If Mr Rudd can learn his lessons, I believe, his return as Labor Party leader and Prime Minister would indeed be beneficial not only for Labor Party but for Australia.

I do not want Rudd back. The main environmental problem is uncontrolled population growth. Considering the water resources available in Australia we may be overpopulated now, but Rudd ignores that in wanting a BIG Australia. Rudd, like Abbott and Gilard, has little regard for the separation of Church and State.

i want a prime minister who is aware of Australia's fragile environment, committed to an adequately resourced public school system and can think of Australia's interests beyond the next election.

david f for PM!

David, there is no person to fit your 'suitable PM' description currently in parliament, and none would be attracted either.

The return of Rudd, 'Hello, I'm Jesus, I come from The Cave, and I'm here to help' is hopefully unlikely but would be a (bad) miracle if it did come about.

Shame Faulkner is not in the lower house, or that Combet would be pilloried by the NewsCorp media and gutter TV goons for being a 'faceless union thug', a meme the sport obsessed Oz public would not have the ability or interest to consider for more than a nanosecond, and then accept as 'fact'.

Plibersek sounds human and trustworthy, a rare combination in politics but it is actually hard to imagine any of the current crop of ALP drones being suitable as a PM.

Belly will be promoting the gnome from Australia's Worst Union as the next saviour if he comes on here, I will predict.

Well you've got Ruddy right Blue, a more arrogant fool you would require a very long march to find. Typical linguist, most of them never do learn to count.

You shock me with Faulkner. He's the Hindmarsh Island man. The bloke who wanted a sealed envelope used as evidence, in a law court, to prove "secret womans business". This was to buy some green votes, & be damned to truth or justice. I was amazed he was reelected after that lot. Says a lot doesn't it.

Is he really what you would want as PM? If so there really is not much hope for getting rid of the "what ever it takes" attitude in Labor

Faulkner from Labors left is very nearly our best.
TBC bet that shocked you, I and a third of center unity broke ranks to vote for him.
Combet too is very good.
Any one can we but Rudd looks the one I agree with our author.
But understand this, right now, within the party maneuvering is taking place.
If the numbers existed for any one other than Gillard change would have already been done.
Bill Shorten must be a chance.
Change a certainty.

Hasbeen, yes, the Hindmarsh affair, a sorry episode all round, both on the ALP and the develop-at-any-cost sides.

I have no excuses for anyone involved in that, Faulkner included.

Was it real? was it all a hoax? I have no idea and no view either way, mainly because I have no knowledge of it beyond the grime in the media.

A casualty of bad politics, is the most generous view I can muster, in the absence of knowledge or interest in it.

Belly, if Rudd is the answer now, he was probably the answer then.

Gillard was never an answer, to anything, and remains so.

But if Rudd was the answer prior to the election he won, then that tells us all what a total shambles the ALP is, and has been for a very long time.

And it goes back to Beazley also never being the answer as a leader, so why was he ever a deputy?

Because Beazley was so unsuited to the task of leadership, the vacuum the ALP is trapped in now, is the result of very poor decisions taken by the ALP post-Keating's loss.

It was at that point, when I saw the ALP was drifting aimlessly under Beazley, that I cut my ties with them. No doubt a decent person, no doubt he should have been able to lead the ALP to victory, but due to the nature of politics today, he simply failed to cut the mustard.

Let's face it, Howard was a magnificent political operator, even if he was surrounded by drones most of the time.

Rudd is no Howard, Gillard is no Rudd, and neither is a Hawke, a Keating or a Chifley-Curtin type.

But Howard was no Menzies either, so it should be possible for the ALP to select someone who can achieve the acceptance of voters, like a Chifley or a Hawke, without trying to emulate them in vastly changed times. Best not to create a Keating clone yet, some love him but too many demonise him still.

more....

From previous post....

The AWU Gnome suffers, in my eyes, a credibility deficit, like Swan does. Hard to pinpoint, but watch a Q&A session and there is a disturbing vibe about his blustering that tells me, 'hotair merchant', a more appealing Hockey-like character, but a hotair and content-free character just the same.

False sincerity oozes from his pores, like Abbott.

Not so Combet, or Faulkner, and Faulkner is clearly a hard nut who could lead the ALP where they need to be dragged.

Apart from being in the wrong coloured seat, he doesn't want to do the job though.

Blue you disappoint me. Not in what you say, which is all too true, but in highlighting that we can probably no longer have someone as decent as Beazley lead the country, because he can't lead his party.

I am not into it all as you & Belly are. I flit around, picking up bits, then scurrying back to my old cars when it all gets too dispiriting.

I can't handle Labor politics, too dirty for me, & the Greens are utterly mad, so please don't tell me the other lot are just as bad. You'd be condemning me to voting informal for years.

people were comparing the Rudd Government with that of Whitlam. No one really thought it could be any more incompetent until our current PM took over. Even Gough looks marginally good now having previously been our worst PM by a mile. Mr Rudd sits between Gough and Julia. We reap what we sow.

I agree that the return of Kevin Rudd could be beneficial.
He's well known and respected internationally. He has
demonstrated a willingness to improve the governing of
Australia - allbeit to the dissatisfaction of the factions.
It takes a strong persona to take on a rabble and govern
in the interests of the nation. As far as we've seen Kevin
Rudd was achieving his goals when he was allowed to function
in his own right. It is obvious that the ETS agreed
with by Malcolm Turnbull as leader of the Liberals,
was abandoned by Kevin Rudd bending under pressure
by the factions who caused his downfall.

However, it would not be wise of Kevin Rudd to challenge
Julia Gillard before the elections. He should wait for the
outcome of the elections before challenging. He should not
repeat the underhanded fiasco perpetrated by the right-wing
factions. Had Gillard waited until after the elections her
popularity rating could possibly be higher than it is
today.

A logical choice as PM as things now stand -
would be Malcolm Turnbull,
if he only crossed to the other side - which is
highly unlikely. There are too many irrational
members on the Liberal side for Malcolm Turnbull to function
within the Liberal Party structure.

As for other capable Labor Party candidates?
No one jumps out that has the experience necessary to be
a respected force both internationally and within
Australia. It will take time to bring out future leaders
to the forefront.

May the ship of state remain rudderless.

Labour could bring back Mark Latham. I seem to remember Julia also backed him.

Faulkner, maybe. Combet never, minister in charge of getting the budget back to surplus by grounding us further into the ground. Electricity cost under 3 cents to produce a kwh and the average consumer price is 28 cents.

Combet should look into the 1000 percent mark up before giving them free reign to fleece us again and how will taxing us on emissions change the global prognosis in any meaningful way. Get your greasy hands out of our pockets you elitist swine.

Re Rudd, no pun intended. He failed to implement any of his major policies correctly, they ALL brought controversy and wasted tax payer money, and he was not sharing power with Bob.

Ah Hasbeen, do not sell your self short!
You indeed are as well informed as our Green mate TBC, not at all.
He tells us his in depth view of Bill Shorten comes from brief glimpse on QaA!
Great depth, great platform to see clearly from.
Bill is far far more than that, no trickster he is a person who can rest on his achievements already,and not yet middle aged.
Yes he has an ego, but so too has every one with such talent.
Of all candidates he then Rudd are the only ones who can cut, now and forever the Mark Latham, snail trail thread that Joins him/Gillard/Crean and the awful imitation of Pyne. Joel [halfwit]Fitzgibbon.
Turn around Australia, look at the front bench of Abbott's would be government.
Like those Circus clowns mouths open , turning from side to side , hoping without hope some thing of use will come in to their empty heads.
Unlikely.

Gawd, just leave Kevie where he is, flying around the world first
class, living in luxury hotels for that million a year or so that
was quoted recently. He thinks he matters, that will keep him
occupied and Canberra wastes so much, that odd million hardly
matters in the bigger scheme of things.

Gillard faces the realpolitik of spending her days in bed with
Bob. Its either that or the opposition benches, so she'll remain
a lame duck for the term.

If you wanted to bring back past leaders who mattered, bring
back Keating or Costello, for it is because of them that Australia
is doing well today and because of them that Kevie got through the
GFC. Credit where credit is due.

Our present bunch, wether Kevie or Abbott, just don't have what it
takes.

Andreas Berg,
You simply can not be serious. Kevin Rudd hasn't learnt anything except how to get back at Julia Gillard. Of what benefit is that to us other then ridding us of her ? Kevin Rudd is an academic & therefore he is not capable of managing anything. Don't you people ever get it. The ALP isn't about building Australia, it's about ruining it. I simply can not believe the thickness of some people. Gawd !

Dear individual,

I do not believe that we have any evidence allowing to judge whether Kevin Rudd has learned from his mistakes or not unless he is given a chance to show it.
Taking into account all the circumstances of his displacement and present deficit of political leaders capable to work as prime-minister, I do believe that such a chance should be given to Mr Rudd again.

Andreas Berg,
I for one am not prepared to give him another chance just his outfit hasn't given me any. I can't afford to trust that lot at all. I have seen enough damage, haven't you ?

Andreas Berg:>> I do not believe that we have any evidence allowing to judge whether Kevin Rudd has learned from his mistakes or not unless he is given a chance to show it.<<

Andreas exactly that sentiment in the judiciary sees pedophiles offend over and over and over again, habituality is a character trait, Rudd is a habitual failure.

Kevin Rudd would be good for the Labor party for the simple reason that Gillard is a complete incompetent muppet.

I don't care who they bring back, their fate is sealed for the next 30 years. Just as long as someone pulls the ni'cads outta that red things backside. The Philips Head Screw is just above the crack, it's huge you can't miss it!

I'll tell you Hasbeen, the other mob would lead us to oblivion in a bucket given their policies, what ever ragtag arrangement they have for policies is, in the current media cycle.

It also beggars believe in my political memory, when we refer to Whitlam as our worst PM.
In fact Whitlam never had a chance to govern, and was in fact elected twice as PM, in 3 yrs and was still not allowed to govern after winning an absolute majority in the second election because of the lowest political act in Australia political history, by the exploiting of the death of a Labour Senator by Joh himself, causing the rigging of the numbers in the Senate, and ultimately the denial of supply of the Gov'ts own money. Thereby strangling the Whitlam Govt. The media barons were in on it then, just as they are in on it now.

Shame on Whitlam for wanting to spend money on infrastruture by taxing the big end of town. Similarities there with Rudd.

Shame on Gillard for modernising Australia taking our country on to the world stage environmentally.

All the conservatives need now is for a few Green Senators to pop off in States they control, exploit state powers again, create a knobbled Senate, and ask the Governor General to sack the Gov't and give Tony the job as caretaker PM. What a good plan.(sic) Don't even need an election that way . Ahh the Golden days of Liberal Party history.(sic) Tony could just declare himself caretaker for a 4 yr term and get on with rescinding anything that isn't bolted down.

