Politics & Government The Politics Thread

Remove this Banner Ad

Iva Bigun said:
My point is Labor doesn't repay debt, so GDP % is irrelevant if your incompetent

BTW did you happen to catch that the Unions released the makeup of the cabinet before the government tonight, we know who is in change now don't we.
Click to expand...
If you're one of the few countries in the world to keep debt manageable, considering that most other countries borrowed to keep their economies chugging via stimulus packages (i.e. investments in infrastructure causing a multiplier effect, lowered taxes, increased benefit, loan, and grant spending, that sort of thing), it simply makes no sense to call the Labor Party incompetent in that sense. They ran one of the best performing economies in the world as compared to the rest of the world.

If you look at this link, you can see that our economy's size (calculated via PPP) grew at a faster annual rate under Labor (2007-2012) than under the prior Liberal Party (1996-2007).

You simply can't criticise the Labor Party's economic management. The numbers just don't allow it.

In my eyes, the Labor Party's incompetence was in their infighting and inability to appear stable to a public who were looking for stable leadership during the GFC. They definitely jumped the gun when they got rid of Kevin Rudd due to poor polls, and even more stupidly, replaced him with Julia Gillard. They also promised a surplus that they couldn't deliver, and I have no idea why they even bothered promising one, considering the economic climate of the world at the time (GFC), and also in consideration that a surplus really isn't all that important... To put this into perspective: Gough Whitlam, supposedly a guy who was in the process of ruining Australia's economy during his time in office of three years, delivered a surplus every single one of those years. His successor Malcolm Fraser (with Phillip Lynch and John Howard as his treasurers) only delivered two surpluses in eight years. The problem is if we use surpluses and deficits as the be-all and end-all of economic management, then suddenly Malcolm Fraser and John Howard were economic ninnies, and Gough Whitlam and his plethora of treasurers were economic masterminds.
 
Last edited:
jackenny said:
If you're one of the few countries in the world to keep debt manageable, considering that most other countries borrowed to keep their economies chugging via stimulus packages (i.e. investments in infrastructure causing a multiplier effect, lowered taxes, increased benefit, loan, and grant spending, that sort of thing), it simply makes no sense to call the Labor Party incompetent in that sense. They ran one of the best performing economies in the world as compared to the rest of the world.

If you look at this link, you can see that our economy's size (calculated via PPP) grew at a faster annual rate under Labor (2007-2012) than under the prior Liberal Party (1996-2007).

You simply can't criticise the Labor Party's economic management. The numbers just don't allow it.

In my eyes, the Labor Party's incompetence was in their infighting and inability to appear stable to a public who were looking for stable leadership during the GFC. They definitely jumped the gun when they got rid of Kevin Rudd due to poor polls, and even more stupidly, replaced him with Julia Gillard. They also promised a surplus that they couldn't deliver, and I have no idea why they even bothered promising one, considering the economic climate of the world at the time (GFC), and also in consideration that a surplus really isn't all that important... To put this into perspective: Gough Whitlam, supposedly a guy who was in the process of ruining Australia's economy during his time in office of three years, delivered a surplus every single one of those years. His successor Malcolm Fraser (with Phillip Lynch and John Howard as his treasurers) only delivered two surpluses in eight years. The problem is if we use surpluses and deficits as the be-all and end-all of economic management, then suddenly Malcolm Fraser and John Howard were economic ninnies, and Gough Whitlam and his plethora of treasurers were economic masterminds.
Click to expand...
This is a truly fantastic summary. Well done!
 

Log in to remove this ad.

jackenny said:
If you're one of the few countries in the world to keep debt manageable, considering that most other countries borrowed to keep their economies chugging via stimulus packages (i.e. investments in infrastructure causing a multiplier effect, lowered taxes, increased benefit, loan, and grant spending, that sort of thing), it simply makes no sense to call the Labor Party incompetent in that sense. They ran one of the best performing economies in the world as compared to the rest of the world.

If you look at this link, you can see that our economy's size (calculated via PPP) grew at a faster annual rate under Labor (2007-2012) than under the prior Liberal Party (1996-2007).

You simply can't criticise the Labor Party's economic management. The numbers just don't allow it.

