Fraser on Q & A

[medusala]

With about 30-40,000 readership in Melbourne the OZ has to be losing heaps of money its only Murdoch.s stubbon pride that keeps it going.Once it was a great read now just a right wing rag. not worth wiping your arse on!

What a relief it is that it does not subscribe to your Joan Kirner like views.

Murdoch can subsidise the Oz because he knows how to sell papers and thus can produce quality broadsheets with the cash.

Fairfax can do neither (ex AFR)

http://www.mediaspy.org/report/2010/08/13/circulation-newspapers-take-another-hit/

The Australian Financial Review again stood out for its declining performance, mirroring the poor readership figures released yesterday and its precipitous decline in the first quarter. June quarter circulation for the publication’s weekday edition fell by 5.8 per cent to 77,046, although its Saturday edition had a smaller 1.1 per cent drop.

Elsewhere in the national press, The Australian recorded a small decline on weekdays, dropping 0.5 per cent to 135,115, but The Weekend Australian fell 2.3 per cent to 300,389.

Fairfax‘s Melbourne newspaper The Age also experienced a notable drop, decreasing by 4.5 per cent on weekdays to register circulation of 197,500, while its Saturday edition fell 4 per cent to 279,900. The Sunday Age fell by 0.3 per cent. Melbourne’s Herald Sun also fell, registering falls of 2.1 per cent across weekdays (515,500 overall) and Saturday, and falling 3.2 per cent on Sunday.

In Sydney, the market-leading The Daily Telegraph declined 3.8 per cent to 374,395 on weekdays, although its Saturday edition was one of the few publications to record an increase (0.8 per cent). The Sydney Morning Herald experienced a 1.4 per cent decline on weekdays and was steady on Saturday.

Elsewhere around the country, Brisbane’s The Courier-Mail dipped by 1.4 per cent on weekdays to 216,638, while The Advertiser in Adelaide dropped 4.1 per cent to 180,091.

 

[Eastern Rangers]

Van Onselen etc are hardly Lib fanbois.

Clearly highlights how highly warped your opinion of the political spectrum is. PvO is a Liberal man through and through. He's one of the less bias opinion columnists at the Australian because he's very much a traditional Liberal.

 

[Eastern Rangers]

Tax cuts are good for economic growth. That is beyond dispute (unlike spending tens of billions of NBN)

So is fiscal stimulus and investment in critical infrastructure in a General sense.

I'm not sure many people will dispute the fact that the NBN will be good for the economy, it's on a costs to benefits ratio on a short term time line where the argument seems to be. I'm not sure there is any long term example of what we can expect from the NBN in terms of it's long term effects on our economy, insofar that the modelling wont and can't include technologies and services that don't yet exist.

It's not a case of market delivery because the very fibre in the ground is the the foundations for future service delivery. It's comparable to say the human genome project, a project that had no commercial foundation but has and will spawn an incomprehensible amount of commercial applications.
yet.

 

[Nankervis brothers]

Speaking of The Australians bias, check out the dummy spit here by Shanahan. By his partisan logic, Gillard, who finds herself in the same hung parliament as Abbott, is a manipulative schemer for simply negotiating with Brandt and Wilkie. See here:

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...re-of-the-absurd/story-e6frg6zo-1225913549262

This guy is a joke. His barracking is too obvious and plain to see. It has even reached the point that Gillard is now taking thinly veiled pot shots at him ( i noticed this in a speech she delivered at the National Press Club a few day ago). Surely it is time for him to renew his LNP membership and take retirement.

 

[medusala]

So is fiscal stimulus and investment in critical infrastructure in a General sense.

Spending generally delivers far less benefit than tax cuts. Lower taxing economies are better than higher taxing economies which will result from higher spending.

No sane person would argue the NBN represents critical infrastructure.

I'm not sure many people will dispute the fact that the NBN will be good for the economy, it's on a costs to benefits ratio on a short term time line where the argument seems to be.