The only thing not like Whitlam in the Rudd Gillard era, is that they (R and G) have actually got some of their bills through both houses successfully.

The Liberals today are baying for an election, crying foul and claiming populism, but then they would not let a Govt legislate after 2 approvals from the people, 2 elections approving the Gov'ts agenda in 3 yrs in the Whitlam case. Hypocrites the lot

Comparing Kevin Rudd to paedophiles is a bit over the top Sonogloin , isn't it?

thinker 2,
Whitlam has lost the title of worst Prime Minister to Julia Gillard which she shares with Kevin Rudd. Try to live up to your name.

individual: "I have seen enough damage, haven't you?"

These mistakes are unlikely comparable with damage caused by John Howard in his late years as prime-minister. He was trying to spread fear and paranoia among Australians. Fear of terrorism, fear of refugees, fear of financial crisis, etc. ... Social management must not be based on fear, and human rights must never be sacrificed for any material benefits.
It is why, under no circumstances, I want ever see Mr Abbott as our prime-minister.

Social management must not be based on fear,
Andreas Berg,
then what do you call Labor's style of management or your own words for that matter ? Isn't fear mongering all you lot come up with ? At least those opposing you have proof that Rudd & Gillard couldn't manage. Abbott hasn't made a fraction of the blunders of those two.

individual, much as I dislike Rudd and regard Gillard as an empty vessel, Abbott is a blunder.

A Masters from Oxford maybe, but missing a few neurons where he needs them, is the impression I get.

And no Belly, I have not studied him on Q&A.

He misses that cunning-rat finesse of Howard, but I too fear his rise to the top at the next election, as do many others, and far more than a continuing Gillard, who may yet last the distance and surprise Kevvieboyo, never mind everyone else.

Just ask those in Qld who suffered under Rudd as Goss's office boy if they think he learned anything from his years there in government, to take into the Rudd government and see what response you get.

He did learn one thing, and that left us with all Howard's dud public servants, in place and carrying on with all of Howard's policies, as can be seen in the work Gillard did on recreating WorkChoices into WorkChoices Light, not to mention carrying on with Howard's dismantling of public education, and failing to get a dental scheme into Medicare, and so on.

Oh, they ditched the off-shoring of refugee prisoners and offered a couple of apologies, but I can't recall what for now, now the froth and bubble has washed away and nothing else has changed as a result of the apologies.

Good Morning, can not find a stump so ask you Labor voters to gather around the Ute.
Now look here,pedophiles? and why are you listening to those blind mice?
Yep we are lead now by a lady heading in the wrong direction and as unloved as any leader in our history.
But be brave!
Replacing her with a pumpkin on a broom stick will see us rise ten points.
The quality of our detractors, 30 years in the wilderness? is questionable.
Tony Abbott? his front bench, heard of them?
Once we dump our dear lost leader just wait, the spot light will fall on the other side.
30 years?
Loven it!

Howard's dud public servants
The Blue Cross,
There's no such thing as a non-Labor supporting Public Servant. Even when we have a conservative government the Public Service is always 99% Labor hence the insurmountable problem.

I remember of course that Mr Rudd had a landslide victory over John Howard mostly due to announcing a number of promising policies.
I have not forgotten that Mr Rudd has failed to implement quite a number of those policies, which were so proudly announced and warmly met by electorate.
Nevertheless, I risk to suggest again that he should be given a second chance.
I do believe that mistakes, failures and negative experience can be turned into positive, if a person is willing to learn and to correct them.
I trust the key words of this discussion are: "If Mr Rudd can learn his lessons"...

Andreas, that is what I was alluding to.

Rudd does not 'learn lessons'.

He was despised here in Qld for his attitude and demands, and he took all those same negative attributes to Canberra with him.

Rudd has no need to 'learn lessons' because he is Rudd.

He's from Qld, and he's there to help.

Help whom?

No one thought to ask him, did they?

But, in the very doubtful possibility that Rudd knows what 'humility' means, maybe he could learn from Bonhoffer,and he did arise from the cave, then there is the question of the media and the gormless Oz public to consider.

He would be laughed at and about from pillar to post.

The public careers of all those who knifed him would be shot, so Belly's Gnome would be gone, and the ALP would probably still lose to an Abbott led Coalition and we'd still be in the mess we are with a hopeless ALP that wants to become more of a clone of the Liberal Party than it already is.

And then who to lead the ALP after Rudd lost the election?

Back to square one with a shortage of talent and ability.

Mind you, that's never stopped any political party in the past, I suppose.

In fact, it's a pre-requisite for the Bob Katter Mad As A Hatter 10/6d Party isn't it?

Dear Blue Cross,

Thank you for your thoughtful message.
I am glad we agreed that Mr Abbott's premiership would not be beneficial for our country. Mr Turnbull might be different story...
However, can the ALP win elections under current leadership? - No.
Can the ALP win elections under different leadership? - Unlikely. Frequent change of leaders would mean instability within the party, and people won't support such a party.
Yet, return of Mr Rudd seems to be a different matter. It could be accepted by electorate as willingness of the ALP to correct mistakes and to implement promised policies, if the ALP would manage to explain this properly to the public.
I believe, if Mr Rudd and the ALP are willing to learn their lessons and correct their mistakes, then we could have some ground for a cautious optimism.

Gillard would have been dumped long ago if not for the gun being held to her, and labor,s head, by Andrew Wilki and co, over these pokie reforms.

Blind Freddie knows that Rud on an off day would be far better for both labor and the country than Gillard at her best.

All in all, I still think the best option is to let the people decide, then we will have a Pm who has been voted in by the people, not by default.

The one certainty in all this is that th ind will get flogged and who ever wins office will do with the blessings and support of the majority.

In saying this, if labor wants any chance of holding office, they must dump gillard. And fast!

She is much more a liability than Rud ever was.

Andreas

The ALP would have to buy TV time, Australian Story plus all the channels the nongs watch, with a 30 minute mea culpa from Rudd.

Bazza Kennedy or that fat fellow from the commercials that everyone fawns over, doing the interviewing and a complete undressing of Rudd's character and how he intends to set about 'going forward'.

The journals-of-choice would have to be filled with a print version.

'Rudd denounces previous arrogance' blazed across the pages of the Oz.

TV commercials, like he had when he took the leadership, stating how wrong he had been and how his time in the cave had changed him.

It won't happen though, because he has not changed at all.

"let the people decide, then we will have a Pm who has been voted in by the people", you mean, like the people decided to vote Howard out of his seat?

No one 'votes for the PM' except those in his/her seat.

Gillard's electorate could vote her out, not you or me, unless you live there.

There is this unbelievable, stupid, idea that somehow no one who voted was responsible for the outcome of the ballot.

We who voted caused the 'imbalance' that the noisy goons, like Abbott and supporters, are upset about.

Why is no one prepared to take responsibility for how THEY voted?

Had people voted in a different manner, then there would be a different outcome, but they CHOSE not to, and we have exactly the result we all voted for.

Don't think for a moment that if Abbott was now PM, in a minority government, the blame would be any different.

Time to grow up, and accept responsibility for how you voted.

Yes Blue, we got what we voted for, & what we deserve. Still it could have been worse, with the number of lefties attracted to Turnbull. If they can't have Rudd, they'd settle for his clone it seams, so we might have had the coalition, led by a self serving stuffed shirt fool, running the place.

Guess we are making a habit of the fool bit recently.

So every time you look at Julia, & think silly little girl, just remember how much worse it may have been.

negative experience can be turned into positive
Andreas Berg,
Same goes for Abbott or anyone else for that matter. I'd rather give Abbott a first go then Rudd a second one. I can't afford to believe in Labor anymore, especially on social issues incl Law & Order.

I think the facts speak for themselves in my assessment of the Whitlam era Individual. I don't think you have addressed them.

In addition to that, I think you massively under estimate Gillard, in that she maybe has the ability to stay around a bit longer than you give her credit for.

At the new year, she can say that her first full year as Pm was a year of delivery of policy, and hit the ground running next year.

As for the synopsis about Abbott making less mistakes, so therefore should be PM, is dependent upon what you perceive as mistakes Individual, and as for Abbott having achieved anything, (except for inventing new versions of the desperate lunge for power), name something.

Rudd has no chance Andreas Berg, but there is something in what you say in that the Rudd policies were indeed popular, "it's when he failed to deliver them" that it all went pear shaped for Kev.

The Labor Party and Julia Gillard should take heed of that I think, for it is not Abbott's suitability for the top job that is effecting the opinion polls, it is the public perception (maybe true) that Gillard herself has made too many concessions to the big end of town in these watered down versions of good Labor policy ("Workchoices light" is one as TBC said) and has allowed it's social democratic pedigree, to drift to the Greens. That essentially what Rudd was doing with the mining super profits tax etc, doing the job of being a good Labor PM.

It was his party Belly, that did not have the intestinal fortitude to deliver those policies, and not even Julia Gillard has been able to make that palatable or even preferable in the public view ever since, all in the face of the worst opposition Leader and front bench in Australia's political history. A dangerous right wing rabble of people entirely unsuitable for Govt. Who knows what they would do with the power. It scares me to even contemplate it.

cheers T2

Blue, I am proud as pounch that I didn't vote for either labor or the greens, becaue, if I did I would feel ashamed.

And as for,your rant about voting for the PM, you know full well what I meant, so don't try to distort the truth.

If an election were held tomorrow, people would realize that a vote for their local labor member would be a vote for the leader of labor to be pm.

In any case, the fact remains that this woman is well past here use by date and, given the position she has allowed herself, and the Australian public to be in, due to the deal she has done, she should do the honorable thing and let the people decide.

If they want pokie reform, she will get back in.

If they want a carbon tax, she will get back in.

If they want the mining tax, she will get back in?

However, if labor wants back in, they must chuck her out, and fast.

Is that not the makings of a real democracy at work!

Dear rehctub,

Voters will get their chance to have their
say at the next election in 2013 and much
can change in that time - including the
leadership of both major parties.

A democracy
requires its citizens to make informed choices.
If citizens are given false or misleading
information. the democratic process becomes
a sham.

Lexi writes

'A democracy
requires its citizens to make informed choices.
If citizens are given false or misleading
information. the democratic process becomes
a sham.'

Lying to the electorate on the eve of an election makes the democratic process a sham. That is exactly what Ms Gillard did.

Lexi, I think even the most staunched labor supporter, like yourself, would agree that we are in a period of limbo, as the government is being held ransom over what is essentially an unreasonable deal with two very minor inds.

This woman has taken us from disater to disaster with no clear path in sight as to how on earth we are going to stop the waste and try to repay the huge debt we now have, in just 4 years.

