Gough Whitlam: Messiah or Very Naughty Boy?

Messiah or Very Naughty Boy?

  • Messiah

    Votes: 37 72.5%

  • Very Naughty Boy

    Votes: 7 13.7%

  • What the?

    Votes: 7 13.7%
  • Total voters
    51

Remove this Banner Ad

bst4-1.gif


Chart 1: Australia’s unemployment rate, 1945-46 to 2003-04

The increase in the structural rate of unemployment since the mid-1970s likely reflected a range of factors. In the 1970s, poor macroeconomic policy management (especially in the face of the first oil price shock), combined with rigid institutional arrangements in the labour market and strong union influence, resulted in much higher inflation and a sharp increase in real wages relative to underlying trends in productivity. The resultant real wage ‘overhang’ resulted in a reduction in employment opportunities and rising unemployment as businesses reacted to the increased cost of labour.
Click to expand...


Says it all really. I loved Gough at the time as we suddenly got an extra weeks holiday and leave loading.

I wonder now how many people lost their jobs because of it.
 
Todman said:
Murdoch didn't have as much influence as Frank Packer back then. Media ownership restriction laws back then meant that Murdoch had "The Australian" and the Adelaide advertiser.
Click to expand...

http://www.smh.com.au/national/murdoch-editors-told-to-kill-whitlam-in-1975-20140627-zson7.html

With a publishing empire that included The Australian as well as daily or Sunday newspapers in every Australian capital, Mr Murdoch's new editorial direction was seen as a critical political development.
Click to expand...

Again, stop making s**t up.
 
Ripper said:
Says it all really. I loved Gough at the time as we suddenly got an extra weeks holiday and leave loading.

I wonder now how many people lost their jobs because of it.
Click to expand...

Telling stats that expose the fatal flaw of Green/Labor supporters. They accuse Libs of no social conscience for resisting policies that ultimately result in a poorer nation. A society with fewer opportunities and reduced capacity to help those in need.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Ice-Wolf said:
Uh, you do now what Unions and Unionists are for don't you? Are you sure you didn't forgot the word corrupt in there somewhere?
Click to expand...

Corrupt is assumed.

Lately unionists are all about stealing from their members to fund house renovations for their mistresses.
 
Xsess said:
Telling stats that expose the fatal flaw of Green/Labor supporters. They accuse Libs of no social conscience for resisting policies that ultimately result in a poorer nation. A society with fewer opportunities and reduced capacity to help those in need.
Click to expand...

Good intentions are all that count.

The fact that their good intentions always result in horrible outcomes is neither here nor there.
 
B4Bear said:
To para-phrase that Woolworth's ode to the bogan: If you don't like it leave.

The airport is over there ----->

There are plenty of people in America that share your view, I am sure they would welcome you into their caring arms.

BTW, it is not your money, it is the Government's money. Pleae point out to me the place in the constitution where it says that it is your money, nah didn't think so.

You are happy to reap the benifits of a society where you can while stomping on the face of anyone that is less fortunate than yourself, and who might need a hand up.

Churlish, childish and just down right spiteful. Do you have a picture of the Mincing Poodle or Andrew Bolt on your wall? If not you should, they are fellow travelers on your hate filled life.
Click to expand...
When the good times are over, people like you will find that the cupboard is empty. You will expect the government to prop you up and they will have no one to steal the money off.
 
B4Bear said:
BTW, it is not your money, it is the Government's money. Pleae point out to me the place in the constitution where it says that it is your money, nah didn't think so.
Click to expand...

I am honestly gobsmacked that there are people who think like this.

Where do you think the government got that money?

They stole it, at gunpoint, from working Australians.

Don't believe me? Don't pay your tax. Men with guns will turn up at your house and insist that you do.
 
pokerspiv said:
I am honestly gobsmacked that there are people who think like this.

Where do you think the government got that money?

They stole it, at gunpoint, from working Australians.

Don't believe me? Don't pay your tax. Men with guns will turn up at your house and insist that you do.
Click to expand...
It's the fee for the government providing the framework that allows you to make that money. It was always their cut.
 
pokerspiv said:
And yet Gough ruled with a heavier hand than any Australian prime minister before or since.

Some people just enjoy being ruled I guess.

Personally I just wish politicians would **** off and leave me alone.
Click to expand...

You believe nothing of the sort. You are more than happy for politicians to involve themselves on peoples lives when it agrees with your political views.
 
B4Bear said:
BTW, it is not your money, it is the Government's money. Pleae point out to me the place in the constitution where it says that it is your money, nah didn't think so. You are happy to reap the benifits of a society where you can while stomping on the face of anyone that is less fortunate than yourself, and who might need a hand up.
Click to expand...