??? Many if not most will. The marginal return from an increase in speed from 2mb to 100mb is very small. Few users want it nor need it, those that can are generally able to access it now.

I'm not sure there is any long term example of what we can expect from the NBN in terms of it's long term effects on our economy, insofar that the modelling wont and can't include technologies and services that don't yet exist.

Wow! So its all pie in the sky stuff. A frank admission.

How can you then say few will dispute it will be good for the economy when you yourself struggle to say how the economy will benefit?

Clearly highlights how highly warped your opinion of the political spectrum is. PvO is a Liberal man through and through. He's one of the less bias opinion columnists at the Australian because he's very much a traditional Liberal.

Being a liberal and being a Liberal party fanboi are two very different things. He is the former, Shanahan the latter.

I fail to see why people can not grasp this. If a paper makes it blatantly clear that it favour liberalism then it surely follows that all things being equal it is more likely to support a party that (supposedly) agrees with this philosophy over one that clearly at the moment does not.

 

[1jasonoz]

It is not budgeted, the final figure is not not known.



It is going to cost far more than that. Tanner had to defend this at the time of th last budget.



It is the opinion of virtually all credible analysts. Even the chap in charge had to admit it would struggle to make a profit.



Merely an example re the top rate of tax.



Tax cuts are good for economic growth. That is beyond dispute (unlike spending tens of billions of NBN)

It is not budgeted, the final figure is not not known.

So it's not known, yet you have claimed it to be $21 billion, $43 billion and now $40 billion, make up your mind will you if your going to start posting figures, you make the Green supporters look like Economic wizards with your constant changes.

It is going to cost far more than that. Tanner had to defend this at the time of th last budget.

You claimed their was no costing int he forward estimates for the NBN, that is blatantly incorrect and i am wondering why you have repeated this incorrect stated despite it being wrong and afetr you have been corrected?

The ALP has provided $18.3 billion over the forward estimates for the NBN (forward estimates you claimed had not occurred), the Liberals have used this very figure of $18.3 billion as a saving in their election costing by not going ahead with it, plus also included the interest they state they would save by not going ahead with this $18.3 billion contained in the forward estimates-which you deny even exists.

It is the opinion of virtually all credible analysts. Even the chap in charge had to admit it would struggle to make a profit.

Credible analysts equal does entities that some agree with you; you will have to roll out another IPA or HR Nicklarse quote to support i believe on this subject.

Tax cuts are good for economic growth.

Correct, so what would be the effect of not you milkshake and sandwich tax cut of a $1 billion tax cut, but of taxation reform that broadened the tax based through means testing and using these savings to undertake wholesale taxation reform (not some laughable big scope milkshake tax cut you propose )?

Also why have you dropped you little "high speed pr0n" statement since Abbott announced his $6 billion broadband plan; is Abbotts broadband plan high or low speed pr0n?

No sane person would argue the NBN represents critical infrastructure.

Actually those people who don't make the Greens posters around here look like economic wizards, understand the critical nature of high speed broadband in our future economy; just like Abbott does with his $6 billion plan and the NZ Conservative government does with their national plan.

 

[Wonaeamirri33]

Sounds like someone's got a bug up his arse! I'm detecting a trend here, some sort of pattern

you make the Green supporters look like Economic wizards with your constant changes.

those people who don't make the Greens posters around here look like economic wizards

Buy a new slogan Jase.

Or better yet, actually try to mount some sort of genuine substantive argument beyond sloganeering and cheap line-slinging in this regard.

Use of the Abbott technique does not impress. Just looks like another form of superficial barracking...

 

[Hawkamania!]

I think we might be waiting a while for a reply!
The Herald Sun is hopelessly sensationalist, while Fairfax is very left-wing, both in its writers and its readers judging by the letters section. The Australian is conservative, but it's reasonably objective. Like the AFR it has its audience and is economically liberal. It is by far the best paper in the country (at least that I've read).

Looks as if finders is ignoring your post. Partisan eyes often fail picking up the obvious.

