The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Kevin: the morning after > Comments

Kevin: the morning after : Comments

By Tim Anderson, published 7/11/2007

Progressives have become so obsessed with the 'get rid of Howard' campaign that they speak little of the issues.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. Page 4
  6. 5
  7. All
Seems Keith is otherwise occupied, that's ok.

Arjay, what do you think?

Anyone?
Posted by Q&A, Saturday, 10 November 2007 2:04:00 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Q & A

I do have a life outside of this forum and sometimes I just get busy living it. And contrary to your exhibited centralist controlling view I don't need anybody's approval for that.

In answering your questions I shall also pose to you a few of my own. And please don't give me Kevin's bland motherhood statements, that insuinuate much but actually promise zilch, in response.

1. The promised rolling back the unfair dismissal laws has caused me to roll back my business. I don't employ anyone now. Small business will merely employ people on a yearly basis to avoid the threats from that particular promise. I can see increased unemployment in the small business arena... or an employment pool made up of people who work for 11 months. Of course the extra training of staff will simply be added to the price of production. (That will also be inflationary). We were all bitten once before.

2. If as Garret has promised we implement Koyoto and set a target for 2020 the coal industry will be greatly affected negatively. My great fear is that since Rudd and Garret won't announce a target now and given Garrets gaff's I think after the election they will simply impose one. I suspect this is one of Garret's intentions in regard to his spilling his guts to media people recently.

3.The biggest single problem with Labor's policies is that they do not exactly copy Liberal policy. The big difference is Work Choices and specifically the timing of the proposed roll back. The Union influence, once labor is elected will ensure the rool back begins as soon as the election is over. I just can't see Rudd's finger in the hole holding back the force of the overwhelming flood from that particular dyke. Rolling back work choices will be inflationary.

But pray tell me how Rudd proposes to hold down interest rates?
Posted by keith, Sunday, 11 November 2007 2:41:11 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
4. It is not so much it's policies but it's controlling figues. eg. 'Howard's gone and I'm back'. From the mouth of a known union bully and strike proponent. And of course there are many others.

5. Unrealistic expectations lead to unrealistic wage demands. And to quote Glenn Milne in todays Sunday Mail. "When it comes to cost of living Rudd is engaged in a giant election ruse...and a cruel one at that.' He's running around highlighting the increasing cost of living but not promising to fix it. However many voters in focusing on Rudd's criticisms, have developed an expectation their petrol, groceries and interest rates are going to be more affordable under Labor. And that is something which can only be achieved if wages go up...and that's what a weak leader looking for simplistic solutions will allow.

But please tell me, since you obviously toe the Labor line, why you think Garret either a fool or a liar. Tell me how Rudd will resist the expectation, among his troops, according to Latham, that Labor will be more 'progressive' once it's elected? You can define 'progressive' ... since Howard has.

Now in your own word's use your own ideas to answer my three question.
Posted by keith, Sunday, 11 November 2007 2:41:46 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"The last Liberal electoral campaign was based on fear - and the country fell for it."

What election campaign or for that matter any government campaign is not?
Posted by atko, Monday, 12 November 2007 9:10:57 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Keith,

Thanks for replying. You raised some interesting points that I wished to pursue but you have obviously taken offense in that I merely wanted someone (anyone) to continue the thread – they have not. Besides, other threads will overtake this exchange, don’t you think?

It appears you are a prolific contributor to OLO with 700+ posts. A cursory reading shows that you are a stalwart conservative voter. As for me, I am less intransigent and am therefore up for grabs. I voted Liberal last time and will probably vote Labor this time, the Senate another issue.

As to your questions:
1. “How Rudd proposes to hold down interest rates?” Difficult really when the RBA yesterday said the interest rates are likely to rise a few more times with inflation heating up until mid-2009. Of course, throwing money around like confetti doesn’t help. Personally, I think Rudd has better monetary and fiscal policies and we will see on Wednesday if indeed he is more an economic conservative than the Howard/Costello conservative. Certainly, slowing an overheated economy would be responsible (e.g. carbon taxes) and would help.

2. “Why you think Garret either a fool or a liar.” I don’t, simple as. However, I would much prefer Turnbull as our environment minister (he is very astute and sensible when it comes to environmental issues; he is an environmentalist after all). Unfortunately, the Howard *machine* rolls him in Cabinet purely on political and ideological grounds, so has to scurry back with his tail between his legs – politics can be ugly, as he is finding out. What do you think of the issues raised by Guy Pearse, a former Liberal insider that worked for Robert Hill? Check it out here

http://www.highanddry.com.au/extract.cfm

Con’t
Posted by Q&A, Tuesday, 13 November 2007 9:30:29 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Con’t

3. “How Rudd will resist the expectation, among his troops, according to Latham, that Labor will be more 'progressive' once it's elected?”

Latham was/is a dork – get over it, every one else has.

Being progressive (in my words Keith) in terms of political ideology means adopting a more centrist or balanced position. Rudd has done this since both Howard/Costello are leaning further to the neo-con or “New World Order” Right. National/International problems can only be solved by convergence (not divergence as evidenced by Bush, Howard and Co) – this is progressive.

I too have a struggling business but I have not rolled it back as you have, I'm confident. IR reform is/was needed and Howard pushed it through the Senate without the checks and balances – he went too far.

Coal will be around for a long time but a carbon tax is needed, amongst other things. The coal industry is amenable to Rudd’s plans and when the study is finalised mid-2008, we can then look at the specific numbers. Howard/Costello have not commissioned the equivalent and come across as still in a state of denial while other countries’ leaders and captains of industry are being more progressive and proactive – Oz is still dragging the chain.

We needed balanced IR reform, Howard/Costello went too far (look at the bureaucratic nightmare and back-log this has produced lately).

You are not stupid; costs of production/services are pushed up by high demand, for example. We are living in a consumer driven society and low unemployment means those in the market can virtually ask what they like – this is why we need balanced IR.

My daughter is about to graduate with a $60K HECS debt and was threatened with the sack from her (P/P-T) hotel job because she would not sign the new AWA (reduced hourly rate, no penalty rates, no meal breaks, etc). They did not sack her (she was good at her job) they just reduced her work hours and employed younger immigrants who could not negotiate the conditions. She is hanging-in till after graduation.
Posted by Q&A, Tuesday, 13 November 2007 9:35:02 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. Page 4
  6. 5
  7. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy