Polls rule under today's pathetically organised groups of scared little people. They are called MP's but 95% of them have no say on anything do they? The few in charge decide everything with occasional ajustments for other's objections. They decide what our country will be and is.

That is while we allow these two Parties to dominate our government's. If you're happy for your MP to obey Howard or Rudd then just stop thinking and let Big GrandDaddy (or Brother in Rudd's case) make your decisions.

Mind you those decisions may lead to no water, no electricity, no fuel for cars that don't take alternate energies. Public transport, roads, health, education. You name it, today's MP's talk about it but do very little.

If you want this to change you actually have to start telling your MP they work for YOU. And tell them how you want them to vote on each issue. And demand answers when they don't.

My MP voted for the MP payrise. I have asked him why when I said he didn't deserve one. Clearly he thinks I'm to be ignored but what if we all did this? Actually asked MP's to look after us? Why don't you do it too. It's no big deal, just asking your employees to do what you employed them to do?

Think about that. If Howard's AWA's allow dismissal without reason then I sack my MP right now. Would you? You have reason and it's not unfair as they don't follow their job description do they?

And don't tell me how hard they work. How many hours has Howard or Rudd actually done working for Australia? Not many mate. Rudd says he hasn't been home basically for the last 10 months so how is he doing anything other than campaign for Labor? And Howard. Does he do anything but campaign. So they don't work for us most of their work time. You happy with that?

Before you decide on your vote ask them to do what we want, not what they are told to do by those organisations they owe.

Of course polls are supposed to be just a sample of opinions. That's what they are meant to do aren't they?

As to polls not being accurate, well, they seem to be close in Oz politics over the last 20 years. Which is what polls should do, be close to the reality.

However your point about betting markets is spot on.

People don't bet out of emotion when it comes to elections. They bet the way they think the majority will vote based on a range of data.

Oz betting has changed dramatically since Rudd was made ALP leader.

Prior to Rudd the betting was about like this :

Labor $2.60
Coaliton $1.50

Which means the bookies and punters still had Howard as favourite.

This has changed this year and has gradually reversed to make Labor favourite. Not only favourite but clear and unassailable leaders. The betting is like this now :

Labor $1.36
Coalition $3.20

Game over. As it happens I started betting on Labor at $2.60 and have now had a bet on Howard at what was $3.60 before this weeks poll. So I can't lose. And neither can Labor.

Howard's price came down from $3.60 to $3.20 this week following that poll. But Labor's price did not change at all. Why? The bookies simply took some sucker money. That's it.

I would like to be able to not only exist but to go back to the days when i could afford some sort of entertainment.Nowadays all the income of this house is spent on surviving.Food prices have skyrocketed,ditto cost of living.We have no credit cards or hire purchase,just our normal overheads.Once we could go out for tea,go to the movies,have a holiday or gamble if we wished.I use less electricity now than in the past but the power bill has risen 11.37% making my bill the highest ever.I walk the shops adding my groceries as i go because food prices have escalated so much.They mining boom has escalated the figures for average earnings but most people don't work in that industry.The govt need to take a look at how the average income earner is doing,then they'll realise just how difficult it is to make ends meet.For the first time a household needs two incomes to survive.I dont believe their is a way to undo the damage that has been done.I worry what is instore for my children and grandchildren when the whole of their wages will be spent on surviving life,not quality of life.

I was hopeful that the hard questions would get a run.
My hard questions would be, What does your party intend to do to,
(1) Improve the education facilities available in public owned schools and the development of the clear and logical thinking capabilities of students in all schools. Undermining the self-confidence of a child should be a criminal offence. Our children also need courses in ethics not in the churches' warped morality.
(2) Improve the medical and dental health of all citizens.
(3) Reduce and hopefully eliminate gouging of customers by many commercial enterprises. In this regard banks are very much to the fore as are the two retail giants. Third line forcing is well understood by economists to be the antithesis of competition and therefore very undesirable but has been allowed by both major parties.
(4) Eliminate public funding of governing party 'barrow pushing' advertising which probably, in effect, corruptly buys support from media enterprises or at least minimises criticism. The resources saved could be applied to points 1, 2 & 3 above. In this matter 'Honest John's' party does look very honest.

The Australia I want for my daughter is one where Workchoices is only a memory, not a reality. One where public education attracts more than 35% of the federal education budget, since it educates 67% of all students, one where Global Warming will be tackled not merely spoken about. An Australia where equity and fairness prevail, not at all like the current Australia.

