Voting

[JoseMourinho]

They are all the same. Don't kid yourself into thinking otherwise.

No, they're not. One leader has more forehead than the other!

What's the SRP forum?

You don't want to know. There are some good value posters there and then there are people who just stalk your posting history .

I live in a safe electorate (Tangney) so I find it hard to get motivated about voting.

I just voted the Lib Candidate in Tangney, Labor Govt want to put a royal commission through the banks which will eventually pile onto the financial advice sector and we'll get even more regulations (which will benefit the Big 4 more...). I work for a small financial planning business so more regulation in the financial advice could hurt our hip pocket more.

 

[Barney_Gumble]

No, they're not. One leader has more forehead than the other!


You don't want to know. There are some good value posters there and then there are people who just stalk your posting history .


I just voted the Lib Candidate in Tangney, Labor Govt want to put a royal commission through the banks which will eventually pile onto the financial advice sector and we'll get even more regulations (which will benefit the Big 4 more...). I work for a small financial planning business so more regulation in the financial advice could hurt our hip pocket more.

Can you please provide a link to the SRP forum? Many thanks

 

[JoseMourinho]

Can you please provide a link to the SRP forum? Many thanks

https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/forums/society-religion-and-politics.46/

 

[Barney_Gumble]

https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/forums/society-religion-and-politics.46/

Thanking you Kindly, good sir.

 

[kickazz]

No, they're not. One leader has more forehead than the other!


You don't want to know. There are some good value posters there and then there are people who just stalk your posting history .


I just voted the Lib Candidate in Tangney, Labor Govt want to put a royal commission through the banks which will eventually pile onto the financial advice sector and we'll get even more regulations (which will benefit the Big 4 more...). I work for a small financial planning business so more regulation in the financial advice could hurt our hip pocket more.

Don't mean to take the piss but are the regulations better for the customer's hip pocket though?
I recall there were a lot of cowboys ripping people off before, has it all been returned to a reasonable level of equilibrium or have the rules gone to far in your honest opinion?

 

[Bunk Moreland]

They are all the same. Don't kid yourself into thinking otherwise.

Funnily enough, a couple of years ago I was able to have a chat to a former very senior Liberal figure (a former NSW Premier no less) and he said exactly the same thing.

Both sides are largely identical. Libs study law and go and work in an MPs office. Labor study law and go and work for a trade union.

Less and less of them have ever had real jobs – they’re just sticking to some absurd, ******ed party “script” that’s been put in front of them their entire adult lives.

They’re all just playing some ridiculous game, less and less of them have a clue about the real world.

And more and more of them have never even set foot in “their electorate” until they’re nominated.

It’s all a big, incestuous bubble, and includes much of the “political media”.

None of them have anything of value to say.

Now they sit around wondering why less people are voting for them and trying to work out why we have hung parliaments??

 

[JoseMourinho]

Don't mean to take the piss but are the regulations better for the customer's hip pocket though?
I recall there were a lot of cowboys ripping people off before, has it all been returned to a reasonable level of equilibrium or have the rules gone to far in your honest opinion?

It isn't any better for the customer's hip pocket and in fact, it could be worse because the red tape that has been put on may end up with the adviser charging more for it.

Group insurers still charge the same premiums (which advisers lost the commission of) and now advisers will have to charge for the commission that they would have received (most take the hit themselves because charging $1,000+ upfront for just insurance is a rip).

There are a few adviser commission rebates but they are arguably very small compared to group insurance premiums staying the same and clients will have to pay for it.

The problem has never been rogue advisers, it always has been ASIC. They had a parliamentary committee which pointed the finger at CBA and Macquarie but the reason they even had that committee was because ASIC knew about this but did absolutely nothing.

 

[Bostonian]

Personal religious values should stay mutually exclusive from political decision making for society as a whole.

All social and moral values should be removed from any governance. If you don't want religious values present then it's right to say you don't want any values from anyone. If it's annoying to have religious people imposing their views on us, then the same should be said for a party like the greens.