The latest Qantas issue is a point in case whereby, the legislation SHE DEVELOPED was proven to be unworkable.

Furthermore, she had many an opportunity to intivine yet her common response when questioned about the issue was, I am monitoring the situation constantly.

The law states that unions are not allowed to intentionally harm a company, and they did, yet she and her unionized bunch did nothing.

Labor must act now before there is nothing left to save.

runner,

"Lying to the electorate on the eve of an election makes the democratic process a sham."

Ah....unless you devise a cunning plan which separates your promises into tantalizing entities known as "core" and "non-core".

my assessment of the Whitlam era....massively under estimate Gillard
thinker 2,
The country still hasn't recovered from the Whitlam era.
As for our present PM I can only suggest you speak with the victims of her Government rather than political analysts of academic background. Already forgotten the batts & cattle export have we ?

Satire, no just my honest truly held view.
I am hearted, true, that I truly think the worse detractors of my ALP are not basing their views on understanding.
While I often charge head n t my own side, they would never consider doing that.
I am reminded some comments come from a lifetime of getting it wrong.
This much is sure.
One day the real Tony Abbott/his few solid Cabernet supporters, will be uncovered.
He is far worse than even Gillard, big call.
If that day was today, if Abbott's mask fell and he with it, if polling switched around.
Labor could still never win, with Gillard.
Two second grade leaders, one goes the other must.
We then must ask why it took so long.

Dear rehctub,

I agree that there is a growing sense of frustration
that real people are being ignored at the expense of
established interests. This includes young people -
which the "Occupy Melbourne," and other protests
show. Unsurprisingly conservative commentators have
been frothing at the mouth.

As far as Qantas is concerned I suggest that you read
the following article. It may put things into perspective:

http://newmatilda.com/2011/11/01/naked-conflict-between-profits-and-wages

Two second grade leaders, one goes the other must.
Belly,
correction there, one is proven but the other is only suspected so, I'd rather give the unproven the benefit of the doubt.

That is the thinnest reasoning for electing someone PM of Australia that I have ever heard Individual.

What you are saying is, that the most compelling reason for electing Abbott as PM is,
because we haven't tried him yet. I don't think that is enough Indi.

Actually look at Mr Abbott's Parliamentary record,
especially as Health Minister under Howard. It speaks
volumes. As does the "leadership," he's provided
as Opposition leader. And lets not forget he only won
the leadership over Malcolm Turnbull by just one vote.
Further "proof" is unnecessary.

thinker 2,
I don't know why you use the word compelling In Abbott's case when the evidence is so compelling in Rudd's case.

I suppose what I am really saying Indi, is in the absence of any other perceivable reason for wishing that Abbott were PM.

As for Rudd who's an A grade politician, unfortunately he is a Z grade people manager apparently. Gillard on the other hand has proved a competent people manager if nothing else, in a very difficult circumstances.

I am reminded of a Petty cartoon recently in the Age, where Julia Gillard is standing on a ball in the Greens, she's successfully juggling issues like the GFC,Carbon Tax, Boat people,I.R.,the NBN, Murray Darling, her Party, the Independents are balanced on her nose, and so on. In a splat at her feet is pink bats and school halls and Abbott is sneering from the sidelines screaming loudly, "incompetence".

That's the closest thing that I have seen resembling accurate political commentary recently Indi.

And may I also say that the only people really interested the reinstatement Of Kevin Rudd as Pm as an issue, are the Coalition, their supporters, and News Ltd.

Dear Individual,

Here is just some words that can be made up from
the word - "compelling.":

Logic,
Cope,
Coping,
Epic,
Gem!

You're right. "Compelling" is a word better suited to
Kevin Rudd then Tony Abbott.

Thinker, please.

Our Julia has all ready proved conclusively that she could not manage a school tuck shop, let alone a school building program.

Granted she has proved about 3 times as competent as Ruddy, who can't even manage himself, let alone any project. If we are going to continue to let him flit around the world in our name, we do require an intelligent person, with a remote controlled zip, on his mouth, to shut him up, most of the time.

The main requirement in any Oz leader today is to be able to sit on the Greens, & their fellow travelers.

Only when we get rid of all the get rich quick, on tax payer subsidies, greenie hangers on will we start to get some sense back in Oz. Handling Greens is yet another area in which our Julia absolutely no aptitude.

I would ask the more reasoning posters from both sides to consider.
Yes things are crook in Canberra.
Hung Parliament and concerns about the greens.
An idea in conservatives heads, or just a handy tool? that independents are conservative traitors.
Rudd's dismissal was the catalyst.
He was knifed due to his controlling, But replaced by a fool.
Those leaks turned a small but clear majority victory to Labor[ it was going that way] to hung Parliament.
We if we wish to understand, MUST see this,Greens too prospered by those leaks.
A high tide mark was achieved.
It will not be repeated, dream if they want to, that is the fact.
Greens, independents, maybe Gillard her self.
Must have done a deal, to serve under her no other.
A CLICK, I HAVE HIGH LIGHTED IT OFTEN, Lathams Slug trail exists, it wants to pass leadership from one to another.
That may be the reason.
But Labor Will not/Must not take Gillard to an election.
Indy please, have your views but let me have mine.
I am getting old but have every intention of taking my brain to my grave with me.

Dear Hasbeen,

From your description of what we require, the only
candidate for the job of PM would appear to be -
Malcolm Turnbull. How do you feel about him. Or
shouldn't I ask? You surely can't be suggesting
Abbott. You're far too intelligent for that. If
not Turnbull, then who else (apart from Abbott)?

Lexi you write

'And lets not forget he only won
the leadership over Malcolm Turnbull by just one vote.
Further "proof" is unnecessary.'

and lets also note that the Liberal party was in an unwinnable position when Turnbull was leader. Since Abbott took over the party is now almost in an unlosable position. Although Abbott's is abhorent to you, his policies are certainly being backed by the public while Turnbull's were not.

I don't think Abbotts policies are supported Hasbeen, it's not clear what they actually are, except for the rescinding of everything that isn't nailed down .

The opinion polls are anti Gillard whom finds herself in a difficult position leading a consensus Govt with Independents and Greens. Abbott wouldn't have a hope in hell of doing the same Hasbeen, making the decision of the Independents to choose Gillard, vindicated with bills actually passing through both houses. Govt governing.

Never before has a more Bjelke Petersen like figure in Tony Abbott ran for PM, (other than Joh himself). The similarities and parallels between the two are worrying.

It took 23 yrs to rid Qld of Joh, after electoral gerrymandering, the bribing of journalists, dirt units, endemic police and institutional corruption and abuse of power etc. What would someone like Abbott do with Federal powers ?, having so much belief in himself

Joh believed he was on a mission from God , he used to respond to advisors, economists, environmentalists, unfriendly journalists and voters with "don't you worry about that, you let me worry about that, then he would do what he was going too do anyway, without scrutiny. Once in Gov't you never knew what he was up too.

This is the Abbott Govt that I perceive lurking in the shadows, elected on a wave of media misinformation, supplied and supported by vested interests. These same interests will be all lined up after the election for their slice of the pie, of the jewel in the crown of resources rich nations, Australia. And Abbott will have the taxpayer subsidising their operations and their profits. Suddenly he'll rediscover the value of individual contracts in the workplace and bring on Workchoices 2 (the heavy version) and decide finally the the concept of man made climate change "is" crap. Drown a few refugee boat people to stop the boats and improve our international standing on human rights matters(sic) . All in its first year of an absolute majority, leaving the other 3yrs of a 4 yr term devoted to entrenching themselves, just like Joh.

Make no mistake, Rudd is better than Gillard, as much as Turnbull is better than Abbot;
That's really all I can say; they're all terrible, but they're not incompetent as the current two leaders.

Dear runner,

You can't be serious. What "policies" of Mr Abbott's
are you referring to. The man is all spin and rhetoric.

It took 23 yrs to rid Qld of Joh,
thinker 2,
and look where it got us ? what did we get in return ? Goss ? He single-handedly ran a great state into a corner just like Whitlam did with the country. There is a glimmer of hope now though that sense is coming back into Qld politics, it looks as though Anna Bligh will hand over to Andrew Frazer like Beatty handed us on a platter to Bligh now that she is in the bail-out stage. Campbell Newman is a reasonable alternative to Bligh as indeed anyone would be at this stage. She is now on an insane vote buying Govt spending spree which can send us back to the dark ages of Goss.

Dear individual,

Alas, there remain in Queensland some individuals, who still have sympathies to Bjelke Petersen's rule. Even more, in Russia, there are still some individuals, who place a photo of tyrant Stalin on windscreens of their cars despite millions of his rule's victims. Memory of some individuals can be surprisingly short, and perception very selective...
I am not surprised that such individuals might support Mr Abbott, but, apparently, their support is counter-productive and make a very negative endorsement for Tony Abbott.

Joh even attempted to do away with "the right to assemble" Indi.

Recent events of new Coalition states flexing their muscles with protesters are a taste of the future, with right in the Coalition positioning itself as the centre, all the while being urged by extremists in their parties from the sidelines. Abbott is just the front nutter , its the other nutters that are backing him, that worries me.

There are people like Cory Bernadi behind the scenes running campaigns on social Networks, drumming up confrontation and the politics of division amongst the young, versed and trained directly by the Tea Party of American fame. This is one example of the type of thing I mean when I refer to the deliberate and concerted campaign by the right to position itself at the centre of conservative Australian politics. People like Peter Reith making public statements and positioning Abbott now, in order that promises made now, can be broken once elected, is another.

This morning I heard some person representing the HR Nicholls Society saying that Fairwork umpires should only be thinking about wages and that companies had a sovereign right "not to negotiate", about contracts if they don't want too . This is not moderate thinking; this is based ultimately upon the misbegotten belief that the so called "trickle down effect" exists. Meaning, making the rich richer at any cost, makes everyone better off.

"A complete nonsense invented by some ideological twit", whom although he actually knew about it and was recipient of it ; dishonestly "did not include greed in the equation".

One vote may have cost us our future King Hazza when Turnbull lost the leadership, and Turnbull is much more PM material than Abbott that is true, but I think schools still out on which who will prove the better PM material Rudd or Gillard. Gillard is not finished yet.

Thinker 2 I like the way your mind works even when we disagree.
Time wasting trying to talk to Indy, he however highlights a truth.
Australians, not just Queenslanders, like such as the flying peanut.
We however should understand, its not half way it is love or hate.
Abbott, history will support me, talks nearly as much drivel.
He taps in to an Australian willingness to believe the worst,and fall for rumors.
I think, after much turning it over my Labor party, full of inside information we, voting public do not know.
And a better understanding of the fraudulent nature of the oppositions policy and actions, think voters know.
Think voters could not be so silly and will not vote Abbott in.
Here lays the real problem, intent on this self blinding wrong, Labor could not give free pies and water to starving Kenyans, it fails to sell its achievements.
To look over its shoulder at me and its voters.
If Gillard still leads at election time, no joke, I just do not think my party wants to win or me to vote for it.
Rudd Shorten please.

