 12, 2014
- 1,285
- 1,353
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Banned
- #328
- Apr 4, 2013
- 13,670
- 16,890
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
People who think Murdoch has some kind of favouritism to a side of politics misunderstand him.
He is nothing but self serving. He will pick a side that favours him. Once you understand that about Murdoch, he becomes less important, though no less evil.
- Moderator
- #330
Lol.
Libertarians would never support the State having the legal power to detain people at gunpoint and imprison them indefinitately without charge, trial, natural justice or procedural fairness.
It appears as if you dont understand your own damn political paradigm.
Gus Poyet
Norm Smith Medallist
- Jul 1, 2012
- 9,253
- 4,056
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Other Teams
- Brighton & HA, Boston Celtics
- Banned
- #331
You are correct if they are citizens of the nation. You are incorrect if you are refering to anyone like a foreign agitator or boat person who is trying to gain entry to the country through channels not accepted by the nation.
So who are you refering too?
Maybe you havent been paying attention but David Leyonhjelm has been making a bit of noise lately(in opposition to) in regards to the new proposed laws and powers realting to the whole terrorist hoo-ha.
I understand it prefectly well thanks for enquiring.
FFS you have no idea. If the price of something due to govt intervention is lower than it would otherwise be then there is more demand for that product and a greater supply in to the market place . It is the govt that creates too many graduates and thus the govt that has dumbed it down via oversupply.
Such interference in price setting is completely against the notions of a free market
Libertarianism isn't anarchy. You are basically arguing all libertarians should believe in totally open borders. Few would agree. See Ron Paul.
Last edited:
There used to be a reasonable correlation between poverty and crime but its seemingly broken down in the last 20-30 years. Noone exactly knows why. See Freakonomics on the topic.
However, once again you ignore the obvious. The THREAT of homelessness acts as a deterrent to anti social behaviour
- Sep 27, 2014
- 34,227
- 28,858
- AFL Club
- Essendon
A good Prime Minister who achieved a lot. Conservatives hate him because of it and masturbate to his unconstitutional dismissal.
- Banned
- #335
Gough Whitlam, Kevin Rudd and Julia Gillard. All three tried their best to F### this country.
- Sep 27, 2014
- 34,227
- 28,858
- AFL Club
- Essendon
Gus Poyet reminds me of this
Riseupaustralia
Club Legend
- Oct 12, 2014
- 1,285
- 1,353
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Banned
- #337
You're a Kiwi.
Jiska
Moderator
- Moderator
- #338
Yes, and no. Consultation would have just meant delaying the inevitable and dragging it out, costing millions of dollars. Consultation is a fancy way of saying this is where we need to be, how do we go about doing it slowly instead of just making the decision now and getting it done.
The Government should have stopped subsidising the manufacturing industry decades ago. They were never going to be able to pour enough money in to keep, for example, car manufacturers here. All they did was waste billions upon billions prolonging the inevitable. They would have been better spending that money decades ago on retraining workers rather than pouring money down the drain. Both the Labor and Liberal Parties are both complicit.
Jiska
Moderator
- Moderator
- #339
So says you. At least they tried to make fundamental long term change for the betterment of the country, even if I didn't agree with some of it, at least they had a vision. On the contrary, Howard sat around and did * all for 12 years during a mining boom and did nothing but deliver tax cuts to middle and high income earners.
I note your admission of Hawke and Keating - are you happy with their efforts?
As opposed to Pig Iron Bob and his mates in the Cultural Cringe, British To the Bootstraps mentality chasing knighthoods for SFA.
You don't use money to go about your life?
Money might not be the government's possession, in the literal sense. But it sure isn't yours. It is created by the government for the people to use, and is not designed to be kept. I can never understand why right leaning people speak of money as something solid, something to have possession of. Whereas, the economic system we live in is fluid. In fact, I find right wing people in particular refer to money as something solid and fluid at the same time, when it suits them. They just go round in circles with their justifications.
I can never understand why right leaning people take the possession of money so personally. What's it to them? Would you know why?
Rudd and Gillard had a vision? Sure, its not like they ever backed down when a bit of pressure was on them eg mining tax, refugees, ETS.
Delivering tax cuts is the single best thing any govt can do ie putting money back with its rightful owners
NB terms of trade was better under Rudd/Gillard than under Howard.
Wow.
Jiska
Moderator
- Moderator
- #343
Let me be the first to say that I never liked Gillard one bit. That being said, her disability scheme was first class and will (or should) stand the test of time.
Rudd probably should have gone to a double dissolution on the ETS, which was a great policy, so much so that it cost Malcolm Turnbull the leadership. The building of the NBN was a revolutionary vision. At the end of the day he sold it was fast internet, but what he should have done was sell it as upgrading the century old copper network to provide future services to the home. When the copper network first went in it was for telegrams. Now it's used to provide internet, health services, emergency services, telephone etc. etc. Who knows what future technologies Fibre could bring in 50 years time? He's mining tax was a lot better than the crap Julia bought in too, at least he had the right formula, but at the end of the day he was knifed by people hungry for power, which Gough avoided.
And therein lies the fundamental problem with the Australian society. The best thing we could have done with that money is invest in infrastructure to build the future rather than continuously chasing our tail and trying to catch up with our exponential population growth. At the end of the day, $2 extra a week makes * all difference to the average tax payer, but it makes a massive difference for infrastructure growth.
We can have tax cuts and infrastructure. Its not zero sum.
The problem is when governments spend money on inftrastructure they tend to waste it ie Alice to Darwin Railway, NBN, pink batts etc.
How about a world class rail/metro system instead of chasing the youth vote. No brainer
Agree that exponential population growth is idiotic.
You are predicting the dumbing down with the quantity of degrees being supplied, and not with the quality of the degree.
If the standards of the degree are not lowered and more people pass, then you have INCREASED the education average of your population.
Going by your argument, when it became mandatory for all children to complete year ten, the quality of their education should have fallen, because there are more of them that now have a leaver's certificate.
Oh, and an unregulated free market sucks dogs ball.
The Coup
Premiership Player
- Sep 4, 2014
- 3,641
- 1,682
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
- Banned
- #347
The standard has dropped though.
Even in the perpetual circle jerk of univeristy rankings, the Aussie universities are falling.
First hand anecdote: the profit motive has ruined university degrees due to the glut of international students with poor english skills being balanced with a need to at least pass those students
Spreading access to education is great, if you're funding education and the students are your own people and the quality of the education is maintained. Unless you see university purely as a place to learn work skills, in which case the proliferation of degrees makes entering the job market harder and the value of those degrees is lessened simply due to supply and demand.
Our economic system is at odds with quality education.
- Apr 2, 2013
- 10,981
- 16,393
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
Agree with most of this. Rudd's vision and ideas were overall pretty good he just couldn't get them implemented.......be it through poor management, micro managing, inability to delegate. Gillard could never shake the illegitimacy tag but in the long run she will go down as the better PM to spite buckiling and caving on certain policies for the simple fact she got things done where Rudd couldn't to spite having an inferior political vision. Really botched what were good conditions, climate and the time for reform did Labor.
As for Whitlam and the thread. A bit of both. Sure he was a sh*& economic manager that nearly drove the country to the wall but his social reforms, diplomatic strategy and key National Visions have stood the test of time (as they were ahead of his time and truly reforming) and have benefited Australia in the long run.
