Politics Sir John Howard

Remove this Banner Ad

The sacking of Gough Whitlam. If we didn't have a GG, that wouldn't have happened & the CIA would have had to find some other way to get rid of him.

The Queen interfered?

What makes you think a president would not have the same power?
 
The Queen interfered?

What makes you think a president would not have the same power?

Yes, because that Cur contacted England to see if he could do it.

For starters, if we were a Republic, we wouldn't be looking to the Poms & the Yanks to get rid of our leaders,.
 
The other point about knighthoods are didn't we go the road a few years ago where Aussies would no longer be rewarded with knighthoods, deserving of them or not.

I mean, Allan Border would have one now. And Shane Warne too - if we still had them.

See Captain Afterworld's post on page 1. They no longer award Knights of the Order of Australia, but that leaves several other orders of chivalry for which Australian citizens remain eligable, listed here.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Yes, because that Cur contacted England to see if he could do it.

For starters, if we were a Republic, we wouldn't be looking to the Poms & the Yanks to get rid of our leaders,.

Does the GG act on the Queen's advice or vice versa?

You seem a little confused.
 
Elizabeth Taylor got a knighthood and she is a US citizen who was born in the UK.


..

So were a stack of other Yanks, Its just the order of the garter doesn't allow it. Each order is seperate, like the order of the thistle is the highest Scot's one

But Liz was born on British Soil so she is always considered a queens subject you can never get rid of that therefore she was made a Dame

For instance the order of Bath only allows Commonwealth citizens and has a Millitary and Civil division. But it does allow Honorary membership outside the Commonwealth

Bush Snr and Reagan were given the Honour as were Powell Ike MacCarthur and a few other US Generals
 
It's a by product of a property boom. It's difficult to have one and not the other. For those that didn't take advantage, that's their bad luck or bad judgment.

Not everyone is smart enough to take advantage but that's life and the world isn't always nice and fair. For those too young at the time, it's bad timing but their time will come, if they are smart enough to recognise it when it does.

come off it FF. We, as "clever Australians" now owe an enormous amount of money, mostly to foreign owned finance companies, to fund the ever increasing cost of bricks and mortar.

Sure, we all feel rich on paper, but in the same period home prices have gone up, mortgages have gone up twice as much.

Imagine if, instead of the previous governments gearing everything into property investment, they had given tax concessions instead to venture capital; to investment in education and intellectual property; so that the money we've spent funded companies that actually turn a profit, that make things that we can export, and maybe go someway to fixing our Current Account Deficit.

Instead, we're all up to our necks in debt simply to own a home! All that money we owe, what have we done with it, how have we invested it?

In property prices that is a false wealth.

Howard and Costello failed us. We, as a nation, are up to our neck in hock and we have nothing to show for it
 
Of course I'm bloody well serious, we need someone to protect us from the failed Rudd administration, he's only been in power a month or two and it looks like he has managed to set us on course for a recession already.
surely no one could possibly think I am serious.
Howard for G-G ... you know it makes sense.

Of course I'm bloody well serious, we need someone to protect us from the failed Rudd administration, he's only been in power a month or two and it looks like he has managed to set us on course for a recession already.
(COLOR=White}surely no one could possibly think I am serious.[/COLOR]Howard for G-G ... you know it makes sense.

Very clever...must be close to post of the year.

Extreme camoflage techniques to suck in a response.

Should call your self son of sam :thumbsu:
 
come off it FF. We, as "clever Australians" now owe an enormous amount of money, mostly to foreign owned finance companies, to fund the ever increasing cost of bricks and mortar.

Sure, we all feel rich on paper, but in the same period home prices have gone up, mortgages have gone up twice as much.

Imagine if, instead of the previous governments gearing everything into property investment, they had given tax concessions instead to venture capital; to investment in education and intellectual property; so that the money we've spent funded companies that actually turn a profit, that make things that we can export, and maybe go someway to fixing our Current Account Deficit.

Instead, we're all up to our necks in debt simply to own a home! All that money we owe, what have we done with it, how have we invested it?

In property prices that is a false wealth.

Howard and Costello failed us. We, as a nation, are up to our neck in hock and we have nothing to show for it

Re the venture capital and IP, no reason why these things could not be have been done / could be done as well.

I can't see them ever being an area that would cost so much as to take away from other areas/ideas to much.
I agree they are great ideas and should be done as well.

If you mean investing at such a high level as to create enormous amounts of new industry across a wide area, i love that idea in theory, i don't know enough to comment on if it is realistic in Australia with our wage levels, insurance, regulations etc etc. It always shits me that then pen i write with is made by the sheep rooters ;)

Re education, you can always spend more money on education, it's a long term investment. I think it is important to spend the money in the right areas.

