Graham you like every one else are entitled to your opinions.
And believe it or not I respect you BUT firmly think Shadow minister has gone far past fair comment, often.
Now while discounting your views about new workplace laws bringing higher unemployment, I concede your figures are right.
On unemployment.
You would be as aware as I am just a month ago most thought the figures meant we had full employment.
That highlights a truth, some welfare is wasted, some do not want work any work.
Both party's know change is needed in this area.
Now for balance and understanding, my posts have challenged media bias, and spoke of last minute change in editorial policy.
This election is very close not yet won.
But instead of looking to SM read this mornings Sydney daily Telegraph editorial, a well put to gether and true read but ends with support for LABOR.
Then read the Sydney herald goggle them see the attack adds turn off for voters.
GY I remember once I complained about a poster inferring I was a pedophile, based on some within my party.
You highlighted that truth,, then said you would delete it because it inferred I was, it was hard to understand, hard to think in a way you left the insult on the table to have a go at my party.
Bloke I do not want a panel to over see the forum I think it is counter productive.
And I have not sided with those who find you too hash, ever , but I truly think you, like every one of us, can be biased.
Shadow Minister hasbeen, and others can think as they wish so Can I let my peers judge me, you judge me but my views remain truly held.

There is a major flaw in employment numbers that has been used by both parties for years, that's the fact that a job created is measured by just 1 HOURS WORK PER WEEK.

Many employers have now canned all overtime and put thier employees on a strict 38Hr mon-fri shift and they, like me, do the sunday P/hol themselves as thier businesses simply can't afford the 'back to the 70's' pay rates.

One sneaky move by labor was to increase the loading for casuals from 20% to 25%. This was their way of creating full time work.

Another is the 'unlawfull dismissal' law. This law effects small businesses with fewer employees, which in effect negates any protection from UFD laws.

Tony abbott is running scared on IR and I think that's a shame, as to continue down the same path with IR may well be our downfall. Like it or not, we now live in a seven day society.IR laws must recognise this or many will perish.

Remeber, mining will not last forever.

I think the only long term solution will be in the form of a 'dictatorship' arrangement, the old 'do as you're told' senario. But this won't happen as long as the people get to choose who leads the country.

There are simply to many relying on 'hand outs' and they will vote for those who provide the most.

Our present system is leading us to an unsustainable future and one that few seem to recognise, either that, or they simply coose to ignore the facts.

The IR laws effect the 'risk takers', the 'job creators' and all the protection of workers rights in the world will mean nothing to the worker if they don't have a job.

well read the forum added to one other thread the once Latham now political warfare one.
Still stunned still shaky threads, like sleeping your way to the top taming of the shrew shotgun wedding had a run.
List goes on surely we would have it no other way, robust debate in the plebes section of OLO.
Am I truly a fool? can it be that my truthful views on who should run this country betrays my country?
Do we all agree with this threads title? every word of it? can the host of world experts who say We did better in the GFC be wrong?
BIAS do not expect any of us not to show it but surely some care about balance about truth about this country if we let bias challenge our right to be us think as we do we put our country at risk.
OLO is our country's best forum stifle it with one sided bias and it will not be.
I am content to be measured against Shadow Minister individual and hasbeen.

Belly, I wouldn't dispute that the forum threads that have been created lately are mostly from one side. I try and balance the journal, but on the forum most things get approved. I certainly don't strive to balance the thread topics.

If you want a thread coming from your side of the debate then you should submit it.

I'm not sure that it really matters that much anyway because once the thread has been created everyone just piles in.

I don't really want to buy into this thread. What I posted was to demonstrate that SM was not peddling "half truths" and that I thought the commenters should address issues rather than accusing others of bad faith.

rehctub,

I see that you are including both major parties in your criticism, however, it was the Howard Government that instituted the one hour a week as being "employment".

Got to say that your idea of "dictatorship as the only way out is mind-boggling. I'm not entirely satisfied that you are really joining us from the vantage point of the twenty-first century. I'm sure you have a portal from somewhere long past and you visit us via it, lol. It seems that you can't believe that the pesky proletariat got the vote and propose to pedal it via some outrageous system called democracy...Are you for real?

Nairbe “A top rate of 66.6% seems a little harsh”

Agree except when compared to a top rate of

over 75% in post war, 1950 Australia, which has progressively fallen since, although with the progress of indirect tax, Tax take as % of GDP increased to about 30% by 2001.

(http://www.treasury.gov.au/documents/1156/PDF/01_Brief_History.pdf)

113%+ in post War UK (98% marginal income tax plus 15% surcharge on “unearned income”) – hence why the wealthy fled UK in 1950-60’s before being axed back by Margaret Thatcher but since the increases in UK VAT tax as % GDP has climbed from about 37% to 53% in the UK’s Blair/Brown decade of economic decay.

and 90%+ in post war (1944-45 and 1951-1963) in USA, presently 35% and consuming approximately 19.5% of GDP (Hauser’s law)

To mervs original justification “our economy would be a lot better off.”

No, because the level of tax to GDP would be “excessive” and self defeating

Strip peoples access to discretionary income and you strip all incentive to achieve.

Replace peoples discretionary income with government funded spending and you end up like the USSR

An absolutely fabulous war machine, shops with empty shelves and people trying to escape the repression of an omnipotent government.

As for the stupidity of the incumbent incompetents

Squanderers of the Howard /Liberal fiscal legacy
Bad Economics
Bad Employment policies
Bad ETS
Bad (deadly) Environmental policies
Four big bad “E”s to suggest

Labor deserve the big “E”xit next weekend

A return to Liberal government (regardless how you feel about any individuals like Tony Abbott), is to vote for a return to fiscal prudence and responsible economic stewardship.

This is really simple, just read the history books to understand

Liberal policy works
Socialist policy fails.

I see we have the usual sprinkling of “failure apologists” haranguing Shadow Minister for exercising his right of expression.

I wonder if Senator Conroy will decide to "censor" SM in his version of “brave new world” if his socialist brethren return to power to enact Conroy's

“You no agree with me, you no get to say on my national broadband network ” policy