Thanks for the invitation, Andrew. At the risk of indulging in motherhood statements, the Australia I want my kids to grow up in is:

- An Australia in which our leaders seek constructive solutions instead of reflexively looking for a victim group to blame for our problems.
- An Australia in which our taxes pay for healthcare and infrastructure, instead of subsidising companies that use our taxes to profit from the provision of essential human services.
- An Australia in which people look first to what their co-citizens can contribute to the society, instead of focusing on how their co-citizens worship, what they wear, what languages they speak or their ethnic background.
- An Australia in which the public education system enjoys the confidence and respect of the entire community, so that people don't feel the need to opt-out and exercise a Hobson's 'choice' to unnecessarily pay tens of thousands of dollars for a good education they can get for free.
- An Australia in which newspapers report news instead of peddling opinion.
- An Australia in which we are immune to moral panics about whatever group of people are the demons-du-jour.
- An Australia that is excited to be engaged with the wider world, and especially our neighbours in the Asia-Pacific region.
- An Australia that fosters strength through diversity. A strength built from harnessing the diverse talents, interests, ideas, cultures, skills and expertise of everybody in the community.
- An Australia that is economically prosperous, and which makes wise and sustainable use of our scarce resources.
- An Australia that faces the future with hope instead of suspicion and fear.

Well said Merc - you've saved me valuable time

Churchill once said: "It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried" and unfortunately it's true. By being in a democracy, we have our elected folk making decisions which are at least in some respect election driven (and in reality, this is a very large consideration).

Note, I'm not advocating a move away from democracy.

The MPs on offer are (mostly) and insipid bunch and are thoroughly uninspiring. Where are the leaders who will actually fix things, like completely overhauling the tax system? Who are the ones who are willing to make changes for benefits that will occur in 5-10 years time, not changes governed by the electoral cycle?

I don't see any out there, which means that the hard questions that the author wishes them to consider aren't on their radar.

More's the pity.

I think that one of the highest priorities for a safe and pleasant Australia is for us to avoid the financial trap we fell into in 1894 and 1931, when our foreign debt was called in.

If this happens again, it will not be much fun for anyone.

My main concern is the remarkable similarity between Kevin Rudd and NZ Prime Minister David Longe, 25 years ago. Longe came to power when NZ was up to its ears in debt, and then played silly buggers with the US over their nuclear powered warships entering NZ ports. The upshot was that the US kicked NZ out of ANZUS, and then wall street decided it would be a great time to call in the NZ foreign debt. I am not sure, but I think NZ housing interest rates went up to around 25%.

If Rudd is elected and then plays silly buggers over recalling troops from Iraq, we could see it happen again. At least the federal government has paid off all its debt, but our private debt is heading for $600 billion and our annual payments deficit is heading for $60 billion.

One stock exchange commentator said that during the recent downturn, that you could see that that was only a tremor, as only marginal lenders like RAMS were having trouble refinancing their foreign debt. When the real one hits, it will be Westpac, National etc., that will be in this position.

Remember that if a crisis hits, there will be nothing the federal government can do, as they cannot print foreign exchange.

The reality is that we need a substantial reduction in the standard of living, particularly for the average person, so that we can make our foreign accounts sustainable and make sure there is a country left for our children.

I too totally support Mercurius' views. I could not put it better! Thanks!

Merc - I wish many more Australian politicians talk ike you do.

I'd like to hear them answer the hardest question of all. Are our state governments really neccessary for the most efficient delivery of health, transport, utilities, education, police and local government?

The states with their hugely expensive administrative civil services and parliaments should be dispensed with because their game is recurring cost-shifting and blaming others. They are numbingly insensitive to the calls for reform from local government.

In the forthcoming federal election, how many candidates will put their hand up for root and branch reform of government in Australia?

Do they have a vision to enact one body of consistent national law that can empower local communities accross Australia to prioratise and deliver the kind of infrastructure and services that we want?

Wishy-washy 'new Federalism,' and promising to make the Co-alition of Australian Governments (COAG) work are just cop outs. Tough decisions must be made if 'value for tax dollar' means anything.

Yes it would be good if these so call pollies would answer the real questions.

I tried that with greg combet but he ran and sent his heavies out and then packed up at a street fair.

Have a question about branch from last, could you clarify as i see it has to do with parties.

We do have a serious problems and it is us the people who many have the answers but pollies dont care from the parties.

For instance we should direct fund schools and hospitals and those other organisations that would prefer this.

As i have been told the states waste 40% of federal money on red tape so this would then get the funds to where they are needed.

Also about nurses if they get a wage cut, which would be 75% of them that are paid by state government then the labor states are at fault.

Like myself having asking the hard questions here is one for labor.

When is labor going to take responsibility to the corruption associated with the heiner affair.
When is rudd going to stand up and take his punishment which has been said in a government report dated 2004, for those associated with queensland government.

I have also sent an email to the attorney general saying what has happened is a disgrace and actions need to be taken.

Will labor take action against these crimes and also acknoledge the pain and suffering that the victims that have been hid by labor.