Governments would be far more effective and financially less wasteful if all they took care of was roads, police, military etc

The amount of time and money wasted on shit that has zero to do with a true government is ridiculous. Marriage being a prime example of something that a government has no right to be involved in or commenting on other than keeping records of who married what.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

If you wrap yourself in your faith at least be consistent about it in your policy, that's the inconsistency that really irks me about guys like Morrison, and Bernardi. By all means don't vote for gay marriage because of faith, but they may want to bear in my mind of few other biblical instructions like do unto others when looking at social policy.

Thing I notice about twats like Morrison and Bernardi - their religion actually isn't really a problem - it's the fact that they're simply campaigners.

 

[Bostonian]

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...-allconsuming-narcissism-20160703-gpxbd3.html

Hits a lot of good points.

The Abbott faction within the liberal party are quick to forget how unpopular Tone's was with voters. He was a long way behind in polls and although we will never know, his government would have struggled to win this election. Admittedly they would've had time to turn things around but they were very unpopular. The handful of people I've mentioned this too tell me polls are rubbish, but they're only rubbish when they don't align with your own views. They've been very close to the actual election results the last three elections and to anyone paying attention have been very close to the general feeling of the population in between elections.

And Shortern is wrong. If the libs do form a majority then Turnbull does have a mandate. That's what winning a majority governments means. Yes they've lost a lot of seats, but rather than attack them, why not build on what Labor has achieved. It's this continuing cycle of negativity that has seen people vote in record numbers for smaller parties and independents.

The biggest joke is that if Shorten forms any sort of government its on the back getting some of their lowest primary vote totals in their parties history.

Libs have a 6% higher primary vote than Labor.

 

[Gough]

Funnily enough, a couple of years ago I was able to have a chat to a former very senior Liberal figure (a former NSW Premier no less) and he said exactly the same thing.

Both sides are largely identical. Libs study law and go and work in an MPs office. Labor study law and go and work for a trade union.

Less and less of them have ever had real jobs – they’re just sticking to some absurd, ******ed party “script” that’s been put in front of them their entire adult lives.

They’re all just playing some ridiculous game, less and less of them have a clue about the real world.

And more and more of them have never even set foot in “their electorate” until they’re nominated.

It’s all a big, incestuous bubble, and includes much of the “political media”.

None of them have anything of value to say.

Now they sit around wondering why less people are voting for them and trying to work out why we have hung parliaments??

I like watching it as a game, always have done, even as a kid, and now I've got a couple of half decent Canberra contacts it's even more fun.

 

[theyellowsash]

The biggest joke is that if Shorten forms any sort of government its on the back getting some of their lowest primary vote totals in their parties history.

Libs have a 6% higher primary vote than Labor.

the libs AND the nats have a higher primary vote. when you look at the actual parties, labor has 7% less. you cant count them as a single party since they often run against each other. they just get combined all the time out of convenience since they have agreed to always support each other, but at any time the nats could put preferences to someone else.

 

[Scotland]

It's time for a new party.

Liberal vs ALP is a bit like Gold Coast vs Brisbane. It's not like watching my own team which is clearly very strong in one area (forward) but weaker in another (midfield) but both teams are just a bit shit across the board.

If you could take the cream (if you could call it that. Curd maybe?) from the major parties and a few independents you might have something.

Maybe.

 

[theyellowsash]

It's time for a new party.

Liberal vs ALP is a bit like Gold Coast vs Brisbane. It's not like watching my own team which is clearly very strong in one area (forward) but weaker in another (midfield) but both teams are just a bit shit across the board.

If you could take the cream (if you could call it that. Curd maybe?) from the major parties and a few independents you might have something.

Maybe.

well thats the way its supposed to work. every member is technically unique and can cross the floor at any time to vote for any legislation they support. that way you dont need a new party to combine the good guys from either side, cause they should be voting via their own conscience anyway. the problem is the dictatorial way the parties themselves are run where any non-conformity will pretty much be their political death warrant, and you get stupid shit like penny wong having to publicly declare opposing gay marriage and turnbull having to publicly oppose the proper nbn and republic.

