The Forum > Article Comments > Final thoughts as Australians go to the polls > Comments
Final thoughts as Australians go to the polls : Comments
By Tristan Ewins, published 18/8/2010What kinds of issues might play on voters' minds as they make their decision about how to vote in this election?
- Pages:
-
- Page 1
- 2
- 3
-
- All
Posted by Chris Lewis, Wednesday, 18 August 2010 8:31:41 AM
| |
Chris; no I'm not contradicting myself on debt. I support extra investment in infrastructure, and in services and welfare on the following basis:
That there are the budgetary means to service any debt; and if debt will have to be serviced; that improvements in productivity and quality of life would make it worth it. And when it comes to reforming welfare; introducing programs such as a NDIS - again I don't recommend piling up loads of debt. I suggest a levy to pay for the NDIS. Reform of tax is at the core of making improvements to the social wage possible and affordable; and ensuring debt from infrastructure investment can be serviced. I do no recommend piling up American or European levels of public debt. And I think it's amazing how with our negligible public debt; that there is very little emphasis on private and household debt. Posted by Tristan Ewins, Wednesday, 18 August 2010 10:35:57 AM
| |
Tristan,
fair enough on debt. It is mostly private, but reducing it will require that funding of many issues is funded elsewhere. Interesting times ahead in this ultra-competitive international economy. Posted by Chris Lewis, Wednesday, 18 August 2010 11:51:18 AM
| |
Whilst the issues of climate change and a carbon price have been mentioned during the election campaign, the greatest moral and economic challenge of our time does seem to have fallen off the radar.
Could it partly relate to last week’s admission by the US Government that a decade of satellite measurements by NOAA may be undermined by a faulty satellite. One reading of 612 degrees Fahrenheit was recorded in parts of Wisconsin. If similar errors have gone unnoticed for a decade, could this explain global warming? Late last year we came very close to introducing an emissions trading scheme. At Copenhagen we were in the cheer leaders’ squad in favor of signing up to a heavy handed international treaty. Our new PM told us a few weeks ago, we need to begin to rethink the way we live and work. Now we realize that all this effort and talk was partly based on the data from a faulty satellite, as well as our East Anglia friends. What the electorate needs right now, is The Climate Sceptics party’s voice in the Parliament. Link: http://www.climatechangefraud.com/climate-reports/7491-official-satellite-failure-means-decade-of-global-warming-data-doubtful Posted by CO2, Wednesday, 18 August 2010 12:16:00 PM
| |
Another cut and paste from the Labor pamphlets. These are not your thoughts only a regurgitation of party one liners.
No attempt is made to address the issue of public schools costs being nearly double that of private schools or that 60% of principals surveyed said that what the BER delivered was not their top infrastructure priority and about 20% did not even fall into their top 4 priorities. Tristan, what exactly is the old fashioned technology that the coalition plan is looking at deploying? Labor plans to bring the budget back to surplus within 3 years. Perhaps you could indicate one Labor plan that has even vaguely met budget? Posted by Shadow Minister, Wednesday, 18 August 2010 2:13:20 PM
| |
Re: Coalition broadband policy, see below:
"up to $6.25 billion in joint public-private investment and grant funding for the optimisation of existing DSL networks, the building of an open access fibre backhaul, a satellite network and the creation of two wireless networks designed for rural/regional areas as well as outer metropolitan areas." "under an Abbott Government, 97 per cent of Australians would receive a “minimum peak speed” of 12 megabits per second (Mbps)." http://www.computerworld.com.au/article/356440/speed_confusion_dogs_coalition_broadband_policy/ See more details at the URL provided - too much to include in a comment. But as I note in my article: "Communications Minister Stephen Conroy expects the NBN to provide “speeds of up to 1,000 megabits per second” " Everything I have written here I honestly believe. Many of my opinions lean towards bolder policies than the government is actually embracing. My arguments are much more than 'cut and paste' of govt policy. eg: My arguments on a National Disability Insurance Scheme, and progressive tax, welfare and social wage reform. I also make arguments for infrastrcuture investment, with a reasonable role for sustainable public debt - beyond what the government is willing to talk about. And my opposition to privatisation extends to the experience of the former Hawke and Keating Labor governments. Then there's by argument for massive investment in public housing, and support for pattern bargaining, and no erosion of wages and conditions in 'modernised Awards'. Most of the above goes beyond ALP policy. But if you support these ideas you're better voting ALP or Greens. Posted by Tristan Ewins, Wednesday, 18 August 2010 4:39:11 PM
|
Are you serious? This government has been a disgrace with its spending programs. Rather than being a mouthpiece for the left (or Labor), you need to do some homwework and be honest with the facts. Read the official reports that weigh up the evidence.
HIP alone wasted 40% of allocated resources ($1 billion).
It appears your solutions are spend, spend and spend.
You also contradict yourself. You argue for more and more spending, yet you cite authorities that levels of debt under Laborr are exaggerated.
Yes, some of your points are valid, housing and broadband, but (usual) your piece appears more about propaganda. Even faster broadband may have costs as more opportunities emerge to shift parts of products and services offshore to escape higher costs.
As you are a teacher, is that how you would sell your knowledge to youth? Fact is both major parties have strengths and weaknesses, although you (and others) prefer to call politics as some kind of football match (us and them). This is not the 1930s (hopefully never again), as even conservative parties have moved on