If labor cannot fix this then how can we let them have contrl over our government when it is quite obvious that they are inept.
This was also stated at the second royal commision into the centenary house affair, where the labor government leased a building from the labor party.

This was also deemed not in the interests of the people.

Stuart Ulrich
Independent Candidate for Charlton

Merc, Thanks for articulating my thoughts so clearly.

Woooooooo... talk about Red Rag to a raging Bull :) FOYLE... *grr*

You said:

Undermining the self-confidence of a child should be a criminal offence. Our children also need courses in ethics not in the churches' warped morality.

I have a different take on it.

"Undermining any sense of 'hope' in a child should be a criminal offense"

Teaching them "Now Children.. there is nothing to believe in except the here and now.. EAT DRINK AND BE MERRY.. for there is nothing else.. take advantage of all the weaklings around you.. use them in the persuit of your own goals.. enhance your own life in every possible way.. don't regard others in any way except utilitarian.. how they can assist you in your own exploits and efforts...yes children.. this is life..."

HAH! well newsflash..the "Church's warped idea" is this:

1/ Love God with your heart.. (your life has purpose.. meaning)
2/ Love your neighbour as yourself...(You have social and communal responsibilities)

What irritates me a tad..is the HIJACKING of Christian values, and the re-packaging them as 'Humanistic/naturalistic' ideas.. when they are just intellectual stolen property!

Socrates, for all his wisdom regarded 'Slaves' as a lower form of life.. Christ came to 'set the captive free'....and restore human dignity to redeemed people.

So..I'll ask a hard question.. (as Jesus did) "Where do you stand before Almighty God"? When Jesus told the 'drooling materialistic crowd' that to follow Him meant self denial.. aaaah.. "Many ceased to follow him thereafter..as this was a harrrd saying"

Yep.. our position b4 God is indeed a hard question.. but an important one.

JESUS of Nazareth...was not 'Poll Driven'....

......politicians to be reelected on the basis of what they have done, only first timers on promises.
......an Opposition unafraid to point out Government misdeeds in case they bite themselves on the bum later on.
......a Government (at all three levels) that acts for its electorate instead of its influence groups.
......a free FOI
......fixed terms to avoid the current BS.
......a God, the list goes on

Conservatives may well wish to forget the polls, they are as always an indication of voter intent, nothing more or less.
While the result of this election is not yet assured the polls tell us of a long term feeling that change is wanted.
I am amazed that for eleven years those polls had become a trophy for the very same conservatives who say forget them now?
Would the remaining time be better spent dealing with the reasons those polls are so good for Labor?
Or so bad for conservatives seemingly blinded by them?

There is a new kid on the block who is flying below the poll radar. A rank outsider so they say, but a rank outsider who has the potential voting power of 2.6 million Australian voters. This new political party comes from the ‘grass roots’ - they are your mother, your father, your sister, your brother, your son, your daughter, your grandmother, your grandfather, aunt, uncle, cousin, niece or nephew. They are the “Hidden Army” of unpaid family carers who provide care and support for family members with a disability, a mental illness, the frail aged and those with chronic illness - people who need assistance in their daily lives.
The work they do takes place in their own homes,hidden from public view. Governments know all about unpaid family carers – after all family carers save the Australian economy over $33billion each year. But at what cost to carers? The oft touted mutual obligation has not been translated to a partnership of government with carers in their care role. Carers have been left with all the responsibility, little or no assistance and no voice.

Well family carers have finally said enough is enough. Care in the community should not mean an open slather exploitation of family carers for decade after decade and an abrogation of responsibility by government – it should mean a sharing of the care load, a partnership by government with families in providing age appropriate support for those they care for. It should also mean age appropriate transitions from the family home into age appropriate supported accommodation external to the family. Parents should not have to worry about what will happen to their son or daughter when they die.

The Carers Alliance www.carers.org.au will run candidates for the Senate in the upcoming election. Not your problem you might say. Not so! In the blink of an eye, anywhere anytime, you too could become a carer and have your life changed forever through an accident, a stroke, the birth of a child. How you would like to be treated as a carer?

I am struggling to work out the point of this article.

I would expect that professional statisticians would have included distortions in their given errors, and Justin and Andrew's 12% error margin is a guesstimate.

The comparison of polls vs odds is comparing a snapshot of present opinion against future preditions and is not entirely accurate.

The polls as a indicator of present feeling are used to shape policy and strategy by the goverment and opposition close to an election, and suggesting that in depth policy should be the focus of elections is like debating the environmental impact of hosing water onto a burning building, admirable but pointless.

well said scorpio

I understand as having a special needs daughter and do have carers come around for her.

Will be voting for carers at the election for senate.

That is also another reason i am standing as and independent.

These people in government have no idea about what goes on, only what they are told by their party.