 

[1jasonoz]

Sounds like someone's got a bug up his arse! I'm detecting a trend here, some sort of pattern

Buy a new slogan Jase.

Or better yet, actually try to mount some sort of genuine substantive argument beyond sloganeering and cheap line-slinging in this regard.

Use of the Abbott technique does not impress. Just looks like another form of superficial barracking...

I see you yet again had to go back and modify your post after you originally posted it (but before the sites counter recorded your change).

Do you think there is any reason that i laugh at the Greens voters who constantly get shown up by the boards buffoon on economic matters?

Come on if you can't match it with the boards buffoon who slides between total free market economics (and denounces any government involvement in the market place (picking winners i believe)), to supporting the government providing subsidies to certain areas (re rural & regional areas) of the market for individuals who make an informed choice to live in these areas?

If you can't get over this buffoon and have to continually modify your posts due to you posting incorrect information then you deserve as much derision as they receive.

 

[Wonaeamirri33]

A lame post is lame whether it is edited or not, amigo. Not to mention intentionally dishonest and untruthful. Clearly your integrity is slipping drastically...

Do you think there is any reason that i laugh at the Greens voters who constantly get shown up by the boards buffoon

Come on if you can't match it with the boards buffoon

If you can't get over this buffoon

Sloganeering over substance again. And so creative and interesting to read too.

I also note the use of the Meds Method within that post of yours. Obviously you've spent much too much time with him yourself, to the point where you're now borrowing his childish techniques

Like I tell him, making up bollocks about old threads and repeating empty throwaway lines doesn't substitute for a real argument. But now you're following him into the same fallacious antics.

You're regressing Comrade... I can detect the brain cells evaporating before my eyes

PS- And that's one thread thus far where your new ally has been able to lay claim to such a misstatement on my part. One thread, where I readily owned up to the mistake. And unlike your ally, I always take that approach when it's appropriate to do so, because that's what honesty is about.

So yes, you're being deliberately deceitful here, just like him in this regard.

 

[1jasonoz]

A lame post is lame whether it is edited or not, amigo. Not to mention intentionally dishonest and untruthful. Clearly your integrity is slipping drastically...







Sloganeering over substance again. And so creative and interesting to read too.

I also note the use of the Meds Method within that post of yours. Obviously you've spent much too much time with him yourself, to the point where you're now borrowing his childish techniques

Like I tell him, making up bollocks about old threads and repeating empty throwaway lines doesn't substitute for a real argument. But now you're following him into the same fallacious antics.

You're regressing Comrade... I can detect the brain cells evaporating before my eyes

PS- And that's one thread thus far where your new ally has been able to lay claim to such a misstatement on my part. One thread, where I readily owned up to the mistake. And unlike your ally, I always take that approach when it's appropriate to do so, because that's what honesty is about.

So yes, you're being deliberately deceitful here, just like him in this regard.

Another post you had to edit after posting it; enough said when you seem to shot yourself in the foot.

PS- And that's one thread thus far where your new ally has been able to lay claim to such a misstatement on my part. One thread, where I readily owned up to the mistake. And unlike your ally, I always take that approach when it's appropriate to do so, because that's what honesty is about.

My new ally, i treat you both with the same contempt actually.

 

[Wonaeamirri33]

enough said when you seem to shot yourself in the foot.

Sure I did kiddo.

One thread where your fellow-traveller found a misstatement on my part, which I readily admitted to on that thread at the time I made that mistake.

Whereas you were dishonestly claiming that I 'continuously' posted incorrect information. That was just a straight-out lie on your part.

As I said, your integrity is slipping badly.

 

[Hawkamania!]

Sounds like someone's got a bug up his arse! I'm detecting a trend here, some sort of pattern

Buy a new slogan Jase.

Or better yet, actually try to mount some sort of genuine substantive argument beyond sloganeering and cheap line-slinging in this regard.

Use of the Abbott technique does not impress. Just looks like another form of superficial barracking...

Hypocritical post is hypocritical.