In my eyes, the Labor Party's incompetence was in their infighting and inability to appear stable to a public who were looking for stable leadership during the GFC. They definitely jumped the gun when they got rid of Kevin Rudd due to poor polls, and even more stupidly, replaced him with Julia Gillard. They also promised a surplus that they couldn't deliver, and I have no idea why they even bothered promising one, considering the economic climate of the world at the time (GFC), and also in consideration that a surplus really isn't all that important... To put this into perspective: Gough Whitlam, supposedly a guy who was in the process of ruining Australia's economy during his time in office of three years, delivered a surplus every single one of those years. His successor Malcolm Fraser (with Phillip Lynch and John Howard as his treasurers) only delivered two surpluses in eight years. The problem is if we use surpluses and deficits as the be-all and end-all of economic management, then suddenly Malcolm Fraser and John Howard were economic ninnies, and Gough Whitlam and his plethora of treasurers were economic masterminds.
Click to expand...

I hear your argument and agree with a great deal of it, I do however differ in that most other Countries didn't have the $50 Billion in the bank that Australia did that allowed the Labor government to create stimulus (at least initially) without the need to borrow. Many of these countries were borrowing more against already heavy debts. It is the Libs that put us in the position to ride out the GFC storm. I agree that our economy grew during the Labor years, some of this through the stimulus and some through the higher rate of return for foreign investors and some through Labors willingness to spend.

I would suggest that it would of been a different story should the GFC hit a couple of years later and the 50 Billion was already gone on wind chimes and circus colleges and Swan had implemented his Carbon and Mining taxes.

As for the Whitlam surplus' I would also suggest that the impact on the Fraser governments ability to provide a surplus was caused by the unsustainable free education system put into place by Whitlam (with no idea how to pay for it) that ran throughout the entire Fraser Governments reign

BTW I also agree that a surplus isn't the be all and end all, my concerns is strictly to do with out of control debt and I feel that Labor has the potential to put us in that position. I want my kids to have a future, not a burden
 
Comment directly for our new Premier

“We won’t be negative and none of my ministers will make irresponsible comments.” says Palaszcuk

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...ly-about-economy/story-fnn8dlfs-1227222645912

Seriously what a stupid comment to make to the media (not her first, I might add). The first time she says something about the previous Government, current opposition, Federal policy she will of broken this commitment. What makes it even more naive is that with so many new ministers one or more are bound to say something negative of irresponsible over the coming weeks and months. Just a brain dead thing to say
 
Iva Bigun said:
Comment directly for our new Premier

“We won’t be negative and none of my ministers will make irresponsible comments.” says Palaszcuk

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...ly-about-economy/story-fnn8dlfs-1227222645912

Seriously what a stupid comment to make to the media (not her first, I might add). The first time she says something about the previous Government, current opposition, Federal policy she will of broken this commitment. What makes it even more naive is that with so many new ministers one or more are bound to say something negative of irresponsible over the coming weeks and months. Just a brain dead thing to say
Click to expand...
I thought the article was pretty obviously talking about the economy.

“We remain positive about Queensland’s future,” Ms Palaszczuk told business leaders on Tuesday.

“You won’t hear us talking about being negative about the economy"

Ms Palaszczuk said Queensland was facing economic challenges from low global oil prices and flat coal prices.

“We face a battle to deal with continued economic weakness and high unemployment,” she said.

But she pledged to be upfront about the state’s finances.
Click to expand...
 
Experimental said:
I thought the article was pretty obviously talking about the economy.
Click to expand...

The speech itself was about business and the economy but she left herself open with the “We won’t be negative and none of my ministers will make irresponsible comments.” comment, she should know better.

Even your example“You won’t hear us talking about being negative about the economy" is an opportunity for her to look like a fool, if one minister says "we were left a wreck by the previous Government" for example her comments will be thrown back in her face.

The point I am making is that ill conceived comments such as these show her up as not being at best under prepared and as worst not up to the job, other examples include
  • the GST comment in the dying days of the campaign and
  • not visiting ANY ministry's for updates prior to the election.
  • NO no no no deals (Broken)

She has our States future in her hands, a ministry full of first timers, some teachers and the remainder are hand picked union cronies, frankly I am concerned
 
Last edited:
Iva Bigun said:
Even your example“You won’t hear us talking about being negative about the economy" is an opportunity for her to look like a fool, if one minister says "we were left a wreck by the previous Government" for example her comments will be thrown back in her face.

