The Forum > Article Comments > PM's spin turns off childless > Comments
PM's spin turns off childless : Comments
By John Black, published 27/5/2008A growing number of voters think it's time the government dropped the campaign slogans and focused on governing.
- Pages:
-
- Page 1
- 2
-
- All
I am child-FREE, by choice, and am turned off by the Working Families mantra, but I wouldn't have gone as far as voting for the Coalition - they are just as bad in the way they ignore and marginalize this increasingly large (and sensible) demographic. I voted Greens first, because they have a policy on sustainable population, then I voted Labor, because at least Labor has policies which ensure that the children being born today won't turn out to be the psychopaths of tomorrow, which I think is what we are starting to see with the children born under the Howard regime - farmed out too young, by their financially over-committed, overworked and overstressed parents to the tender care of corporations like ABC Learning.
Posted by GDavies, Tuesday, 27 May 2008 11:58:17 AM
| |
John Black, where this nonsense is supposed to lead I don't quite know but every family with children started life childless so what are you on about.
If those whining about families are sick of it, then have a family. Problem solved. Otherwise no-one has a clue what on earth you are on about. Posted by Marilyn Shepherd, Tuesday, 27 May 2008 3:22:10 PM
| |
The fastest growing household in Australia is single adults. Many of these single adults won't ever have children because they are low paid men or educated women.
About 30% of Australian households are single adults. Government policy fails to recognise that many of these people do it tough. How about mature workers who were retrenched in their 50s. They are too young for the pension, too many assets to get social security and too old to get another permanent job. They often by a Jim's Mowing franchise or live off their savings and watch Australia sail by. How about mature women who were often unable to join superannuation schemes until 1992? Posted by billie, Tuesday, 27 May 2008 4:36:24 PM
| |
i think the situation the author describes is true. However it is a fact that it is a standard policy from both major parties. Family First for example appear to reside closely to the liberal party. Of course like many political parties, the religious are pulling the strings there behind the secular front.
Deciding to vote for one or the other will get the same results. I'm not sure of the solution short of a new political party, or voting for a minority party, but I am a bit irritated that the author thinks that changing the slogan is an acceptable suggestion, as it suggests no such requirement be made in policy. Posted by Steel, Tuesday, 27 May 2008 7:04:44 PM
| |
Rudd or Merlin? Australian’s must decide. Be it the future economy, the educational aptitude of a nation, our engagement on regional international affairs or not, it is time we woke up to address the fact that it is “we” who needs to take the responsibility. We need “political will” to “share the burden” everyone.
There are “winners and losers” here and this time it is not just about the poor. I was appalled hearing Australians have no spine to invest. To problem solve the issues on Medicare, wages, solar energy, a liberal appreciation of the arts and, that we’d entertain a tradeout on the GST for a pathetic $0.3c discount in fuel prices? Gads… no wonder we cant see the mirror through the fog. Shining at us are the facts. Climate Change is here, A world Food Crisis Looms… we have an uneven demographic (baby boomers) and a globe full of refugees who need our attentive assistance. Our lie… that all stays the same, is a fatal lie. As you eat your ‘fruitloops’, be mindful of the things that it cost to give you the chair, the table, the spoon and bowel of nourishment that you claim you need in life. Ask for which part needs your care. What happens when you decide to open the door? I see Liberals engendering grimy politics. Their game is anomalistic, flares darkness, pettiness – emotional dishonesty, drolly to a tit-for-tat fallacious narrative. I say to Mr Rudd “if you stoop to a dog, mind you do not wear the fleas”. I say Peter Costello could be the only true match as your opponent, because at least he is serious, about this nation… as are you. The Educational Revolution is about Citizenship. Government must be inclusive, with programs at ground levels… else administrations will remain lost… unsound, out of touch…. Cultures that can be a liability to a nation include those that create barriers to change, create barriers to diversity. I say fundamentalism is a dangerous form of growth… no matter who is in power. That fear of substance itself belittles us ALL! http://www.miacat.com/ Posted by miacat, Wednesday, 28 May 2008 1:16:56 AM
| |
Interesting analysis John. I am part of a typical family - 2 adults, 2 children (teenagers) and I hate the 'working families' mantra. I think a party makes a mistake in choosing a particular 'exclusive' group over any other as part of their slogan. I voted Labor despite their mantra not because of it.
Better to stick with "turn on the light" or "time for change" = inocuous and ridiculous as they are they are more inclusive. You may have a point about the childless demographic but it does not tell the whole picture - such as in WA with the swing to the Libs for Cowan and Swan was more based I imagine on the resources boom and its various spin offs for WA residents. Pensioners fed up with being ignored by Howard for 11 years would also be unimpressed with the mantra but in desperation would prefer an alternative in the hope that pensioners might get a voice. I think this is the group that will need focus in the next 10 years as the baby boomers all start to retire, some of whom started work prior to the availability of superannuation and many of whom took time out to raise families. In vast numbers this group may make more of an impact than childess singles/couples. I don't know for sure but it is something worth pondering on. So far both parties seem to have forgotten how difficult it is for pensioners and carers. It is interesting that some analysis reveals that some single childless voters would preference Liberal over Labor after voting 1 for the Greens. Perhaps these were more protest votes for the lack of choice and a 'punishment' for the Libs losing touch with the grass roots, excessive pork barrelling, increasing Conservatism etc, by young upwardly mobiles who might vote Liberal normally. I agree that Labor should flick the 'working families' mantra. If they are nauseated at having to say it one more time I am at having to hear it one more time. Posted by pelican, Wednesday, 28 May 2008 10:12:15 AM
|