"Because its the Libs that want to give tax cuts
from which only the rich will benefit whereas
Labor is trying to inject money into the economy
from which all will benefit.

Libs are for supporting the rich and the powerful,
Labor is for equity."

Foxy,

This is the fundamental difference between the two parties where they do actually differ. I think Ludwig's referring to the fact that since the Hawke/Keating years, Labor has grown a lot closer to big business. Some are happy with this situation and some aren't. Is it an example of the ALP's maxim "keep your friends close, but your enemies even closer" or have Labor really sold out?

“Libs are for supporting the rich and the powerful, Labor is for equity.”

Foxy, can you provide a bit more on this belief, or direct me to any of your previous posts in which you may have elaborated. Thanks.

"Libs are for supporting the rich and the powerful, Labor is for equity.”

I would describe it as

the libs want to nurture, encourage and take care of the golden goose,

labor, in the name of "equality" want to stop it laying the golden eggs, unless it can provide one a day for every person, every day.

Tax is levied upon the reward of those who take risks and/or innovate.

The history of the last 3 centuries, since the early days of the industrial revolution and the attendant improvement in living standards, is wholly dependent upon and a reflection of mankinds ability to take risks and innovate.

Unless there is improved productivity (the quantative measure of positive innovation, invention and successful commercial risk taking), there is no improvement in the available wealth or a basis for levying tax.

Government and Bureaucrats add nothing to the wealth, they merely shuffle its distribution around but the efficiencty of that process suggests the final benefit may not be worth alot of the costs of administration.

Especially when alot of people are naturally philanthropic. Bill Gates and Warren Buffett to name but two among millions, including the millions presently mining their pockets to exercise personal philanthropy and compassion for those who are suffering in the current bush fire crisis.

Greater personal disposable income, a product of lower taxation, allows the expression of greater personal philantropy. The Australian journalist has sent an open letter to Krudd, exprressing outrage at the debacle with centerlink emergency offices set up near the fires a couple of days ago, the bureaucrats were indifferent to peoples personal suffering and demanded identification from people who ahd lost everything... something which personal philanthropy just would not care about.

And apparently Centrelink followed a similar imperical posture when attending the Queensland floods.

Just another example of meddlesome government not addressing the needs of the people who elected them and authoried them to collect the taxes to finance the needs of those disadvantaged by natural disaster.

Col, I think you are almost right in that assessment; the only difference being that bureaucrats/public servants also pay tax and buy stuff. The higher level "fat cats" probably buy more. But your assessment of Centrelink services sounds pretty accurate; it would be pretty typical of Centrelink staff to be asking for ID from people who have nothing. That way they don't have to give them anything. They can drag that out forever, until the people find a way of proving they are who they say they are.
Keeps the "bottom line" down rather well really.

Nicky

Workchoices, a word that will still be tainted in 100 years,I offer it as evidence of conservatives war on the less well off.
16% that is Labors lead in the polls, it will take more than opposing every thing to return that mob to government.
Lets not forget an election held today would cripple conservatives for another decade.
We are going to have both houses dissolved watch and see, now is the time for Turnbull to try to win voters not chase them away.

Dear Ludwig,

Belly has given you a great example in his last post
in answer to your question - Workchoices!

The Libs want to give tax cuts- from which only the
rich will benefit. The Government doesn't.
The Liberals did not object to 'fat-cat' bonusesa
and salaries for big businesses and banking.
The Libs. tried to destroy the union system.
The Libs. introduced GST - which makes it harder
for the poor to afford living expenses.
The Libs. want to privatise the health system.
The Libs almost destroyed the public hospital system.
The Libs want to increase funding to elitist
schools.
The Libs. tried to abandon rail-services to rural areas.

Is that enough for you Ludwig?