The worst conservative isn't as useless as the best ALP candidate. Deny that one with some proof please.

Dear Individual,

Always argue in a logical manner.

Sound reasoning will conquer unreasonable
generalisations every time. For instance if arguing
about politics don't say, "The worst conservative
isn't as useless as the best ALP condidate." That makes
you appear to be arguing on an emotional level - not a
mature intelligent one.

A more effective approach would be a subtle hint that some
conservative politicians, do achieve a great deal. This
approach may be unlikely in the heat of the moment, but
it has more chance of winning you points.

Cheers.

Obviously we have quite a few people here who must have been fans of West Wing, [the TV show].

They don't like politicians, but do like actors.

You don't have to be too perceptive to see that Rudd never made a single statement that wasn't scripted with the audience response in mind. If ever anything truthful passed his lips, it was definitely only in private.

Some labor people must like being deceived, they want to give this actor a rerun.

These same people are attracted to Turnbull, another experiences actor, although perhaps not quite as accomplished as Rudd at playing the punters, he's from the same, [is it method], school.

Would all those theater lovers please form their own party, & take this pair out of the general picture. Enough money will attract them, as there is no ideology conflict to be avoided, neither of them have any.

The attempt by ALP supporters to drum up support for Turnbull borders on the extreme of deceit & hypocrisy. They're hoping that they can achieve disunity in the coalition ranks which would be their only chance to get past the posts again. I just hope no coalition MP sinks so low as to accept bribes from the ALP to cause such a disunity.
A couple of independents have exposed their contempt for the plight of ordinary Australians already.

individual,

If Turnbull had been opposition leader at the last election the Libs would have romped it in.

Dear Hasbeen and Individual,

It's one thing to believe that you're on the right path.
Quite another to believe that yours is the only path.
And unfortunately that's Mr Abbott's ethos.
Mr Abbott and his colleagues should not be encouraged to
allow this ethos to come any closer to home.

Cheers lexi,
but what about the two traitors ?

Yes Lexi, always another path or two.

Unfortunately quite often there is only one that doesn't lead over a cliff.

Ask the Greeks, no not those in Melbourne, at least not yet. However too much more voodoo economics, & we could be asking those still in their old homeland for a loan.

May be Whitlam & Cairns wrote the book, but I have a sneaking suspicion, that Ruddy has a copy under his pillow, & he just may have loaned it to Julia, while they were still friends.

Indy some come from the lower end of the gene pool.
Others failed to get off the Beach.
Rude using your words back, but consider please.
On what evidence did you launch that comment?
Mate truly, honestly, try harder!

So Lexi, why can't the likes of Qantas seek a batter deal on wages, after all, they are subjected to international competitors, paying far less.

You cant intrOduce competition then expect the local businesses to remain taking it up the rear end, can you?

Qantas is justbthe beginning as this will become a huge issue as many today are enjoying wages and conditions that were obtained through an imbalance between supply and demand. Well the pendulum has swung back, so these conditions must either be wound back, or, we will loose our businesses as they will set up elsewhere.

Of cause, you can sit ther and assume we are in great shape, as this foolish government would have us believe.

After 23 odd years in business myself, I am closing my shop as I have had enough, and I am not alone.

You can't just keep expecting business to prop up the cost of living when times are tough.
As I have said before, brace yourselves!

Dear rehctub,

I'm sorry to hear that you're closing up shop.

I've always believed that in order for a business
to be competitive you have to produce a better
product than the competition or offer better service
than others do. Resting on one's laurels and doing
what doesn't work any longer is not the answer.

Also as I wrote on another thread - critical times
require a reassessment of the relationship between
labour and capital, a reassessment which takes into
account the politics of industrial democracy, profit
and job sharing, and long term planning.

What it does
not need is "kick the worker today and take the money
tomorrow," attitude that comes from so many managers
around today. The only way in which a company can work
properly is for management and its workforce to co-operate
with one another, not condemn one another. Unfortunately
condemnation is the only language that some managers
appear to understand.

to be competitive you have to produce a better
product than the competition or offer better service
Lexi,
Not to forget the economic status of the country the business is in. No point offering great service when no-one can afford it. It'll be an absolute miracle if Qantas doesn't follow Ansett. Keep in mind our economy can't handle any more hick-ups after the live export fiasco & the wave of internet shopping. Kevin Rudd has nothing to offer there because it'd need more than just academic rhetoric.

Ar Lexi, I see you conveniently forgot to mention union in your equation.

I am closing as the centre I am in is half what it was, yet the landlord, in all thier wisdom, have decided to once again, up the rent.

The end result for them, and many to follow, will be a collapse of their centers, watch and you will see.

Here in QLD, our Anna has decided to grant workers another public holiday, and get this, to get over the big weekend of footy finals.

It,s yet another example of just how out of touch our politicians are with what makes the wheels turn.

I recon it's a parting guesture of soughts.

Qantas, unlike Ansett, will not fold as they have a very profitable domestic business, however, they will either pay their international staff less, or they will take that business elsewhere. An who can blame them for that.

Tell Slarti-Bardfast of Hitch-hikers Guide to the Galaxy fame that one Individual . If your product is good enough it creates it's own market , it finds its own level, its own provides its own niche.

Your referring to the negative adversarial politics introduced to Australia by John Howard, Lexi. It has now become the norm in our country much to its detriment.

Rehctub, somehow to me, your post about shutting up shop smacks of coincidence combined with rhetoric. What possible reason directly attributable to the Govt at this time could be the cause of your businesses demise.

Is it the carbon tax ?, or the tax cuts and benefits proposed for small business operators funded by the mining Tax, or could it have been the stimulus provided by Govt to keep business and the economy upright during the GFC. Or is it the proposed increase in the national savings from 9% to 12 % in super causing the problem ?.

Where one business shuts down another opens and if the landlords in the shopping centres had any regulatory restraints upon them with regard to what is a reasonable rental for a premise, then a small business may have a chance to grow into a larger business.

Dear thinker 2,

Heaven help us all if the Opposition wins the next
election.

T2, we have had three pay increases in the past two years or so, which by the way, have been at a time when most small businesses themselves have been struggling to keep the doors open.

The governmentS are he'll bent on this thing they call competition, which is fine for them, as they are not the ones who are committed to a lease, often which involves the tying up of assetts.

As an example, we now have no fewer than 20 Woolworths within the morton shire, then ther,s Coles, aldi and all the ind.

Put simply, ther are simply to many shops for all shop keepers to survive.

Now the closing of ones shop is not the real issue, more so, it's the fact tha you ar committed to this lease and can be sued for hundreds of thousands, when essentially, the reasons for closure are often beyond your control.

My centre for instance has halved it's turnover in four years.

Now while I accept that living costs increase, do you honestly think the burden should be placed on to employers, many of which are going backwards?

Super. At which point in time are employees going to be forced to contriute to thier own future? Once again, the burden is to be placed on business.

Now if you get the chance to become a medium to larger business, say with 20 employees, our government then gifts you with pay roll tax.

You works hard, grow your business, taking huge risks along the way, then, once you create all these jobs you get penalized. Go figure!

Finally, your comment about when one goes another pops up is a dying trend, unless of cause you support the likes of Woolies and Coles and their duloporly.

Indy! come mate! desperation!, polls show Australians think Turnbull would be the better leader.
Sorry but electing Abbott, would be as bad as putting you or Rechtub in the job!
Now, not a sling, just based on what I see here.
Lexi, I GRIEVE!
But given Bill Shortens statement on 3AW yesterday, he will never stand for the leadership.
[ NEVER ?not soon?? never?
Rudd's return only can give any chance to us.

Heaven help us all if the Opposition wins the next
election.
Lexi,
At least it would be jumping from the fire into the frypan.

Belly,

Don't be so down in the mouth about Bill. It makes me think you haven't got the little message, clicked the little link I left for you on the 'Should the green senator resign?' thread.

And there's another little bit of brevity levity for you in the last link of my last post to that thread. Make another cup of coffee, and take a peek.

I reckon Swanny will shortly put a sock in all this potentially destabilising speculation.

Its getting to be like the good old days on the 'Power without pride thread', isn't it?

Dear Individual,

No. It's more like jumping from a
plane without a parachute.
splat!

Lexi,
the splat has already happened under Rudd/Gillard. At least with Abbott we're still on the way down with the chance of a miracle.

Dear Individual,

Yes I agree with that.

A miracle called Turnbull for which we're
all praying!

I think you make your points clearly and well Rehctub in your last post, I understand and empathise with your position.

I think its lost upon Coalition supporters however, that their party has never actually supported small to medium businesses but in fact is the party of Big Business, Particularly International Corporations. They have successfully dressed up their policies as supporting small business but in fact their policies support Corporations.

This goes right back too Pig Iron Bob Menzies and Joh Bjelke Petersen selling Qld coal for a cent a ton too International Conglomerates with whom he was also a shareholder. It is in their DNA. Selling Australia's assets during the last Liberal Govt saw the remainder of our essential services sold to their Corporate Buddies.

The plan for Corporations is obviously to be "the only source of food and water, of power and fuel, of Health Care, of Telecommunications, News,information,and Education etc".

Ironically workers love small to medium businesses because most of us work in them. The Big end of town is finding ways to de-staff, finding ways employ fewer and fewer people, finding ways to disrupt and destroy competition from small and medium business with predatory pricing, massive false advertising campaigns and so on. In Australia the Corporations have almost achieved this dream scenario.

All of these things were once kept safe by a stronger Trade Practices Act. Small businesses were much better protected from the greed of the Big End of Town then. Workers were more assured of real and secure employment and life was far more consensus driven.

With Howard came confrontation politics in the workplaces, and division in the community, using polarising things like dogs on the wharves, fictional weapons of mass destruction and children overboard to fire public imagination. Now we just think this way, and as I have said before "the right" has now positioned itself as the centre in the imaginations of todays typical Aussie Voter.

Oh woe is us Lexi

Dear thinker 2,

It's sad allright. Qantas is following the
disastrous trend of Australian companies
moving overseas. Soon there will be little
left to call "Australian." We'll import
everything from China and we'll be lucky
to survive as a tourist destination.

Perhaps one way to solve Australia's
"refugee problem" may well be to sell
the entire country to Asian interests.

Woe is us indeed.

Hope you saw Leigh Sales interview with Paul Keating on 7.30 Report tonight Lexi.