 

[Wonaeamirri33]

Appropriate post is appropriate

EFA mate. It's BigFooty physics, an ill-conceived potshot will cause an equal reaction of return fire in kind. But of a better-conceived nature in this case.

I'm usually the one who debunks the throwaway lines- and when I do resort to lines and potshots, they're never cheap, or of a throwaway nature. Not a bit of it. Each and every one a jewel of high price!

My barbs are the product of superior craftsmanship, and I personally guarantee their quality...

 

[medusala]

So it's not known, yet you have claimed it to be $21 billion, $43 billion and now $40 billion, make up your mind will you if your going to start posting figures, you make the Green supporters look like Economic wizards with your constant changes.

One is estimated (though the estmimate may well be wrong, one is budgeted/has been spent.

You claimed their was no costing int he forward estimates for the NBN, that is blatantly incorrect and i am wondering why you have repeated this incorrect stated despite it being wrong and afetr you have been corrected?

It is not fully costed. That is correct.

Credible analysts equal does entities that some agree with you; you will have to roll out another IPA or HR Nicklarse quote to support i believe on this subject.

See Goldmans and other analysts.

http://www.businessspectator.com.au...-to-NBN-profits-pd20090903-VJ4QE?OpenDocument

Goldman Sachs’ telecommunication analysts, however, last month assessed the net present value of the NBN at negative $9 billion.

Also why have you dropped you little "high speed pr0n" statement since Abbott announced his $6 billion broadband plan; is Abbotts broadband plan high or low speed pr0n?

It is high speed pr0n. There is no market failure in the cities.

Actually those people who don't make the Greens posters around here look like economic wizards, understand the critical nature of high speed broadband in our future economy; just like Abbott does with his $6 billion plan and the NZ Conservative government does with their national plan.

Noone has demonstrated any critical need for NBN. Where is the Treasury cost benefit?

Do you really think none was ever carried out? That would imply gross incompetence on their behalf.

FFS look at the nonsense Garnaut came out with respect to the ETS, no matter how much they fudged the figures they couldnt get NBN to look any good.

There is no basis to say NBN is a great investment for the government.

 

[medusala]

I see you yet again had to go back and modify your post after you originally posted it (but before the sites counter recorded your change).

Do you think there is any reason that i laugh at the Greens voters who constantly get shown up by the boards buffoon on economic matters?

Come on if you can't match it with the boards buffoon who slides between total free market economics (and denounces any government involvement in the market place (picking winners i believe)), to supporting the government providing subsidies to certain areas (re rural & regional areas) of the market for individuals who make an informed choice to live in these areas?

If you can't get over this buffoon and have to continually modify your posts due to you posting incorrect information then you deserve as much derision as they receive.

Come on if you can't match it with the boards buffoon who slides between total free market economics (and denounces any government involvement in the market place (picking winners i believe)), to supporting the government providing subsidies to certain areas (re rural & regional areas) of the market for individuals who make an informed choice to live in these areas?

You really are thick. It costs more to deliver services there. You may as well argue the dole should be less in WA because it is more expensive to service there than NSW. It is hardly incompatible with believing in neo liberalism to believe in a minimum government standard with respect to service delivery.

We should deny people outside of capital cities access to health, education and welfare because the cost per head is higher than in Sydney?

NB there is one only person who supports fascism on this board and it's you. The same person who praises neo liberalism under Keating but derides it under Thatcher (not to mention loving monopolies).

 

[fairdinkum]

Agree re Janet [Alrechtsen], Miranda Devine is better (and better looking).

The topic of attractive women in political journalism needs its own thread imo.

I know you're an avid Oz reader, Meds. Did you enjoy this article as much as me?

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...ng-at-mummy-pr0n/story-e6frg7bo-1226428481063

To be sure, James's prose can be worse than corny. But then this is pr0n, right? The snobbery of so many feminist critics may explain why the rest of us steer clear of the F-label. A few minutes a day fantasising about a little bottom spanking is harmless fun.

And the success of James's books suggests that she understands women much better than does a "social activist" or a bra-burning, book-burning columnist at The Independent...

