Gillard & Swan, how could they do it? Have they really fallen for their own spin.

It made my skin crawl with embarrassment to hear Gillard lecturing the world leaders on how she runs an economy.

Now if it had been how to run an economy into the ground, it would be reasonable, but I think she actually believes she is doing a good job. If ever they need a skin graft for an elephant, she would be the one to ask.

With every sector but mining & tax collection in rapid retreat, how can this pair of fools actually stand up & talk such bull to the rest of the world.

With her carbon tax, & new mining tax, it is only a matter of time before she destroys the only thing that is working. If we don't get rid of these clowns very soon, we will see a stampede of Greek Ozzies heading back to Greece looking for a place offering more opportunity than here.

I've seen some amazing things in my life, but this pair of fools, simply take my breath away with their arrogance.

Many words could be written on your thread my mate Hasbeen.
We could swap story's for hours about our flowers.
I could learn much from you.
But with respect, and too harsh total truth.
Your thread title,best describes you.
No disrespect, you are free to think the same of me, and we can still have our common thoughts.
But I can not avoid my thought, you have for me, painted a self portrait.

Hasbeen, you will never convince some out there that these two are just plain fools, that are quite simply out of their depth.

You see all these supporters are going to be crowing come mid July, as the sky would not have fallen in, they will say.

But what these two, and their loyal puppets don't understand, is that changes made today, may take months, even years to completely surface and, by the time they do, it will be too late, as big business plans years in advance.

Now there is always the possibility that I am wrong on this, however, as you rightly pointed out, and I have said for a years or more, this in
S about the only sector that is growing, and to heavily tax it is a huge gamble.

You see, responsible gamblers, only gamble with what they can afford to loose.

Another problem is that their focus is on the person on the street, but where they should focus their concerns is on the risk being placed on our businesses competitiveness, cause if this is effected, it effects everyone.

I think on prerequisite for politics, is that any senior minister must have at least ten years experience in running, preferably owning, a business.

At least then they would understand the importance of taking gambles with their money, not others.

They (this government) will go down in history as the worst ever. But hey, some of us already knew that, and could have saved billions, if only the puppets had listened.

*It made my skin crawl with embarrassment to hear Gillard lecturing the world leaders on how she runs an economy.*

I have to agree with you there, Hasbeen. Naive about business is
the only way that I can describe it. Business has kept the economy
going despite the Govt, not because of it. Take WA figures out of
the equation and Canberra is not looking too flash and the debt free
environment which they inherited from Costello, is not looking too
good anymore.

As far as I can see, all that Gillard did was make a fool of herself
on this occasion.

Hasbeen, I share your disdain for Gillard and Swan when it comes to managing our economy, but for quite different reasons.

I would assert that the carbon tax and mining tax are positive moves, in order to get us to start moving towards a greener energy regime and to return a slightly larger amount or our mineral wealth to the government and hence the ordinary people of this country.

So Hasbeen, ye great knocker of every politician under the sun, can you tell me what you would do differently? What are the big factors that would get our economy back on track? And is there anyone out there in our wonderful country that you feel could do this?

Fortunately, Hasbeen, Europe's leaders are not suffering from your hatred of Gillard, (and a dash of misogyny, perhaps...) and so they listened carefully to what our much maligned PM had to say.
Which is just as well, as everything she said was correct, and has been supported by the Nobel Prize winning economists, Joseph Stiglitz and Paul Krugman.
Of course, bringing a dash of reality into your distorted world view, filled as it is with hatred, will no doubt bring down upon my head the usual aprobreum which you typically heap upon those with a more... How shall I put it? Sane world view.
Anthony
http://www.observationpoint.com.au

Anyhony, I only offer anyone what they have earned. My respect is something that has to be earned, it doesn't come just because you were born. Yes I do suffer from Gillard, but only because our TV & radio people allow her air time. It would be to advertisers advantage to ban her. So many people now turn off, or change channels the moment she appears, it must be costing them a lot in wasted advertising budget.

The fact is I have never actually even disliked anyone before now. Swan I have no feeling for, how can you have a feeling for a nothing.

Gillard I despise, but only because she has earned it. I did not actually like Keating, but I did not despise, or even dislike him.

I can only assume hate requires quite a bit of energy. Believe me nothing would make me waste any energy on the likes of Gillard. The mere sight or sound of her brings on instant disgust, but as it comes on so easily, I can't imagine it wastes much energy.

In fact old mate, your post displays something more approaching hate, than anything I have ever felt. Perhaps this is another one of those pot, kettle, dark colour moments. After all, if one wants to see hate, one only has to mention Howard in front of any lefty, present company included.

Ahh, Hasbeen, you protestations are belied by your past posts.
Perhaps you should change your username from 'Hasbeen' to 'Hasform'
Anthony
http://www.observationpoint.com.au

No one else in the world even reports what Juliar says, and she was essentially told to sit down and shut up. I imagine her obnoxious school mam finger wagging did stuff all for Australia.

