Anthony Albanese - How long?

[Number37]

Oh no, can't demand any better of a Labor politician, for it will help the LNP! Doesn't matter how bad a move they're making.

Who said you can't crtiicize Labor?

You're not demanding better of a Labor politician, you are just jumping up and down screaming about a relatively minor issue.
As I have pointed out, the change is a reduction in their personal staff levels but they still have access to the very same service from the people who have been employed to provide that service to parliamentarians for a very long time.
Tell us, what's the differnce between a reasearcher employed in the Parliamentary Library and a researcher employed in an MP's office?

before the election
you can't criticize Labor's policies it will lead to the coalition winning, once they get in they will do stuff
after the election
you can't criticize Labor's policies it will lead to the coalition winning

Classic Game Theory says...
When faced with the real possibility that you can't get what you want your cognitive response is an emotional one, which is to pretend that the choices are all the same....ie you're not really missing out by not getting what you want.

 

[JackOutback]

On quite a few topics they are.

They are not good, they are currently slightly less s**t

Also its great that we've now got, they've got to be careful for the next 3 years or they will lose.

That's a great mandate to do the absolute bare minimum which seems to be his plan

They have been in power for four weeks, Parliament hasn't even sat, they have still managed to do a couple of good things, but you have written them off as no good and only 'less s**t' than the Coalition because they haven't implemented things they never promised. You've gone the early crow way too early.

 

[Number37]

No I'm not, I'm advocating for people to not give Albo a pass.
The idea that we can't criticise Labor or we'll get the coalition is bollocks.


What self interest would that be?

You've been advocating that Labor = LNP forever.
You jump on anything Labor does to repeat over and over that Labor = LNP.

The Constitution says the leader of the party who commands are majority on the floor of the House of Reps forms govt.
The choice therefore is Labor or LNP to form govt.
You continually saying it doesn't matter which one because they're both the same is you advocating for the LNP.

It is not that you criticize Labor, it is the manner in which you do it.
Again. You keep repeating they're both the same and anything Labor does, however minor, you use to back up your argument that they're both the same.

What self interest would that be?

Your self interest is getting whatever colour of politician is to your liking and ONLY that colour of politician.
Like most on here do with the LNP, we encourage them to do the right thing, primarily by the disadvantaged, because they are in a position to do so.
That doesn't mean support for the LNP.
In exactly the same way we should be encouraging Labor do the right thing, primarily for the disadvantaged, because they are now in the position to do so.
That isn't support for Labor, Labor-stan-ing as you like to call it.
The govt implements govt policy.
Whatever colour of govt there is, it needs to be encouraged to do the right thing, particularly for the disadvantaged.
It isn't my colour of govt therefore I will just shitcan anything they do doesn't do anything, especially for the disadvantaged.

At the end of the day politicians, of all colours, even the ones of the colour of your choice, are driven by votes.
Encourage them to do the right thing and reward them with a vote when they do. A bit of positive reinforcement.
If we do it often enough we might even encourage them to do really radical s**t like lift Social Security payments and do something about homelessness.

Waiting for Godot to turn up (the party & leader further left than the Greens), to get voted in and do all those radical things isn't going to happen anytime soon. In the meantime we don't need to throw disadvantaged people (for one) under the bus because Godot hasn't turned up, yet.
In the meantime we can get Rosencrantz and Gildenstein to do some minor tweaking to the s**t-*ery that sees so many people end up as disadvantaged.
Direct your energy there. Advocate for positive change. Negative Nancy-ing is the easy, lazy way out.

 

[Gough]

I saw Ian McKellen in Waiting for Godot

 

[CM86]

I saw Ian McKellen in Waiting for Godot

He never turned up, for my viewing.

 

[Number37]

I know what you're saying, and agree.

Bhuuut. I think the point is... people are sick of accepting the status quo. Maybe if we all pushed hard enough, we could shift the country in the same way that the far right and religious groups have been pushing the country.


Why do we always need to try and placate, and find balance, and negotiate? Why do we always need to play by the rules, if the 'other side' don't, and the 'other side' know how to use that specifically against 'us'?

There are enough bad faith posters, pretending to be with 'us', while doing nothing but attacking 'us'. That it's hard to tell the difference sometimes.

It doesn't have to be bad faith. If you ask someone if they are posting in bad faith and they say no, you accept their answer.
Just because someone says they are not posting in bad faith doesn't mean that their arguments don't have unintended negative consequences.

History should tell you that we never go from left to right or right to left in one go, unless there is some major disruption, like a war.
History tells us that change is incremental.
What the right have become very good at is incremental change that supports their world view. So good have they become at it, that we don't even notice the change, nek minnit they're overturning Roe v Wade and we think it just happend overnight. It didn't happen overnight.
All-or-nothing gets us more right wing govts.
All-or-nothing IMO is in effect what some are arguing. It may not be bad faith, but it doesn't end up being any good.
Surely, if you're not posting in bad faith, then you would understand a point of view that takes into consideration the fact that, like it, or not, we only have 2 choices (for govt, not representation).

 

[carltonchelsea]

Eating it is kind of dangerous for everyone involved, isn't it?

Pretends to be the most liberal progressive and enlightened amongst us and “Albo can go eat a dick” is the most homophobic put down ya can get.
But ya know, he/she is infallible in all things ‘n s**t.
Pathetic

 

[Crankyhawk]

I agree and I am in the same position. But I am also aware that they would be battered from pillar to post and it could potentially be an election killer. Albanese said he had an eye on 2025 as well as the present. There's no point making a few short-term wins if you get turfed and it all gets rolled back. As I say, keep the pressure on, but some are acting as if he is just as bad as the previous government and I certainly don't think that's true.