The point I am making is that ill conceived comments such as these show her up as not being at best under prepared and as worst not up to the job
Click to expand...
Ah okay, I see what you're saying. I agree. Unless she plans on removing the blame game from government (which I truly hope happens, but doubt it will), she's made a pretty foolish statement.

I think it's fairly safe to assume that if Labor wasn't crumbled into a party of 7 after the 2012 election, she wouldn't have become the leader, or even ever had a shot at becoming leader - ever. She's more of a people's person rather than a politician's person - the faceless men would not have chosen her over Bligh, for example. However, they didn't really have much choice given those who were left.

She's a very down to earth person, but has trouble engaging on a widespread stage (like television or radio). Though I think it might give her the 'for the people' persona much like Rudd.

Much like Abbott, though, she sounds (for lack of a better word) dumb. Regardless of her actual intellect, her public speaking leaves a lot to be desired - but it doesn't automatically mean she'll be a bad leader.

I used to see her a lot at ANZAC Day services and public functions and things and she's very well liked. She engages well with the locals and openly and actively listens. You wouldn't really guess it judging by her speeches though - they're robotic and boring.

But as they say, actions speak louder than words, so we'll see what her government is able to come up with.

Like you, I'll be sitting back and watching to see what she comes up with. I'm quietly confident that she'll have a successful term, and with Springborg as opposition leader, she's already got the upper hand.
 
Experimental said:
Ah okay, I see what you're saying. I agree. Unless she plans on removing the blame game from government (which I truly hope happens, but doubt it will), she's made a pretty foolish statement.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't that be bliss, perhaps they might even start looking after the people then instead of political point scoring

I would vote for any government no matter the persuasion if they just got on with the job of governing for the people instead of lining their own pockets and pointing fingers
 
Honestly, all the negativity toward the economy needs to stop... the fact consumer confidence has been dropping is an indicator that we need to be more mindful. All the talk about squirreling away our money, that our debt is unmanageable, and austerity measures are the way, is really just hurting local businesses and causing the government's tax revenue to drop (thereby exasperating 'the problem' - if people are spending less on goods and services then the government is receiving less GST and the like as a flow-on effect, basically meaning less revenue and less money to pay for the budget).

There have been a plethora of politicians in opposition who harped on about the economy being crap; in all honesty their negativity has been a bigger source of problems than our debt could possibly be.
 
http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...ensland-election/story-fnn8dlfs-1227223200400

A NEGATIVE advertising blitz aimed at Labor was canned during the election by the LNP because of fears it would remind voters about Campbell Newman’s overly-aggressive style.

Post-election polling by the LNP showed only 24 per cent of people believed their vote was a positive endorsement of Labor while 15 per cent of minor party voters regretted their decision.

Interesting article, unfortunately the LNP having seen the success of the ALP's relentless attack on Newman (deserved or not) will no doubt do the same for Anna as it is easy to point fingers when in opposition. Sad state of politics :(
 
Iva Bigun said:
Post-election polling by the LNP showed only 24 per cent of people believed their vote was a positive endorsement of Labor while 15 per cent of minor party voters regretted their decision.
Click to expand...
I'd be interested in seeing an actual poll that wasn't held by the LNP. But this election was still ultimately Newman vs. Not Newman, rather than LNP vs. Labor. Results probably wouldn't change too much, lol.
 
Hey Experimental as you work in the health industry you may be able to help me better understand this, in the Courier Mail today it talks about the "Catagory 1" waiting list being reduced from 2435 under labor to just 37 under the LNP, is this correct or a misuse of numbers somehow?

Also it mentioned how specialist waiting lists more than doubled under labour (2006-12) from 1200 to 2300 but had improved marginally (8.4%) under the LNP. If (and i mean if) these are correct they are dramatically improved.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Experimental said:
I'd be interested in seeing an actual poll that wasn't held by the LNP. But this election was still ultimately Newman vs. Not Newman, rather than LNP vs. Labor. Results probably wouldn't change too much, lol.
Click to expand...