The truth is that there is no shortage of good
news about the Australian economy - despite the
attempts of some people to spread yarns to the
contrary.

Economic experts, including the Governor of
the Reserve Bank, Glenn Stevens, tells us:

"Australia's real GDP has outpaced every
other major industrialised nation: Canada, New Zealand,
the Euro zone, the US, the UK, and Japan. Our household
wealth is rising. Our unemployment rate is low and
so is inflation."

Our PM is widely respected internationally
- she actually can put
sentences together in her speeches instead of using
sound bites, slogans and nonsensical sounding messages.
She has a sense of purpose - which we have to realise is
difficult for some to understand.

You are a glutton for punishment old mate.

First I would ban all immigration with no exceptions up front.

I would allow guest workers, including back packers, & allow any who have worked productively for 5 years minimum to be eligible, through the side door so to speak.

I would make all welfare recipients except age & disability folk earn that welfare at the minimum wage for hours worked in community service. I would provide childcare, traveling & clothing allowances so working did not actually cost the recipient.

I would immediately close, with dismissal of all staff, every global warming activity in any publicly funded organisation.

I would make it an offence punishable by instant dismissal, for anyone receiving any or all of their income from taxpayer sources, for any of these people to mention the words global warming, global disruption, or AGW, in any form.

I would stop funding any research into the greatest ever fraud that is AGW.

I would immediately withdraw public funding from all NGOs.

I would withdraw all subsidies for any type of power generation. Any company would be welcome to supply power, from any source at one fixed price.

I would mandate that any company who wanted to supply energy products produce 60% of those products in Oz. If they won't run refineries they don't sell petroleum products. The only exception would be if they exported twice as much petroleum products as they imported eg, gas exports.

I would withdraw from the UN, & withdraw from all treaties we have been stupid enough to enter into with them. World heritage would be the first.

I would get rid of 20%, to start with, of all publicly funded administrative "workers" from all levels of government.

I would sack 100% of all consultants employed by any part of government.

I would get government the hell out of the way of industry.

Then on the second day -.

Whats wrong with the woman, has she gone stark raving mad !
Is she just another Kevin Rudd image preening before an international audience ?
When I saw her on TV giving a lecture to the rest of the world I also
felt embarrassed. Is she really that naive ?

For God's sake Lexi, wake up, you just cannot see that the GDP Gillard
is lecturing about consists almost entirely of turnover by the mining
interests. It is meaningless for the rest of us.

Don't you think that those receiving Gillards lectures know that ?
That is the biggest insult she has given them, that she either thinks
they are ignorant or that she actually believes her lies.

What a disappointment she is !

Maybe we could also have Ms Gillard lecture the world on border control and how to encourage hundreds to their death. Captain Emad could be the next Labour Immigration Minister. Shame and embarassment is all one could feel when she starts lecturing. Even the Howard haters must be wondering how they have let this country become an embarassment in such a short period of time.

I'll vote for you Hasbeen. And get Yabby and Pericles in there too and we'd be on our way to prosperity again.

In this day and age, the only reason these fools are still telling us what to do is because they're backed by big "GUNS"; otherwise they'd be already pushin up the daisy's with what they've done to so many hard working peoples lives.

Unfortunately I think the other side is just the other side of the same coin, just the picture is marginally less unattractive.

Dear Lexi, I think you forget one very important point, that is, to be the best, doesn't give you the right to be good, it simply proves that you are better than the others.

Not a hard act to follow at present, im sure you would agree.

Now I remember you saying you were from around Toowoomba.

Well I live part time and work on my property at Miles, and pass through Toowoomba quite regularly. Whatyou will no doubt have noticed, is the huge increase in traffic, especially heavy vehicles caring mining equipment, or mobile accommodation units.

Now i ask you this, take all this mining traffic away and what is left.

Il tell you, a town going backwards, like any other non mining town.

Now if you disagree, then I am affriad that you are afraid to face facts.

Miles has gone from a very small town, to a thriving town, where most nights one can't even find a single room at any of the countless accommodation houses.

Once again, take this away you are left with next to nothing.

My greatest fear is that enough people like yourself will believe this spin and give these fools another chance to do even more damage.

Finally, if you ask any government in the land about gambling, they will say, only gamble with what you can afford to loose.

Now, do you think we can afford to loose mining?

Hasbeen, I'm pretty much with you mate.

"Our PM is widely respected internationally " Really, by whom? Spending time overseas regularly, I have yet to see her mentioned overseas, except during the Slipper and Thomson debacles.

Yes it is difficult to understand her sense of purpose, as it changes regularly. No carbon tax, carbon tax etc.

Some people simply refuse to acknowledge the realities
around them.

1) They want lower taxes and lower government spending.
2) They ALSO want all the good things that the government
provides - like
3) More infra-structure - roads, ports, education.
4) Government-funded science and research.
5) Government subsidized public health care, and so on.

Ludicrous isn't it.

Mr Abbott has made it clear that he would cut taxes
and that he would re-instate middle-class welfare.
That can only mean deep cuts in public goods -
including education, infra-structure, health,
all of which are necessary to sustain our living
standards and to build our economic strength for the
days when the commodity boom ends.