He's still got it. Everything is so clear after you hear him tell the story. He is a big picture thinker and still miles ahead of his time. Maybe he could come back to lead the Labor Party.

cheers T2

Dear T2,

No unfortunately I missed the interview.
It must have been really something because
they talked about it on "Q and A" tonight.
It was the last show for the year and it was
an interesting panel. The Qantas fiasco was
discussed and overall it was an interesting
hour. Still I'm sorry I missed Keating.

thinker 2 Lexi I saw it.
Early hours of this morning.
Me and my insomnia.
He always had the it thing.
He will not return.
His adviser, who ever it was who told him to repeat things cost him much.
Of all my books one about him is a treasure for me.
An observation.
Once out of Parliament, the self interest of those who follow, see the greats hauled out for publicity not advice.
That is a shame.

There are teo key requirements for business to survive, certainty and security.

These are the two things that have been taken away.

And Lexi, it's nice to see you don't hate th libs, just there leader.

I am a summing then that you will jump ship if the likes of Turnbull becomes leader again.

I can tell you, it took me by surprise when he got dumped as well.

"With Howard came confrontation politics in the workplaces, and division in the community, using polarising things like dogs on the wharves, fictional weapons of mass destruction and children overboard to fire public imagination. Now we just think this way, and as I have said before "the right" has now positioned itself as the centre in the imaginations of todays typical Aussie Voter."

Had to paste this comment from thinker2 as it is worth repeating - that is the 'Right' has ursurped the centrist position for the most part, with one commentator making the point that education is welfare in a recent program. Let's hope the OCCUPY movements don't allow that US style thinking here.

Howard's AWAs were spun under the illusion that there was individual negotiations happening at the bargaining table. This was not so in relation to lower paid positions, everyone involved had to sign or you did not get the job. Fact is though, even after the abolishing of WorkChoices individual agreements still exist even within government. These sorts of arrangements are rarely 'individual', usually involve casual labour and with little or no consultation in drawing up the agreement. The term Individual is just a word typed on the front page, but in reality has very little to do with individuals.

As for Kevin Rudd, how soon we forget. How would Kevin Rudd's return be beneficial given his well reported managerial style? These sorts of suggestions are purely poll-driven and not based on much substance other than an acknowledgment of the fact he was deposed which will always get an understandable sympathy vote but fails to address his own personal shortcomings and limitations when it comes to policy and program delivery.

Pelican, like it or not, low skilled workers are over paid, none more so when their employer are competing on the global markets.

The fact that the costs of living are continuing to rise, is neither the fault, nor the responsibility of the employer, because they to are subjected to the same pressures and some.

If one can not survive on their unskilled wage, they either find a second job, or, work more hours.

That's how it was 20 years ago and we have seen huge advances in tech since then, which, has placed preasure on the workforce.

Now on the other hand, if governments rewarded employers for employing and, punished them for introducing automation into the workplace, things may change. The fact is, the opersite applies.

You can sit there with your head in the sand if you wish, but the reality is that the Qantas situation is just the tip of the iceberg.

I can assure you there are many from both sides watching this space.

Meanwhile, the unions continue referring to past profits when the condem Qantas.

Profits come from the future, not the past, and it is profits that pay for everything, including wages.

I know you are a lost cause in terms of the working poor rehctub but do you ever question why Australia has to compete with cheap labour? That is a failure of trade policy from both sides of government. It is free trade arrangements in their current form that is the problem or the elephant in the room that nobody wants to address.

Australia has to compete with companies where there are no issues of biosecurity, regulation of pesticides, governance etc. In India there is a company selling asbestos with claims that the substance is perfectly safe form of insulation.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-11-08/india-toxic-trade/3650230

Tobacco companies having been forced to admit smoking was harmful and reduce the nicotine content in fags then turned to Asia with high nicotine cigarettes continuing to be sold with abandon.

Unless there is global governance on some of these issues and a level playing field in terms of wages, good will continue to be bought and sold on purely a cost basis. Quality, with the exception of a few specialist niche areas, has gone out with the dinosaurs.

Australia has to compete with the lowest commond denominators in terms of wages and other forms of protections which have value in a First World society.

As for wages in Australia, greed trickles down not up. If top end and middle salaries are rising, bottom end salaries have to rise too just to keep up with living costs. Arguing that the poor need to work two jobs while the rest of us sit on our bums working one is quite plainly ludicrous.

Dear rehctub,

I don't hate anyone.

We're all thrown cruve balls in the form of
people and situations we're tempted to judge.
How otherwise would we grow but by growing
through such challenges. However, hating anyone
would poison me more than them.

And hating Liberals? How on earth
could I hate someone simply because of politics?
Also I come from a Liberal voting family.

I watched Malcolm Turnbull on "Q and A," last night.
I certainly admire him. Peter Reith was on as well.
As was Ray Martin. All in all it was an interesting
panel. Good questions from the viewers.

I can't say who I will vote for at the next elec tion.
It all depends on who the party leaders are and
what policies they have.

Interesting times ahead.

cont'd ...

I need to get glasses.
I keep making typos.
My apologies. The sentence should read -
"We're all thrown curve balls..."

As Lexi literates, nothing good is born of hatred Rehctub. I'm sure you also agree with this principle.

Not trusting Abbott however, is a different thing to hating Abbott. And the concern for me is, that his arrogance and the avarice of his front bench displayed in opposition could potentially become autocracy in Government.

Pelican refers to Occupy protesters and their point. They represent thin edge of the wedge of public discontent and mistrust about "the Big end of Town". I agree with all of Pelicans thoughts. So saying that "low skilled workers are overpaid, "in our society" is at best counter productive and worst anti social to me Rechtub. Right wing rhetoric.

Citing global markets as responsible, carries even less anti-cedence in the case for lowering the living standards of your lowest paid citizens, in order that people up the ladder receive the benefits of a countries wealth, when you can afford "not" to do that.

Although I still empathise about the plight of small business Rehctub, I think that global competitiveness and it's advantages are vastly overstated in our case, and are the focus of a planned Corporate future for our country.

And whilst on the subject of the countries wealth

One example is Gold. Gold prices have been soaring for years in a weak global economy. We own the gold but have not shared in the increasing dividends for our gold. It does not belong to the people whom are digging it up for us. It is our Gold. Surely we should share in the massive increasing profits for "our" gold by including it in the Mining tax, instead of lowering the living standards of our lowest paid workers. Hows that for a sensible and socially responsible economic measure Rehctub ?. The Greens have this in their policy. Belly, I'm getting this drifting feeling again.

* We own the gold but have not shared in the increasing dividends for our gold.*

You remain confused, Thinker 2, but that is not unusual.

FYI, according to our constitution States own resources, so unless
you live in a State with lots of gold, you have no claim to it.
Unless of course you suddenly think that our constitution is
invalid.

But of course you still benefit, despite all that. Mining companies
employ people, who pay huge amounts of tax. Those people spend, employing more people,
paying more tax. Mining companies pay royalties to states, they
pay income tax, payroll tax, fuel tax, stamp duty and all the myriad
of other taxes levied.

In fact without the miners, you would be living in a banana republic, aware of it or not.

It seems to me that greed is your problem, Thinker 2. You always
seem to want more, without actually working for it.

Sorry, but life ain't that simple. Try a lottery ticket.

The theme of the thread, Left behind in our usual way, has impacts.
Any observation of the latest polls show a slight lift in the ALPs vote.
Not taken from Liberals but the Greens.
I find this both good, and informative.
Greens seem intent on considering my concerns about them bias/bigotry/based on no real understanding.
Maybe Rudd's impending challenge is the reason.
Any thing that separates in voters minds any links to greens and Labor is good.
So yes a return would be good.
Shorten first but if he will not run some one must.

Rehctub here.
So Pelican, T2 and anyone else out there who either disagrees with my view or even hates it, please answer one simple question.

Do you think, in tough times like we are in now, that the increased cost of living burdens should be passed on to employers, or, should they be the responsibility of the government.?

Now before you answer that, just remember, we shoukd have heaps of money in reserve given the mining boom we are experiencing right now. It's just that all this, and some has been wasted. Not by me, not by you, but this government.

I would also like you to take into account just how tough most businesses are doing right now.

I will accept no reply as an admission that I am right.

Discussing our topic "Return of Kevin Rudd would be beneficial", we have naturally touched on variety of current problems experiencing by our country.
Unfortunately, we have not really attempted to consider whether return of Mr Rudd would help in dealing with these problems or, on the contrary, would make these problems unchanged or even worse.
Yet, this is exactly the topic of our discussion.
If return of Mr Rudd seems to be beneficial, it is natural to ask for evidence and arguments supporting such a suggestion.
If return of Mr Rudd seems to be unhelpful, it is also natural to ask for evidence and arguments supporting this assertion, and for suggestion of alternative candidature.
I am respectfully asking all the participants of this discussion to keep along the lines of our topic.

Ok AB, rehctub here, back to Krud.

He, after receiving expert advice about the dangers of his insulation program, still went ahead, resulting in at least four deaths and untold fires and billions wasted, houses devalued. If he were a company director he would be facing criminal negligence charges as we speak.

He then took us to Copenhagen, this was after he stole land from farmers, yet, against strong advice and the will of the people, he insisted to go, again wasted millions and achieved nothing.

To think that the person who stabbed him was in the labor's parties opinion, the better option, simply defies belief.

Now this thread is not about how good K rud is, it's about would it improve labor's chances and the answer is yes.

But you must also take into consideration what the labor party stands for, and that's to protect the worker at any cost.

Now I don't begrudge anyone wanting a decent lifestyle, I simply oppose the fact that the increased cost of living burden is always passed on to the employer, who by the way, are also struggling with the cost of living increases.

rehctub I understand the plight of small business and failures in competition policy especially in light of the growing corporatisation of business to larger chain monopolies (especially in relation to buying power).

However, you continually miss the point. Governments should be making policy that works for its constituents not against. Your angst should not be directed to the low income earners. For some reason you have a real tendency to point the finger at the lowest paid and completely ignore government policy as the greatest contributing factor. Governments are completely responsible for the state of the economy and compliance under pressure from big business and other global pressures. And your mates in the LNP are not better.

There is no leadership.

Do you really think with rising living costs the poorest paid should have to shoulder the burdens of the middle and higher income earners? Don't you agree that government policies should work for not against the citizenry?

Given your logic, failure to reply must mean that I am instantly right. ;)

Pelican, I am generalizing here, but in most cases, people are high income earners for a very good reason. They have a set of skills that attract the dollars to go with such skills.

Now in saying that, you can't tell me that a baggage handler at qantas is worth that of a policeman. Also, a policeman doesn't get cheap airfares or, a reduction on speeding fines just because they are a policeman.

The issue is quit simple. Australia is no longer surviving on the dollar spent by Australians and they have to compete globally in everything from pushing trolleys at the shops to flying passengers around the world.