An independent poll would be good, I suspect we will see some Neilson polls soon on the thoughts of the people on the change of government, I agree that it was Newman V Newman. Not so sure about the results if people actually though Labor would get back in. i actually think the protest vote was massive (second election in a row) and a sizeable proportion would be regretting it. Of course that is just a gut feeling from the conversations I have had or over heard post election so I could be completely wrong

I must admit I am still in shock at peoples short memory's
  • Health pay bungle
  • Tahitian Prince Millions
  • Selling of assets (such as QR) something Labor staunch against (unless its them of course)
  • Failing to remove the promised toll on the Gateway bridge
  • Doubling the surgery waiting lists
  • failing to open the Dams at 80% capacity as per QW instructions and (in part) causing the 2011 flood
  • Racking up the states debt (good or bad) without having a plan to pay it off
Hardly a legacy of good governance
 
Iva Bigun said:
Hey Experimental as you work in the health industry you may be able to help me better understand this, in the Courier Mail today it talks about the "Catagory 1" waiting list being reduced from 2435 under labor to just 37 under the LNP, is this correct or a misuse of numbers somehow?

Also it mentioned how specialist waiting lists more than doubled under labour (2006-12) from 1200 to 2300 but had improved marginally (8.4%) under the LNP. If (and i mean if) these are correct they are dramatically improved.
Click to expand...
A category 1 waiting list is any surgery regarded as 'urgent' and the surgery should be undertaken within 25 days. The patient usually has all their details taken, and everything is organised so that the patient basically gets a call and is 'ready for surgery' ASAP.

Surgery is not an area I'm overly familiar with in terms of in and outs, but from what I know, that list quoted by the CM is for elective surgery only - i.e. not-essential or cosmetic. However, the 'wait time guarantee' for Cat1 surgeries means that someone from Brisbane might have to travel to Cairns or Rocky to get their surgery done. In saying that, the government pays for their travel and accommodation costs (a scheme that was already in place and not specific to the 'wait time guarantee'). I don't think that's a bad thing because it's pretty great for patients getting their surgery in a timely manner.

I actually have an uncle who lives in Mckay who needed a knee reconstruction and was flown to Brisbane for the surgery, then flown back.

But in saying that, the numbers have dropped significantly because the requirements for urgent and semi-urgent waiting lists. Not saying that's the only reason, because the numbers speak for themselves - it definitely improved under the LNP.

As for specialist wait lists, I'm assuming they're talking specialists like respiratory specialists, ear/nose/throat doctors, etc. I couldn't tell you what the reason for that is because I'm not familiar with that sector so I'm not going to speculate, but I do know that the funding for Queensland hospitals wasn't increased during the LNP's reign, BUT there have been new hospitals and new extensions open since Labor's reign - Ipswich Hospital, Gold Coast University Hospital, Cairns Base Hospital, Logan Hospital, Prince Charles Hospital, etc. All of these hospitals are new and/or with new expansions with a hell of a lot more specialists and facilities. Just a thought, though!

Overall though, the QLD hospital system benefited greatly from the National Healthcare Reform when it agreed to sign up in 2011. This could also have had an impact on numbers when the changes came into effect in 2012. Doesn't excuse Paul Lucas and Anna Bligh from being completely inept at almost everything - useless human beings.
 
Iva Bigun said:
I must admit I am still in shock at peoples short memory's
  • Health pay bungle
  • Tahitian Prince Millions
  • Selling of assets (such as QR) something Labor staunch against (unless its them of course)
  • Failing to remove the promised toll on the Gateway bridge
  • Doubling the surgery waiting lists
  • failing to open the Dams at 80% capacity as per QW instructions and (in part) causing the 2011 flood
  • Racking up the states debt (good or bad) without having a plan to pay it off
Click to expand...
I completely agree. Everything you've mentioned is deplorable. What's even more ridiculous, is that lack of a plan to halt debt accumulation lead to the selling of assets which STILL didn't make a difference. Bligh was horrendous, but I don't think that the new government should be a reflection of the old ALP government given the number of new faces. However, wasn't Palaszczuk the transport minister when QR was sold off? lol... At least she got the G-Link built I suppose.