Like feminists, these metrosexual types seem bewildered by the thought that women might like to fantasise about being bound so tight, the ties leave marks on her body.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...ng-at-mummy-pr0n/story-e6frg7bo-1226428481063

Oh, Janet.

 

[noddy]

^^^
I must have led a very sheltered life.

But Janet does have that "come on" look, well sort of i guess in a weird sort of way.

 

[evo]

^ Forget meds, that post is crying out for Contra's input.

 

[Slax]

I actually find the most interesting thing about the current positioning of both the ALP and Coalation is that the people they claim to look up to in the likes of Hawke/Menzies/Fraser are all further left than the current ALP.

Politics in this country has moved alarmingly to the right in the past 15 years and it is all on the back of negative campaigning. We no longer have proper debates about policy or even scutiny of policy in the press. We are run by a bunch of people who only want to call each other names and claim that they are destroying the country without actually going into detail about what they are doing wrong and offering an alternative.

We as a country are heading backwards at a rate of knots and no-one in Canberra seems to care

 

[medusala]

 

[pazza]

I actually find the most interesting thing about the current positioning of both the ALP and Coalation is that the people they claim to look up to in the likes of Hawke/Menzies/Fraser are all further left than the current ALP.

Politics in this country has moved alarmingly to the right in the past 15 years and it is all on the back of negative campaigning. We no longer have proper debates about policy or even scutiny of policy in the press. We are run by a bunch of people who only want to call each other names and claim that they are destroying the country without actually going into detail about what they are doing wrong and offering an alternative.

We as a country are heading backwards at a rate of knots and no-one in Canberra seems to care

That's the point I was trying to put to Trips yesterday and he wouldn't have a bar of it.

 

[Inferno]

I actually find the most interesting thing about the current positioning of both the ALP and Coalation is that the people they claim to look up to in the likes of Hawke/Menzies/Fraser are all further left than the current ALP.

Politics in this country has moved alarmingly to the right in the past 15 years and it is all on the back of negative campaigning. We no longer have proper debates about policy or even scutiny of policy in the press. We are run by a bunch of people who only want to call each other names and claim that they are destroying the country without actually going into detail about what they are doing wrong and offering an alternative.

We as a country are heading backwards at a rate of knots and no-one in Canberra seems to care

The Coalition have clearly moved to the right since the days of Fraser and Menzies, particularly in regards to economic policy. Both were your traditional Victorian moderates, where as Howard and Abbott obviously come from the more conservative NSW branch of the party. I think Fraser was more the exception then the rule in terms of leadership in the Libs anyway.

However I think people overstate how much the ALP has moved to the right. The major difference I see is the shift away from being a reformist party with clear ideas that they aggressively pushed from the 1970's-80's with the likes of Hawke, Dunstan, Wran, Cain etc into a far more reactive, managerialist party. I don't think the current government is dramatically more right wing then Keating's, it's just far more incompetent and spends more energy on pandering to outer suburban conservatives ("working families"). They really did nothing in Opposition during the Howard years and hoped to get elected on a single issue (GST) the first two elections they faced Howard in and by having flashy leaders the last two elections they faced him in. Their biggest problem is policy development as well as a willingness and reasoning to push for reform.

 

[John]

I read the Fin this morning and that left wing pinko journal of note (hee hee) had as it main headline something along the lines that the Carbon tax was the cause of the gambling class sticking its funds into pokies. Once one read the story proper it was a wonderful headline of propaganda that the Murdoch press would have been proud off. The beat up was based on QLD results for the last couple of months and deep in the detail said that every time there was an interest rate cut, a tax cut etc etc the numbers spiked up to 12% (if my memory serves me correctly) and then slips back to normal levels after a short while. I have no idea as to the Carbon tax being a good or bad thing but this headline was the biggest load of nonsense once the item was read. The media is really a confidence trick of the highest order.

 

[John]

I would have thought Rupert did not want to make the same mistake twice.

Me neither Meds .