Re having nothing to show for it, a lot of people have a s**t load of equity to show for it and many have cash to show for it and i don't think there is any doubt the economy has been good to many people over the last ten years.

How much Howard/Costello can be credited with making that happen is debatable but the fact is they were running the show whilst it was going on and a lot of people i know have been very happy with the way things have gone in the last ten years under their leadership, myself included. (i'm talking economically here)
 
Re the venture capital and IP, no reason why these things could not be have been done / could be done as well.

I can't see them ever being an area that would cost so much as to take away from other areas/ideas to much.
I agree they are great ideas and should be done as well.

If you mean investing at such a high level as to create enormous amounts of new industry across a wide area, i love that idea in theory, i don't know enough to comment on if it is realistic in Australia with our wage levels, insurance, regulations etc etc. It always shits me that then pen i write with is made by the sheep rooters ;)

Re education, you can always spend more money on education, it's a long term investment. I think it is important to spend the money in the right areas.

Re having nothing to show for it, a lot of people have a s**t load of equity to show for it and many have cash to show for it and i don't think there is any doubt the economy has been good to many people over the last ten years.

How much Howard/Costello can be credited with making that happen is debatable but the fact is they were running the show whilst it was going on and a lot of people i know have been very happy with the way things have gone in the last ten years under their leadership, myself included. (i'm talking economically here)

I hear what you're saying, but you have to question the value of equity if there's a credit crunch ;)
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Re having nothing to show for it, a lot of people have a s**t load of equity to show for it and many have cash to show for it and i don't think there is any doubt the economy has been good to many people over the last ten years.

If the equity is in something that is not increasing in value then it's not particularly useful. Nationally, sinking such huge amounts of money into housing is insane beyond belief - it's a totally non-productive investment. To have large amounts of money borrowed from overseas so we can own our own accommodation can't possibly be good for the economy in the long term because the effective return on investment is nil (selling a house for more money is only personal profit - it's still being sold to someone else in the economy who then inherits - and likely increases - the national debt burden).
 
If the equity is in something that is not increasing in value then it's not particularly useful. Nationally, sinking such huge amounts of money into housing is insane beyond belief - it's a totally non-productive investment. To have large amounts of money borrowed from overseas so we can own our own accommodation can't possibly be good for the economy in the long term because the effective return on investment is nil (selling a house for more money is only personal profit - it's still being sold to someone else in the economy who then inherits - and likely increases - the national debt burden).

yea I'm a selfish bastard, I'm more worried about what i can control myself ;)

Housing prices go through cycles but the general trend is always up with a few hiccups a along the way possible so the equity is worth plenty as long as the price doesn't fall to levels pre purchase and that isn't going to happen for most.

It's a bit like a pyramid scheme (i'm talking a proper pyramid scheme not the legit network marketing companies that get wrongly labeled with that term) the ones that jump in right at the end/top or when the market peaks may lose some money (as has happened in U.S. and Sydney lately) but those that get in early cash in. But unlike a pyramid scheme those that do that need only wait coz the price will eventually rise again.

A mate of mine who owns a home loan lending company said you should never sell property, only buy more and more and more. He said since the great depression, housing prices double on AVERAGE every 9-12 years regardless of economic conditions.
 
A) you just cant accept that the muppet model was voted down
B) The Queen is in no way interfering in Australian politics

Can you name a single example in the last 30 years where the Queen interfered in Australian politics?

The queen visited the electorate which had the biggest 'no' vote.

You would have thought the empty streets around the country during her visits would give her a clue to the real reason (Eddie and Malcolm ?) we voted no.

Shes out of touch and will reward Howard because she thinks he helped the monarchy. The monarchy never interferes directly, just reward the dogs who do it on their behalf
 
I believe Garry Glitter will be Knighted at the same ceremony.

It means so much,you know!
 
I say give him the knighthood. All that will do is reinforce how irrelevant the rodent has become. He hasn't moved from the 50's and deserves it.

Kevin today has shown in 3 months how he is a better PM than Howard showed in 11 years - say the word SORRY. End of story, game over.
Yep, by signing the Kyoto protocol and saying sorry Rudd has solved all of the country's problems.

Beware the pm whos political stunts continue from the election campain to ministry.

Johnnie was a man of action. Rudd thus far has been all talk.

It is early days and the signs arent bad, but until some tough decisions are made the jury is still out on Rudd as far as im concerned.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top