We can't do that if we pay up to twice the wages.

I say again, I don't hate low income earners, after all, they make up the bulk of my customs ers, what I am saying is that business shoukd not have to carry the cost of living increases. That's it!

People are not spending money at the moment. Consumer is not confident in world affairs. Sit it out.

Fair enough rehctub we will have to agree to disagree how to attack this problem. I just don't think it is by exploiting the lowest paid, but much more about international economic policy. You are right about competing wages but that is exactly my point, why are we competing with standards we would find abhorrent in this country.

Back to KR. Kevin Rudd's return would not make any difference, even if he were to 'win' in the sport of election it would be only window dressing change - nothing of substance. Rudd may also have had to deal with a hung parliament and shared power but he would have been content to see the Carbon Tax which he pushed during his reign under the CPRS.

Rudd's value would only be in QLD looking at it purely strategically but the ALP would be better served returning to it's roots and in increasing transparency. It is more secretive governments that diminish democracy.

Pelican, nobody is exploiting the lower paid at all, they are simply telling anyone who cares to listen, that the goal posts have shifted an the gravy train has run out.

Whether you agree or not is irrelevant, the fact is that these conditions have been born from the excessive wages on offer from the mining industry.

Now back in 06 when the country was booming, one could literally name their price.

Those days are gone and, if they don't accept that then they may well have no job to go to.

Now I can not emphasize enough that I am not opposed to people having a decent income, you can't just keep expecting employers to provide it, as it's governments roll, to offer income assistance,not ours, as we are faced with the very same issues, often on a much larger scale.

Keep pushing by all means, but at your own risk.

Simply Rehctub, the premise that competing with labour cost in third world sweatshops, and competing for the wages and conditions in third world countries is inevitable and desirable, is only pertinent if you think the course of business should not be interrupted by morality or justice. Unfortunately this is your position.

Business owners, just like the rest of us are part of the community, and a privileged sector of our community at that, mostly. I don't agree that no responsibility exists for the business sector in a social and community sense to maintain the living standards of those they employ.
In fact any contribution an employee might make intellectually for an employer would be deterred by such a view from an employer.

And as for the Rudd revival AB, I don't think it currently exists as an issue. It's a red herring.

T2, your logic is fine, so long as we are doing business in house, but, the reality is, we are not.

Thanks to globalization, we need to compete here to stay there and this is what the Qantas dispute is all about.

Now on the other hand, if you can convince the Australian public to fly only on an Australian ownered and operated airline, shop only at Australian owned and staffed businesses and, buy exclusively Australian owned and manufactured items, from shops, not online, then your logic will work.

We have made this rod for our own backs and we must now pay for the consequences of our actions.

The likes of Dick Smith have been warning us for years, yet, although we may listen, we ignore his and others advice and go for the best deal we can find, knowing full well it is hurting Australian jobs.

Until now, the answer has been to simply increase wages, the ,old shel be right attitude.well, it's not alright any more.

You wanted it, you've got it.

Enjoy!

Julia wants equal pay for women and men, that aught to cause a contraversal panic.

Not at all 579.

The case she is refering to is not a gender specific role and, as such, equal pay should be paid for equal work.

If a person, either male or female or even one who is not shaw which side of the fence they are on for that matter is capable of the same result, in the same time, then they deserve the Same wage in my view.

Well said T2.

rehctub
You are not reading my comments. I am clearly saying government policy is the main factor in this debate. Your language lets you down and displays a real contempt for the poor. A 'gravy train', really compared to whom? The gravy is literally dripping from the top down.

The goal posts have changed but why are you not pressuring governments to change policies that have us competing with Third World conditions and engaging in treaties that do not provide benefits other than to a privileged minority.

Otherwise why not just reduce the minimum wage to $1 per hour arguing that there is plenty of space in the bush for shanty towns to house the poor when the bank takes the house after failure to make mortgage or rent payments. That is the only scenario that will allow us to comepte with the Third World.

Don't blame the lowest paid for simply wanting to be able to keep up with the cost of living and to spend time with their families.

Fact is, if we are going to compete with the Third World the burden should be spread and all of us may have to reduce our living standards.

I wonder how many of us truly under stand those workers who get the benefits of Gillards action.
Child care aged carers often single mums .
One thing the mostly are.
Like good mums they are carers,they care.
Seen them gently lifting your mum or dad back in bed.
Seen them go around the corner and cry as they see the pain of relatives taking the last of a now gone loved ones things home.
Do you know any of them?
The single mums who dad left with kids to fend for herself, working to eat?
Rechtub, sure you will under stand, these folk do not do equal work.
They do more.
I want to say how very proud I am my party leading again,put humanity first fair go first.
I rebut the fear campaign, the awful lie,that equal pay is a side aspect in the general community of this action.
Those Women outside this group get already far More than these do.
Gillard however still, must go, if not she is Lemming number one leading but to a cliff top.

If Mr Rudd can learn his lessons, I believe, his return as Labor Party leader and Prime Minister would indeed be beneficial not only for Labor Party but for Australia.
I trust the key words of this discussion are: "If Mr Rudd can learn his lessons"...
I do believe that mistakes, failures and negative experience can be turned into positive, if a person (and a political party) is willing to learn and to correct them.
Return of Mr Rudd could be accepted by electorate as willingness of the ALP to correct mistakes and to implement promised policies, if the ALP would manage to explain this properly to the public.
Taking into account all the circumstances of Mr Rudd's displacement and present deficit of political leaders capable to work as prime-minister, I do believe that such a chance should be given to Mr Rudd again.

Belly, when my mum was in a nursing home, it cost me $900 a fortnight. That was stretching me rather hard. I actually had to think if I could afford the petrol for the 60Km drive to see her some times. Another $50/60 a fortnight [or a couple of hundred more likely] would have meant it wasn't on.

We are all ready paying what the work is worth, or perhaps a bit more. You don't pay a cleaner nurse wages, or a trade assistant tradies wages.

Don't fool yourself about someone gently lifting anyone into bed either mate. They use a gantry, like an automotive engine crane. It's like watching a bag of wheat getting hoisted onto a truck.

Yes some were great, but I had to get very loud to stop some of them wheeling her table, with her water on it, too far from the bed for to reach, just so it looked tidy. Some of the staff were not too bright, & took a lot of training.

Andreas what lesson can Rudd have learnt?

Not to be an idiot.

Not to go off half cocked, with our money.

How to listen.

Not to think big Oz is good.

Not to crawl to the UN.

How to be a valuable human being, you've got to be kidding.

He's going to be a lying conniving KRudd as long as he lives, just like his nemesis.

AB sorry I have not directly addressed you before in this thread.
I agree, with every word every thought.
Expressed in both your last post and every thought you put here.
Only my unquestionable belief in Bill Shorten pulls me up short of total support for Rudd.
The problem is Shorten seems not to want it ,yet.
Or understands the party is not ready for him ,yet.
Just maybe, given the way Rudd went, only his return can do it, Gillard never can.
Hasbeen, truly you baffle and concern me, often, yet you impress me sometimes too.
I mostly fear such as you, you would not wish me to lie to hide that?
Your payment for your mum is commendable, your visits too.
In I take it very good care? are we talking Government or private.
Are you aware, any idea how very little these people are paid.
One fifth less than others doing much the same.
A truth must be highlighted, you talk often of past possessions present ones and a lifestyle I never had.
But some of these working folk wiping the bottoms of our loved ones do not earn enough to EVER own anything.
I too spent my money on fuel, a nightly drive of 200klm for 7 weeks, my food money, to visit my mum every night.
She made it home, against all odds.
But spent many weeks many times in such care.
I, unlike some, value the memory's of carers who lived a life of hardship just as I did.
But gave their best to those who needed it.
Hasbeen,if yours was the standard response to fair wages for workers, this country would be a sad war like place, not unlike the middle east.
Please stop referring to posters as idiots.
We all have a portrait in our homes of the most likely fool we will ever know.
Mine is the mirror yours too.

Pelican, the gravy train I was referring to was the governments piggy bank.

Anyone who buys a cheaper imported item on line, or, who seeks out a cheaper international flight than Qantas, or, who buys the cheaper imported item from the supermarket is the real cause of this delema we now face.

It is also they who have the power to change most of what is happening right now, by simp,y saying" we have had enough!

Enough of the cheaper imported foods.

Enough of the budget airlines costing Australian jobs.

Enough of the cheap imports sold on h likes of E Bay.

We all know dammed well that each Time we do any of these we are placing the jobs of our own people at risk.

It's not rocket science!

Finally, rud is a dud!

It's just that gillar dis even worse.

You lot should be more worried about what will happen if the libs get a strong leader.
It would at the very least show all whether you vote for who is best for the country, or, labor just because you are brain washed.

Belly, I can see your point, but, how much can you pay a totally unskilled worker, who cleans the floors in a nursing home? How close should their pay be to that of the qualified nurse, treating the patients?

Then go one step further. Most of the costs will not be paid by those like us, who could almost afford it, for a short time. Some of us have an asset, [20 acres in my case], which preclude us from being eligible for welfare, but have very little money. I had to borrow to cover mums costs.

Most costs will be paid by government, the tax payer, as such a large number of those in nursing homes are fully funded. OK, as it should perhaps, most paid all their life for this. If they don't pay, what other services will you cut to pay for it?

Still, where is that $2b going to come from. Julia doesn't give it to us, it has to come from somewhere. Your kids, & grand kids have been signed up to pay this.

Then where will it stop. As all the skilled workers in the sector will see their legitimate margin above the unskilled as diminished, & will expect a similar pay increase. Don't they deserve it?

Not disagreeing with you, just looking a few blocks further down the road at those unintended consequences.

Skills must be rewarded. It was lack of equitable reward for skill & training that killed the eastern communist system.

Yes Rehctub , but "it is the Big Food Chains" that are presenting these cheap imported goods (not actually cheap) but at a price determined by the duopoly, in a cartel pricing structure, sold to the consumer because the margin is higher. Not because there is any actual benefit in not producing your own(local) food and selling it at the retail counter for the consumer. The buying public has to feed itself, and therefore selects from the available promoted choices and doesn't really have much actual choice in the matter in reality.

As always, you identify the villains incorrectly.

It is the Corporate view of the future or more accurately it's CEO in the Qantas matter, that proposes that the jobs go offshore.

In the industrial imbalance created by the Howard years, industrial harmony can never exist now, in an environment that allows Companies to lock their employees out of a business. This has not been successfully repaired by either Rudd or Gillard yet.

In this model all a company has to do, is ultimately "lock out it's employees out of a business", creating total disruption to the service for the customers, and then blame the employees.

Qantas have never negotiated in good faith with their employees and planned to lock them out from the beginning, encouraged to do so by the legislation as it stands.