This isn't remotely true but its an astonishing concept all the same. I just cant believe what you propose hasn't been done before!! So you remove individuals rights to own anything and void everything to the state. The government can then distribute wealth evenly, to every citizen, for the good of all (especially those who dont earn or produce anything (and therefore need help)). As I type this my head is filled with the possibilities. What a wonderful system of government!! We could even do away with elections if all the nations policies are centred on this one system of government. Everyone is equal, everyone gets the same, everyone prospers equally. We would just need one man, a supreme benefactor to administer it fairly. What could possibly go wrong?

No wonder you recieved a bunch of "likes".
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Elroo said:
Rubbish stop your lies. You have previously been caught out as you have been now.

Your more than happy for the Australian government to do anything militarily another foreign nation, the good old US of A asks.
Click to expand...

Only because it's the cheaper option.

I'm guessing you'd rather raise taxes to 70% so we can buy our own aircraft carriers?

I have not been "previously caught out" at all. I am a libertarian. I would prefer there was no government at all. But given that we do have one I feel I am still entitled as anyone else here to have a say in how it operates.
 
pokerspiv said:
Only because it's the cheaper option.

I'm guessing you'd rather raise taxes to 70% so we can buy our own aircraft carriers?

I have not been "previously caught out" at all. I am a libertarian. I would prefer there was no government at all. But given that we do have one I feel I am still entitled as anyone else here to have a say in how it operates.
Click to expand...

I'd rather we'd reduce our defence expenditure full stop. Not be the lacky for any other foreign power and to what ever they ask of us militarily. You got caught out over the NBN and industrial laws in Europe, your not a libertarian you have no idea what a libertarian is.
 
Nikita Blue said:
(d) The US was so aghast that notorious left-winger Nixon followed his lead in recognising China
.
Click to expand...

Whitlam’s visit to China did result in a historic trade agreement.. which was the beginning of the end for Australian manufacturing because he cut tariff’s across the board by 25% without any consultation with industry in the 1973 budget.

138,000 jobs were lost in manufacturing over the next 2 years.
 
Xsess said:
This isn't remotely true but its an astonishing concept all the same. I just cant believe what you propose hasn't been done before!! So you remove individuals rights to own anything and void everything to the state. The government can then distribute wealth evenly, to every citizen, for the good of all (especially those who dont earn or produce anything (and therefore need help)). As I type this my head is filled with the possibilities. What a wonderful system of government!! We could even do away with elections if all the nations policies are centred on this one system of government. Everyone is equal, everyone gets the same, everyone prospers equally. We would just need one man, a supreme benefactor to administer it fairly. What could possibly go wrong?

No wonder you recieved a bunch of "likes".
Click to expand...


There is taking something out of context.

And then there is the rather pathetic load of drivel that you can read above.

You do understand that taxes allow you to drive on safe roads, have hospital access when you are sick, send your kids to school or indeed educate yourself and so on? Let's call it the price of living in a civilised society.

Perhaps it is a bit much for sensible people to ask the selfish right to understand the concept of social infrastructure and politely request that they contribute to it. Heaven forbid you be deprived of that new BMW to go with your two other cars, three investment properties and the share portfolio. You people have no concept of social morality.
 
pokerspiv said:
Only because it's the cheaper option.

I'm guessing you'd rather raise taxes to 70% so we can buy our own aircraft carriers?

I have not been "previously caught out" at all. I am a libertarian. I would prefer there was no government at all. But given that we do have one I feel I am still entitled as anyone else here to have a say in how it operates.
Click to expand...

This is what I love about you so called, "Libertarians." You preach against the need for government yet not one of you intellectual heavyweights is able to put forward an alternative that might even remotely work. The second underlined sentence is an utter nonsense. You have that now. It is called a parliamentary democracy and Australia has been run under one of these since 1901. If you are so hell bent on having your say, how about some of you "Libertarians" stand up and run for office? That might be better than bitching about how tough things are from your high horse.

Seriously, calling yourself a Libertarian is no badge of honour. Let me assure you.
 
Last edited:
The Cryptkeeper said:
Heaven forbid you be deprived of that new BMW to go with your two other cars, three investment properties and the share portfolio. You people have no concept of social morality.
Click to expand...

Mrs Xsess and I are more concerned about living on one income for as long as we can, so we dont have to send our two little kids to daycare (ie to be raised by mainly braindead high school dropouts). After that it will be a tear arse to pay for private schooling because public system is stuffed. All while paying for your eventual kids.
 
Xsess said:
Mrs Xsess and I are more concerned about living on one income for as long as we can, so we dont have to send our little two kids to daycare. After that it will be a tear arse to pay for private schooling (because public system is stuffed). In both cases we will be paying for your eventual kids, twice.
Click to expand...


No need to worry, I do just fine fella. Both the wife and I are degree qualified and have a good jobs. The difference between you and me though is that I am quite happy to pay my taxes given the lifestyle I am afforded and I am also very happy to see as much of these taxes as possible go to those in need.

This doesn't make me a hero by any means. I like to think that any reasonable person thinks this way. So I am not sure where this leaves people like you and your right wing and "Libertarian" mates.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top