I think you could draw out the opponents as “selfish campaigners who want to bankrupt Australians and cripple welfare” really fight a class war and win.

 

[Number37]

I saw Ian McKellen in Waiting for Godot

How many personal staffers was he allowed to have?

 

[Crankyhawk]

Nah.

My guess is she just got a bit over-excited when she heard about an 'invisible hand'. And quotes it without ever having picked it up.

(temptation to insert provocative GIF resisted).

She’s looking for the stimulation of the invisible hand because she’s not getting it any other way amirite?

 

[Brad Goodman]

She’s looking for the stimulation of the invisible hand because she’s not getting it any other way amirite?

False according to Lidia Thorpe

 

[Johnny Bananas]

You're not demanding better of a Labor politician, you are just jumping up and down screaming about a relatively minor issue.

With such a slavish attitude to the Labor Party as that, yeah, I'd say you are saying we can't criticise Labor.

As I have pointed out, the change is a reduction in their personal staff levels but they still have access to the very same service from the people who have been employed to provide that service to parliamentarians for a very long time.

Wonderful. That doesn't necessarily meet the needs of the modern crossbench.

Tell us, what's the differnce between a reasearcher employed in the Parliamentary Library and a researcher employed in an MP's office?

One can be trained to help formulate policy that meets the MPs agenda, the other is beholden to the Parliamentary Library first and foremost. Trust plays a factor there.

 

[Johnny Bananas]

History tells us that change is incremental.

So if change is incremental, why have have there been no increments in real terms of Jobseeker for 25 years (besides a temporary boost during Covid)? Why do Labor refuse to even look at incremental change for those on welfare? Is it because they just don't care about creating change on this front, to the point where they'll prioritise an unnecessary tax cut for the well-off instead?

 

[Number37]

So if change is incremental, why have have there been no increments in real terms of Jobseeker for 25 years (besides a temporary boost during Covid)? Why do Labor refuse to even look at incremental change for those on welfare? Is it because they just don't care about creating change on this front, to the point where they'll prioritise an unnecessary tax cut for the well-off instead?

Poltiical parties reflect life.
The average person likes to s**t on the unemployed.
It's like shooting fish in a barrel.

 

[Maggie5]

With such a slavish attitude to the Labor Party as that, yeah, I'd say you are saying we can't criticise Labor.


Wonderful. That doesn't necessarily meet the needs of the modern crossbench.


One can be trained to help formulate policy that meets the MPs agenda, the other is beholden to the Parliamentary Library first and foremost. Trust plays a factor there.

Did you know that the electoral staff starting salary is about $70K?

 

[Number37]

With such a slavish attitude to the Labor Party as that, yeah, I'd say you are saying we can't criticise Labor.


Wonderful. That doesn't necessarily meet the needs of the modern crossbench.


One can be trained to help formulate policy that meets the MPs agenda, the other is beholden to the Parliamentary Library first and foremost. Trust plays a factor there.

"modern cross-bench"...what is that? Is that just a fancy way of saying more cross benchers?
"trust plays a factor"...what? the Parliamentary Library staff have a secret agenda?

You're just making up stuff to get outraged about.
So I'd say that I am saying that there are actual things that you can get outraged about, you don't need to confect your outrage just so that you can have a dig at Labor.

 

[Johnny Bananas]

"modern cross-bench"...what is that? Is that just a fancy way of saying more cross benchers?

The election delivered a far stronger crossbench, and that will continue in future. I wouldn't be surprised if minority government becomes the norm, and the crossbench will have a huge part to play in holding government to account in that case.

"trust plays a factor"...what?

Yep, there are advisors you trust to formulate policy, because they're answerable to you rather than an external body.

the Parliamentary Library staff have a secret agenda?

No, you made that up yourself.

You're just making up stuff to get outraged about.

No, you're just upset that people want to question the decisions Labor have made.

 

[Festerz]

She’s looking for the stimulation of the invisible hand because she’s not getting it any other way amirite?

Just waiting for her outrage when teachers start telling kids about the economic treachery and ignorance of landlords (a common theme of the classical economists of whom she is so endeared):

 

[Number37]

The election delivered a far stronger crossbench, and that will continue in future. I wouldn't be surprised if minority government becomes the norm, and the crossbench will have a huge part to play in holding government to account in that case.


Yep, there are advisors you trust to formulate policy, because they're answerable to you rather than an external body.


No, you made that up yourself.


No, you're just upset that people want to question the decisions Labor have made.

I'm really really really upset.
So really really upset am I that it upsets me even more that I am upset.

I Labor because I am a Laborstan.

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

Just waiting for her outrage when teachers start telling kids about the economic treachery and ignorance of landlords (a common theme of the classical economists of whom she is so endeared):

In a sane, meritocratic world, a goose like Hollie Hughes would get no airtime whatsoever.

 

[ep2018]

Albo gave a soft utensil answer when asked about the US SC repelling Roe vs Wade, not sure if he's playing smart centre politics in order to wedge the LNP, or if his upbringing as a Catholic raised by a single mother has more to do with it.

 

[NSWCROW]

2nd headline on sky news

" Trudeau forgets Albo's name "


Pulitzer-winning stuff

 

[JackOutback]

2nd headline on sky news

" Trudeau forgets Albo's name "


Pulitzer-winning stuff

If we’re going to play fair, we all thought it was funny and newsworthy when Biden referred to Morrison as ‘that guy from Down Under’.

 

[NSWCROW]

If we’re going to play fair, we all thought it was funny and newsworthy when Biden referred to Morrison as ‘that guy from Down Under’.

Did sky ?

 

[Zarrix]

Not that long if the Labor government insists with third way neoliberal garbage. Will follow the same path as Joe Biden if they insist with it.