 

[Scotland]

Conscience voting happens so rarely it may as well not be a thing.

 

[chargers 09]

Do you think if you grabbed a random MP and put them in a room with 100 people they would be in the top 10% more often than not?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[theyellowsash]

Conscience voting happens so rarely it may as well not be a thing.

every single vote should be anonymous and it should be illegal for parties to in any way enforce some form of party policy or voting bloc (outside of saying these are the majority principles held by the party).

 

[the_interloper]

They are all the same. Don't kid yourself into thinking otherwise.

 

[Nothing]

And Shortern is wrong. If the libs do form a majority then Turnbull does have a mandate. That's what winning a majority governments means. Yes they've lost a lot of seats, but rather than attack them, why not build on what Labor has achieved. It's this continuing cycle of negativity that has seen people vote in record numbers for smaller parties and independents.

If there is a coalition majority then there is arguably a mandate. If they are forced to form a minority government, which is looking likely, then you could not argue they have a mandate. Further, with the Senate voting the way it is, clearly there is significant dissatisfaction with both majors to argue neither has a mandate to rule by force and that negotiation is what the people want.

 

[theyellowsash]

If there is a coalition majority then there is arguably a mandate. If they are forced to form a minority government, which is looking likely, then you could not argue they have a mandate. Further, with the Senate voting the way it is, clearly there is significant dissatisfaction with both majors to argue neither has a mandate to rule by force and that negotiation is what the people want.

i dont think a slim majority can be seen as a mandate. if the vote is only decided by only a seat or two, there is a big enough part of the population that dont support them that you cant conclusively say its what the people want. a mandate really needs to be a bigger proportion than a lineball win. the last election would have been a justifiable mandate since they won so convincingly.

 

[kickazz]

I think we are moving away from big majorities and control of the Senate to the point where mandates and keeping every promise are just not realistic anymore.

Yes, the media need to get off their backs about ruling everything in our out and the court of public opinion must stop crucifying them if they don't stick to their plan 100%.

Why? Because the makeup of the parliament means there will be a greater requirement for negotiation; a with that, compromise. Secondly, as Malcolm alluded to, we live in times where agility is important. That means sometimes plans need to be tinkered with if changing circumstances demand it.

There is still room for policy planning and sticking to it where you can, but I think we need to look to places like NZ and Canada (who have several parties negotiating) to see how the system will work from now on.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

every single vote should be anonymous and it should be illegal for parties to in any way enforce some form of party policy or voting bloc (outside of saying these are the majority principles held by the party).

Nah it’s a case of the system being far from perfect, but still be better than most alternatives.

Deals are done, that’s the way representative democracy works.

At least this way there’s a level of transparency.

Secret voting is a recipe for widespread corruption.

The maggots will do their work, it’s better they do it in the daylight.

 

[Scotland]

People vote for political parties like they are footy teams which is silly.

People also vote for what will most benefit them personally (selfish, but understandable) and what benefits them in the short term (again selfish, but what alternative is there these days?). It's a vicious cycle. You get what you vote for and the parties aim at what will get them votes at the expense of what is good for the nation. I just can't see a major party proposing something that will be beneficial in the long term that is unpalatable in the short term any time soon which is sad. I mean when carbon taxes and emissions trading were the in thing the policies being thrown around 'needed' safeguards to ensure people weren't out of pocket paying their power bills. I mean FFS.

I am liking Nick Xenophon more and more. I don't agree with all of his positions (don't know all of them either) but he actually stands for something and does his job. He's no more 'centrist' than the major parties really, he just picks and chooses which issues are important to him and forms opinions rather than just blindly following someone else's.

 

[Barney_Gumble]

I wear Cotton Y-Fronts

 

[Bomberboyokay]

'Mandates' have always been a concept advocated by careerists in Canberra (politicians and journalists) than a real truth.