Stuart Ulrich
Independent Candidate for Charlton

I'd stay in whack-a-mozzie land if I were you, Boaz, you are sounding just a little hysterical outside your natural habitat.

You continue to insist that without your own personal set of moral values, all the rest of us are lost. Here's your latest laundry list of our sins - apparently our mission is...

>>Teaching them "Now Children.. there is nothing to believe in except the here and now.. EAT DRINK AND BE MERRY.. for there is nothing else.. take advantage of all the weaklings around you.. use them in the persuit of your own goals.. enhance your own life in every possible way.. don't regard others in any way except utilitarian.. how they can assist you in your own exploits and efforts...yes children.. this is life..."

That's just plain deceitful.

You do actually know, but pretend not to know, that the above is not at all the attitude of the vast majority of people on this earth, whose underlying objective is to get along with everybody and make a success out of being part of a moral and caring universe.

But I was vastly tickled to see that you blunt your argument a little by protesting, a mere two sentences later...

>>What irritates me a tad..is the HIJACKING of Christian values, and the re-packaging them as 'Humanistic/naturalistic' ideas.. when they are just intellectual stolen property!<<

Now, I know that it was not your intention to link the picture of moral degeneration with the suggestion that the concepts it contained had been hijacked from Christianity, but it is still highly amusing that you should do so. Thanks for the chuckle.

But really, joking aside, it is pretty insulting of you to keep pretending that i) only Christians are virtuous and ii) that when non-Christians are virtuous, it is only because they have "hijacked" Christian values.

These people in government have no idea about what goes on, only what they are told by their party.

Rubbish !

Most of those people in Parliament have very good idea about what goes on, still most only will do what they are told by their party and or their opinion pollster.

Deciding whether to replace TweedleDee by TweedleDum - or not to, for most people likely comes down to which of them will stuff up our hip pockets and our financial system the least.

Quick response,

See my posts on the following for some reasoning as to why Australia should not be the only country in the word of more than one million square kilometres and the only country in the world with more than ten million people not to have a middle tier of government:

Canning federalism - the Liberals' legacy? (030907)
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=6284

The states are redundant (040907)
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=6297

Cost-shifting, blame-shifting and profligacy (060907)
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=6313

I would like to see:
The tax-free threshold and the 30 cent-threshold indexed to movements in the minimum wage so that any increase granted flows through in full;
Family benefit thresholds indexed in the same way;
Two tax-free thresholds for the single-income family, the only idea of mine which Labor took to the last election;
A referendum of the people rather than a double dissolution when the House and the Senate cannot agree on legislation.

A referendum of the people rather than a double dissolution when the House and the Senate cannot agree on legislation.

hmm.... how about:

A referendum of the people when the House and the Senate cannot agree on legislation, with a double dissolution.

.

"Enough with the polls - let’s talk about the kind of Australia we want our kids to live in."

Just don't rely on the traditional media to help. This is a conversation which needs to take place 'outside' of the more traditional institutions - designed to "influence" only, rather than participate openly and sincerely.

As was recently said “We want a society where people are free to make choices, to make mistakes, to be generous and compassionate. This is what we mean by a moral society; not a society where the state is responsible for everything, and no one is responsible for the state.”

I will be happy with a country which leaves me to make my own mistakes, rather than limiting my rights and choices, then taxing me so as to employ a mindless, faceless bureaucrat to make mistakes in my name.

I too think Merc has said it well. The problem is Merc that most of us do nothing other than vote and blog or just vote.

Given you and others have these ideals, do you have any thoughts on how to get them installed as standard procedure?

There are at least two people on here who are trying to do something and none of you has responded to them at all.

It seems you want someone else to do the hard yards, but with your ideals. I know that Tapp has been banging his head against the walls for some time and has had virtually only abuse from this forum. But he seems to be a good man, a man who cares and wants to stand up and be counted.

The big 2 don't give a rat's about us. You know it so why do you accept it?

When you get to the voting booth who will you vote for? Right now essentially you only have 2 choices. Lib/Nat or Labor. Which one will you give your highest preference to?

It is a rare seat that other than these 2 get the nod so you are voting for the big two regardless aren't you even if you out them last and second last?

That is unless you start doing something now. It won't change how things are now but it will in the long run. Do nothing? Then say nothing.

I'll add another minor Party for you to consider. That is "What Women Want". Small and based on what it says. Anything to oppose the people who think they own you and I.

At the very least I ask you to put your first preference to anyone but the big 2. Why? Simple, the first preference gives $2+, CPI adjusted, to the Party or person with first preference. As long as they get 3% minimum vote.

Stop whining and start acting, like Tapp. Even if you don't agree with him or others they are doing what Australians should and must do. Say "Enough". And keep saying it.