It is the preference of Big business, that imported goods be sold, and jobs be lost to other places in Australia. Only good Gov't representative of it's people will fix that Rehctub.

I am not ready for another free for all, every man for himself, kind of view of Australia that we receive from Conservative Govts in this country, at this time. I would not wish to feel stifled, and once again be lamenting opportunities lost, as I felt during the Howard years.

Going back now, with Tony's "Son of Howard" Govt model is giving me nightmares.

I spoke to a police officer taday, a long serving one at that.

He said he earned $75K per year, which took into account his overtime.

Remember, they are in a very high risk job, and to the, the most feared risk today is catching something from an undesirerable, which they have plenty to do with.

Now a concreter gets paid about $400 per day, thats $100K, a baggage handler for Qantas, up to $85K and a floor worker at r entertainment centre is on base rate of $40K. They also receive double time Sunday's an after midnight.

So, it is very obvious the police are underpaid, so how do we addess this, remain comtetetve in the global market and protect Australian jobs.

Any suggestions?

Increase the pay of Police Officers ?. Sounds like it's a given Rehctub.

*As always, you identify the villains incorrectly.*

Not so Thinker 2. You simply don't understand how supermarkets do
business. The most expensive store space is occupied by those
products which consumers walk past and don't buy, for whatever
reason. Supermarkets stock what moves. It is consumers who want
ever cheaper prices and who will go down the road to buy 10c cheaper.

So supermarkets give you choices. Australian products or cheaper
imports. Or sometimes more expensive imports, if they are better
quality. Consumers decide what is on those shelves, by voting with
their wallets. If a local product is simply not selling, as consumers flock
for the cheapest, then of course it won't be stocked,
supermarket shelf space is too valuable.

Qantas is no different. Given that 80% of Australians choose cheaper
Asian carriers when flying overseas and Qantas are losing 200 million
$ a year on international, they have to change their business model.

No, Qantas are not just there to create jobs and for your convenience.
If you rented your house out, you would quite correctly think it
quite reasonable that the tenant paid some rent. If it applies to
your house, then it applies to other forms of capital as well.

If the tenants trashed your house you might get a bit upset. Well
that is what has happened to Qantas shareholder capital. No wonder
they are upset. As the business community is pointing out, right
now the unions are doing their best to destroy jobs at Qantas, rather
then preserve them. Sadly few union officials understand the
fundamentals of business. Waving placards is not a qualification.
Perhaps we need a few more educated union leaders for a change

Well we are at it again thread was about what?
So may as well step around the Quantas planes over paid women poor under paid cops.
And launch a new branch on our tree.
Bob Brown? seen his anti America bit?
Strange bloke.
But not as strange as those who see any good in him.

How often have you heard the saying, it's not worth me doing that overtime as I just get taxed more and it ends up being not worth it.
well, this is what Qantas is going through right now, they are investing all this money and effort in to the international arena and itnis not worth it.

So why can't they take their business elsewhere if it better suits them?

It's not as if they are letting the majority down, because the majority fly on cheaper carriers.

Back to topic.
It is more an more like a race to the bottom every day.

Remember, rud flogged Howard, gillard punted rud, yet they are coming a distant second to Abbott, who is not a patch on Howard.

Kinda makes you feel all warn and fuzzy, don't it!

Social management must not be based on fear, and human rights must never be sacrificed for any material benefits.
In my humble opinion, damage caused by John Howard in his late years as prime-minister was enormous overweighting all his achievements. He was trying to spread fear and paranoia among Australians. Fear of terrorism, fear of refugees, fear of financial crisis, etc. ...
Also, he is responsible for Australia's involvement in Iraq, and, thus, some people view him as a war criminal.
I believe it is a shame for Australia to have such a prime-minister as John Howard. I do hope we will not repeat our mistakes by choosing someone similar.

That's interesting Andreas.

What do you call the carpetbaggers, trying to rip us off with the greatest fear campaign of all time, the Global Warming con?

If ever there were criminals in high places generating a fear campaign, that is mother of them all, & includes the current Prime, & Foreign ministers.

Dear Hasbeen,

Global Warming campaign is not a fear campaign at all. It is a Global Warning campaign about dangerous influence of human activities on our environment and, consequently, on ourselves.
For example, if physician warns about dangerous consequences of certain styles of life, diets, etc., intelligent persons would gratefully listen and take relevant actions. Fools and idiots would ignore such a warning. 'Intelligent' fools and idiots would consider themselves knowing better than a physician and promote contrary view.
Global warming and dangerous influence of human activities on our environment is not a subject for discussion, it is, unfortunately, indisputable fact confirmed by our scientists. Thus, it is also indisputable that we must address these issues. The disputable only matter are best means of dealing with these dangers for humanity.

Dear Hasbeen,

The global warming con? Carpetbaggers?

Oh dear. I guess "where there's smoke there's jobs,"
and we should keep on doing what we're doing because
who cares about cleaner choices in the future.

Australians
don't deserve a better deal because clean choices are
cheaper and more competitive than polluting ones. We
don't need new industries because the old ones will last
forever. We don't need new industries with high-paying skilled
jobs to be created for the future.

Oh dear.

Ulcers are caused by worry,

& the world was built in 6 days by a man with a long beard, wearing a dress.

If only you people had some math.

Never mind, we survived the majority of the population believing the earth was flat, & the moon was dragged into the sky by horses, didn't we?

Dear Hasbeen,

Don't be so hard on yourself,

It's important to remember that some people in
our society - are dull, self-satisfied, and
joylessly conformist. Not simply null and boring
but nullarboring. Not merely mindless, but
lobotomised. Of course, the option of putting a
price on carbon pollution involves taking some
considerable risks - but almost every human advance
is based on experiment, innovation and adventure.

cont'd ...

There are also those in our society who
protest strongly against the right of ordinary people
asking for increases in their wages yet they don't
protest at the huge salary increases of CEOs.

Plainly it's just wrong that full-time working women earn
on average one fifth less than men. That equates to women
working seven weeks a year for free.

For too long Australia has undervalued workers in the social
and community services, the vast majority of them women.

Workers in this sector have been underpaid for too long
because their work is viewed as women's work. They work in
incredibly challenging jobs including:

1)Working with people with disabilities.
2)Counselling families in crisis.
3) Running homeless shelters.
4) Working with victims of violence or sexual assault.

These people deserve to be properly rewarded for their work.
Yet there are those whose ideology seems to be that of
greed. the politics of money and power. This leaves no
room for social equity, or the idea of an egalitarian
society.

Rudd looks good –but, only in comparison to Gillard.

Rudd was the smiley face with the surefire plan to save the world.
Soon after taking the primeministership he jetted to the Bali clambake promising to ratify Kyoto.

You might remember, Howard had refused to ratify it till it bound countries like India & China. And for that, the left (both labor and the greens) ridiculed him big time.

The left made much of the claim that climate change was almost all due to the activities of the developed world. And if we committed to Kyoto, the rest of the world would naturally & quickly fall into line.

Well, many years have now passed: Rudd has ratified Kyoto; Gillard has ratted on Rudd ; And the Greens are ratting on everyone!

But guess what ?

The left was so successful in marketing the meme that it was all the big bad Wests fault, that now the underdeveloped world is demanding even more Cargo Cult contributions before they’ll move a finger.
From the AFR 10/11/2011: “Developing countries …are now demanding that developed nations sign up to second Kyoto commitment “

And away from the warmist faithful downunder, still awaiting the second coming, much of the world is now a lot more cynical.
From the AFR 10/11/2011: “US, Japan, Canada and Russia are indicating they will not sign up to an agreement that does not bind all major emitters”

Even the ALP is beginning to sound decidedly Howardish.
From the AFR 10/11/2011: “Parting with the approach of former prime minister Kevin Rudd, Mr Combet signaled Australia would not recommit to the Kyoto Protocol unless big emitter such as China agreed to lock in existing pledges to reduce emissions”

No, we don't want Snugglepot back. But that doesn't mean we're happy with Cuddlepie.And we don't want to hear any more of their stories about the big bad Banksia Men warming the world, either!

As far as pollution goes, most of us have been cleaning up our acts for years.

You rely have to ask yourself, what's the use of the cleanest environment if ther are no jobs. Full stop!

If we were unchanged in our polluting ways, from the 70 ,s and 8o,s, I would say ok, but we are not.

I note with interest we have received global accolades for our introduction of the carbon tax.

Does this mean the rest of the world thi ms it's a great idea, or does it mean they will follow suit.

My bet is they will watch us first and see what effects it has on our fragile economy.

Somehow, I don't think the smaller omitters were meant to be the global test pilots, more like the sacrificial lambs.

As for going to war, yes JH started our involvement, I still don't forgive him, but I have to wonder though if he would have tolerated the number of deaths that have occurred under the current governments watch. I somehow doubt it.

Dear Rehctub,

May I respond borrowing your manner and logic: what's the use of jobs if people are getting sicker and sicker due to pollution. Full stop!

Deary me, Lexi, don't start preaching about fairness in our society.

West Australian farmers export most of their production, something
one would think would be good for the country and should be encouraged.

Yet your beloved carbon tax will slug them around 6% of their
income. Now if they were slugging librarians and architects
6% of their incomes, you would be hollering loudly about
unfairness.

Give me a good reason why WA farmers should be slugged 6% of their
incomes and not librarians or architects, to pay your wonderful
tax. Other then your pure self interest of course.

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/abbotts-no-dead-cert-20111112-1nco1.html
Link leads to a well written story.
Unlike some comments we see often it is quite balanced.
And tells it much as it is and was in both camps.
We should remember, understand, a good number of the frothing at the mouth comments here, come from deep dislike/bias/and not from understanding.
I remain convinced Labors threat is in clear sight.
Informed commentators know and have known.
Abbott is resembling a Circus performer.
His twisting and turning, backward, [a term I often associate with his actions]on policy's.
He introduced the stupid grossly so, middle class welfare baby bonus thing.
Then took it back.
He wants of shore but will not support it.
He said no to 12% super then yes.
A look any brief one, at his proposals, must concern his followers.
Almost but not as much, as any belief Abbott's fall increases Gillards chances.
NO! please! Julia Gillard/Tony Abbott prop each other up.
As if both are Saturday nigh drunks fighting over a telegraph poll to learn on.
Both gain ONLY from the fact the public dislikes the other.
Kevin! bring it on.

http://www.smh.com.au/national/coalition-divisions-widen-on-superannuation-20111112-1ncv0.html
This link too, highlights, to those who will see, leadership issues are our problem.
Apart from Bob Brown, who is Representative of his silly walks party.
We are lead by the wrong people.
And focus must resume, its back must no longer be turned,on the coalitions lost nature churning out policy's it has no intention of implementing.
A slick side showman inviting us in to a tent, one that is and will remain, empty.