EDIT: I completely forgot that they'd said they remove the Gateway Bridge toll. It's been there for, what, 25 years? ******* ridiculous that it's still being tolled. Logan Motorway too. Enough is enough!
 
Last edited:
Experimental said:
A category 1 waiting list is any surgery regarded as 'urgent' and the surgery should be undertaken within 25 days. The patient usually has all their details taken, and everything is organised so that the patient basically gets a call and is 'ready for surgery' ASAP.

Surgery is not an area I'm overly familiar with in terms of in and outs, but from what I know, that list quoted by the CM is for elective surgery only - i.e. not-essential or cosmetic. However, the 'wait time guarantee' for Cat1 surgeries means that someone from Brisbane might have to travel to Cairns or Rocky to get their surgery done. In saying that, the government pays for their travel and accommodation costs (a scheme that was already in place and not specific to the 'wait time guarantee'). I don't think that's a bad thing because it's pretty great for patients getting their surgery in a timely manner.

I actually have an uncle who lives in Mckay who needed a knee reconstruction and was flown to Brisbane for the surgery, then flown back.

But in saying that, the numbers have dropped significantly because the requirements for urgent and semi-urgent waiting lists. Not saying that's the only reason, because the numbers speak for themselves - it definitely improved under the LNP.

As for specialist wait lists, I'm assuming they're talking specialists like respiratory specialists, ear/nose/throat doctors, etc. I couldn't tell you what the reason for that is because I'm not familiar with that sector so I'm not going to speculate, but I do know that the funding for Queensland hospitals wasn't increased during the LNP's reign, BUT there have been new hospitals and new extensions open since Labor's reign - Ipswich Hospital, Gold Coast University Hospital, Cairns Base Hospital, Logan Hospital, Prince Charles Hospital, etc. All of these hospitals are new and/or with new expansions with a hell of a lot more specialists and facilities. Just a thought, though!

Overall though, the QLD hospital system benefited greatly from the National Healthcare Reform when it agreed to sign up in 2011. This could also have had an impact on numbers when the changes came into effect in 2012. Doesn't excuse Paul Lucas and Anna Bligh from being completely inept at almost everything - useless human beings.
Click to expand...
Thanks mate, good to hear it from the horses mouth (so to speak)
 
Experimental said:
I completely agree. Everything you've mentioned is deplorable. What's even more ridiculous, is that lack of a plan to halt debt accumulation lead to the selling of assets which STILL didn't make a difference. Bligh was horrendous, but I don't think that the new government should be a reflection of the old ALP government given the number of new faces. However, wasn't Palaszczuk the transport minister when QR was sold off? lol... At least she got the G-Link built I suppose.

EDIT: I completely forgot that they'd said they remove the Gateway Bridge toll. It's been there for, what, 25 years? ******* ridiculous that it's still being tolled. Logan Motorway too. Enough is enough!
Click to expand...

Mate lets get together and start our own party, We can call it the * you useless lying campaigners reform party. And fix this place up :D
 
Iva Bigun said:
Mate lets get together and start our own party, We can call it the **** you useless lying campaigners reform party. And fix this place up :D
Click to expand...
There's already KAP and PUP. I dont think the rest of Australia can handle another loony spin-off party from Qld ;)
 
Good initiative

FORCING political parties to reveal donations above $1000 is expected to top the list of legislation introduced by the Palaszczuk Government when State Parliament resumes.

Ms Palaszczuk said yesterday she was determined to prioritise the legislation after Queenslanders demanded improved accountability at the January 31 election.



This one not so much

No guarantee on surgery wait times

Ms Palaszczuk has refused to guarantee that Queensland hospital patients will continue to get their surgery within medically recommended times.

If she undoes all the work that has been done to ensure people get the surgery they need after all the work to fit the waiting lists, it will be a disgrace
 
Palaszczuk was doing more hand movements than the sign-language guy was. ******* Abbott does it too. IF YOU NEED TO RESORT TO EXAGGERATED GESTURING WHILE YOU'RE TALKING, IT LIKELY ISN'T VERY INTERESTING TO BEGIN WITH. Enough ffs
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top