Dear Yabby,

It seems to me that the answer to your question is obvious - because architects and librarians produce carbon as every human creature only while farmers (and any other manufacturers) produce carbon not only as living creatures but much more as manufacturers of their production.
Don't you think that it is fair, when people polluting our environment because of their professional activities (which are undoubtedly needed by society) pay relevant tax from their incomes? Can you suggest any fairer for everyone way to protect our environment?...
I would be more concerned of how efficiently the government spends this tax money for protection indeed of our environment and, consequently, of everyone of us - farmers, miners, architects, librarians, etc.

Belly, the reason for Abbotts backflip on the super deal, is simply because if he wins power, it will be very unpopular to take this away from the workers.

Now gillard is misleading the people about this 12% as she is trying to make people think the government is paying it, but they are not, business is because it is part of the proposed mining tax.

No tax, no 12%.

As for rud, he radified Kyoto by stealing land from the farmers. Remember the guy up the pole. His life's dream taken away from him, he still owned it and was responsible for it, he just was not allowed to use it.

Remember that must have trip to Copenhargen, who can forget that $58 bowl of soup. Achieved nothing, but now we have a carbon tax, even though the rest thought better of it.

It's not so much the tax, as the timing.

Remember the warning he and old mate received about insulation, yet, despite the repeated warnings and warning signs, young people still lost their lives.

To my knowledge ther were no deaths prior to the first experts warning.

Remember the school halls program and that tuck shop the most expensive one in history.

No, of cause you lot don't remember as you have short memories.

It is you labor supporters, along with green supporters who must take some of the blame for allowing this great nation to be placed in such poor shape in less than four years.

And Lexi, I don't think we can risk waiting until 2013, a I fear we will have little left to salvage.

In my view Rud is your best option, but he is still a dud.

Perhaps if he does come back we shoukd demand a security bond of say one billion dollars.

<< For example, if physician warns about dangerous consequences of certain styles of life, diets, etc., intelligent persons would gratefully listen and take relevant actions>>

Maybe not-see here:

"GOSFORD dad Graham Lord prepared himself for the worst when he was told he had an aggressive stomach cancer.

But the 59-year-old was determined to fight it. He endured seven gruelling sessions of chemotherapy, before undergoing surgery to remove 80 per cent of his gut.

Then he was given the devastating news: he never had cancer in the first place."

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/graham-lords-hospital-horror-after-being-misdiagnosed-with-aggressive-stomach-cancer/story-e6freuy9-1226193498916

You see, if a physician misdiagnoses your condition at least you have some comeback in being able to sue them for malpractice.

If the IPCC and their politically motivated left-leaning cheer squad get it wrong --it's tough titties!

And what is particularly disconcerting is that the IPCCs cheer squad seem particularly susceptible to extraordinary delusions, and have made getting it wrong an art form.

Dear SPQR,

Yes, some physicians sometimes can be wrong in diagnostics and treatments. Therefore, in complicated cases, seeking second opinion has been accepted as an essential standard of medical practice.
However, my example was not about particular diagnosis but about things, which most physicians have agreed upon - what styles of life and diets are unhealthy and dangerous.
Similarly, most scientists related to environmental issues have agreed that human activities produce threat for environment and, as a consequence, for very human life itself.
Moreover, we don't have to be scientists that to realize this. No one of us (except, maybe, some mentally ill persons) is having doubts that we have to wash ourselves, our dishes and clothes, clean our home, etc., otherwise, we would face very unpleasant, unhealthy and even dangerous consequences. Don't we also have to clean after ourselves in our bigger home - the Earth? How can it be that we pollute our planet in more and more increasing proportions, but our Earth remains clean? Alas, its self-cleaning abilities are limited.
Unfortunately,we can't just stop many of our polluting activities as they support our life, but we must make them less polluting for the sake of our life too.
Finding and keeping balance between inevitable polluting and its minimal impact on our environment is a mean of human survival.

*while farmers (and any other manufacturers) produce carbon not only as living creatures but much more as manufacturers of their production*

Err Andreas, I remind you that on farms, that "manufacturing"
involves growing plants, which suck up CO2 and release oxygen.
Luckily for you city people, it blows into cities so that you may
actually breathe.
Perhaps you need to think it through a little better.

Every one has the right to opinions.
It would be good, if those opinions touched just now and again, on reality.
AB I doubt farmers pollute in any was, as much as others.
And too, that yabby 6% extra cost is near true.
In fact farmers may well, and should benefit over all, maybe not in current plans.
But should as increasingly, they bury carbon on their farms.
Sorry Rechtub, disagreed with nearly all that.
LEADER SHIP of this government was/is the subject.
But as carbon pricing has intruded.
CSIRO in the head lines in todays East coast papers.
After researching models, say cost to us of Carbon tax.
Will be NO MORE THAN THE RISE IN COST OF LIVING BOUGHT ABOUT BY SHORTAGES OF BANANAS.

Andreas,
I think you would find that the wrong diagnosis story I linked to involved more that ONE physician, getting it wrong ONCE. There would have had to have been a whole series of tests and examinations by different experts, all of which seemed to confirm the diagnosis -- confirmation bias?

You misrepresent the climate change debate: << Similarly, most scientists related to environmental issues have agreed that human activities produce threat for environment and, as a consequence, for very human life itself>>

I don't know of anyone who would deny that human activity has an impact on the natural environment. And I would add to that very few people –certainly no one on this thread-- is opposed to minimizing pollution or developing alternative energy sources.

Where we differ is on the question as to whether the climate change we are seeing is the result of, or even largely the result of, human greenhouse gas emissions as has been put about by the “Global Warming campaign(ers)”.

In considering the answer you need to look past blurb like this:
--"Since about 1750 human activity has increased the concentration of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases. Measured atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide are currently 100 ppm higher than pre-industrial levels"

To this figure: 3.207%

"Anthropogenic (man-made) CO2 additions comprise (11,880 / 370,484) or 3.207% of all greenhouse gas concentrations, (ignoring water vapor)."
http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/greenhouse_data.html

A figure very similar to this, 3.4%, was quoted in the first IPCC report as an obscure footnote --but in subsequent IPCC reports has become even more obscure --for reasons one can only guess at!

The other area where we part company is –as point out by Hasbeen-- the “Global Warming campaign(ers)” wont to employ fear and guilt and exaggeration to sell their case. The latest being Ban-Ki-Moon during his visit to the University Of Sydney:
http://www.australianclimatemadness.com/2011/09/ban-ki-moon-clueless-on-climate/

*In fact farmers may well, and should benefit over all, maybe not in current plans.*

Geez thanks Belly. Now if the TWU/AWU were going to pay 6% of their
incomes, they would be shutting down the country.

Now you know why WA farmers dislike Eastern states city slickers,
for they are simply treated as milking cows by those so called "Wise men
from the East".

Its once again a question of the tyranny of the majority and then
some people claim that the Govt is doing a good job. Pfft.

Yabby the childlike xenophobia you and some from WA have irks me.
Prove to me, please do your 6% figure.
Are you aware we farm in the rest of Australia?
The Queensland vs NSW squabble,equally childlike, fails in comparison to the wise man from the east bigotry of some from WA.
Over looking until mining and Alan Bond we carried you.
If you can prove to me, your farmers, as a result of federal government actions,will pay 6% more.
And, judging on your slur against I take it the rest of the country farmers, they will not, I will eat the chair I sit on.
Unions? taking up farming are they? or is it them who will say if Gillard or Rudd leads Labor?
How far will you wander from the subject/track to piddle on the ALP?
Unions, Eastern states, me,.

Belly,

I do fully agree with you that we have to keep along the lines of the discussion topic. Otherwise, touching on so many interesting and important themes, we are risking to say nothing about everything or everything about nothing, which is the same.
Please, let us discuss things in relation to our topic.

http://www.mediastatements.wa.gov.au/Pages/default.aspx?ItemId=145882&

There ya go, Belly.

Now start eating your chair :)

I remind you that WA farmers export most of their production, unlike
ES farmers. They compete with subsidised farmers from places like
the USA and EU. You blokes really have no idea what is happening
over here.

*Over looking until mining and Alan Bond we carried you.*

WA was always and still is an export state. 10% of the population
produces 50% of the exports, to stop you becoming a banana republic.

When WA did get some assistance, they were equally forced to buy
crappy, overpriced ES manufactured goods as payment. So they got
no free lunch.

I say it again. You claim its a good government and the carbon tax will cost no
more then increased banana prices. Not so for WA farmers, but then
we don't run the Govt, as the unions do. Don't ever tell me that
the ALP fights for the working man. More like feathering their
own cosy nests.

So belly, where will the additional 3% super come from if labor fails to win it's mining tax fight?

Are they in fact suggesting that if the mining tax is not introduced, that super will not rise by 3%?

Labor says that if the libs are in office and don't recind the Suoer increase, they will in fact have a huge hole in thei budget.

Does this mean that if labor fails on it's mining tax, that they to will have a huge hole if they keep the 3% increase?

Thanks blokes,those last two posts gave me a chuckle.
It is not me BUT CSIRO who says the costs are no problem, the banana statement.
Rechtub,this mornings poll says 60% percent of us support the mining tax.
Look thanks both of you, yabby is a bright bloke, bit xenophobic, seems to share some of his fellow WA peoples dislike of us normal Australians.
Rechtub gives his best.
Rudd, remember him?
While you blokes get the head out of the sand and read an online report on todays polls I would like to remind the ALP
DO NOT ever! think Gillard is going to win any election ever.
On form if she bought every ticket in a raffle some one would knock the butts off and it would never be drawn, get a leader soon.

Belly, I don't hate Eastern Australians. I just think that you
blokes live in a complete economic fairyland and suffer the same
disease as that which is now sinking Euroland. When people like
me pointed it out to them 10 years ago, they took no notice
and continued down that same path. Eventually, the same will
happen in Australia, but learn the hard way.

One moment you want exports, you want jobs, next minute you
put the boots into those creating exports and jobs, whilst
you increase the number of public servants, red tape and
bang more nails into the coffin of the productive economy
on which you all in the end depend.

WA should be crowing far more loudly to make sure it gets
its fair share and is not trampled into the ground by the
East, as we often are.

As I'm pointing out, productive people like WA farmers
are getting screwed by Govt policy. Yet Govt spin ignores
all that and true believers like yourself believe their
spin. Well you might be easily hoodwinked when it comes
to the ALP.

You know perfectly well that I am not pro Abbott. I criticise
all Govt policy if its rubbish, no matter what party.

I do in fact agree with you on one thing. Shorten is head and
shoulders above such party hacks at Howe or Sheldon.

He's also a great deal brighter then Rudd.