Our taxes are already among the lowest of all
developed countries - yet our government from these
taxes is trying to juggle the tasks of funding
a welfare system and providing important public goods
and is doing remarkable well at it according to all
economic experts.

Some people simply don't realise just how lucky they
are.

Hasbeen in your thread you are not alone.
Others too find things that do not exist.
Search for a near bankrupt Australia, the fact is we are leading the developed world, not just because of mining.
Look at the world banks words today and during the GFC.
Lexi! Gillard is not respected by many, she is trying to look statesman like.
She turns my stomach by just walking on stage!
Remember, such as the super conservatives here, and in our media/Parliament did not make her unpopular.
She did that her self.
Post our defeat, we can not win with her! we will need a campaign bigger and stronger than anti work choices.
We will see some who today stand against us ONLY BECAUSE OF GILLARD, join in the fight to highlight the awful nature of todays opposition.
We are not served by pretending 60% unhappy with her is a vote of confidence.
The groaning and moaning here is given life by supporting a woman who could best serve Parliament with a mop and bucket in her hands.

Lexi write

'Some people simply don't realise just how lucky they
are. '

I would call it blessed. It is however a result of good economic management from Costello/Howard who had to deal with the last Labour deficits. Some people are to blinded to realise this simple truth. The wastage in the last 5 years with nothing to show but totally shrunk superannuation screams a message. Now we need more and more taxes in order to pay for this idiotic waste. It is going to take years of a responsible Government before we recover again.

Here we are, James Kunstler can say it better than I can;

http://kunstler.com/blog/2012/06/hazardous-games.html

He has a way with words that does leave you with a grim smile.

Dear runner,

A few clarifications:

As Ian McAuley, a lecturer in public sector
finance at the University of Canberra and a
fellow at the Centre for Policy Development
points out:

"The Coalition had the fortune to hold office in good
economic times - when the Howard government enjoyed
the dividends of the Hawke-Keating economic reforms,
and when the world economy was enjoying a long
speculative-driven boom. Good luck, perhaps,
but not good management. In actual fact the Howard
government's economic report card is overall a
dismal one."

McAuley tell us that: " the claimed virtue of leaving the
books in surplus of 4 per cent of GDP when it left office -
indeed the Howard government did achieve a series of suplus
budgets: that is not difficult in a time of strong
economic growth which delivered very high tax revenue."

"But the Howard government also left Australia with
significant liabilities in terms of our physical and
intangible assets - our common wealth.

It neglected our surface transport - our interstate
roads, railroads, urban public transport. It starved
our tertiary education sector of funds. It neglected
investments which could help us to cope with the
challenges of water shortages, climate change and fossil fuel
depletion.

In short, it let fiscal impression management, displace sound
economic management and directed political attention to only
one side of the balance sheet, the debt side, while ignoring
the asset side.

If the Howard cabinet had been the board of a publicly
listed company, the shareholders would have thrown them out
for weakening the company's asset base."

Lexi

'As Ian McAuley, a lecturer in public sector
finance at the University of Canberra and a
fellow at the Centre for Policy Development
points out:'

You really are getting totally desperate in defending your hero. Just look at the Centres website and you will see its filled with leftist propaganda. Check out the Howard haters on the Board. Surely you can do better than that. Most of the general public has even woken up to the dud Government.

Lexi,

The health care subsidy was intended to encourage the more affluent to self fund some of their health care. This efficiently reduced the required expenditure by the government by more than the cost of the subsidy. The indications from the health funds is that 80% of those losing their subsidies intend to reduce their health cover (but still not pay the surcharge) with a resulting increased pressure on public health and reduced services for those on low incomes.

I for one have pre paid my health cover for the next 18 months and so get the subsidy until labor are tossed out of office.

Also McAuley (hardly unbiased) forgot to mention that the mining boom today yields 4x as much tax today than in 2007, and the huge surplus left by the coalition was squandered in record time by Labor leaving us the greatest federal debt in dollar terms ever.

Gentlemen,

All I will say to you both is that economic
credibility does count in voter land.
All the petty political and hyped grandstanding
will stop working eventually. The Opposition's
economic credentials look raggedy, at best -
and the $70 billion black hole argument will
keep getting regurgitated because there is no
answer. It will intensify before the next election.

The debate will re-focus on the Opposition's
costings and plans - including its direct-action plan
and its internally divisive new tax to pay for
some strange and expensive parental leave scheme.
The certainty on an Abbott victory will be lessened.

Mr Abbott has taken up every position possible on
just about everything. He's gone from skepticism to
warm embrace, to horrified opposition, to apparent
indifference to concentrating on the PM's trustworthiness
as he accused her of having broken an election promise
not to introduce a carbon tax. And the list goes on.

We're now hearing of a "transformation" of Mr Abbott.
We'll have to see whether wearing glasses and reading
his speeches will help improve his image. Smiling less
may also help make him appear more intelligent.

It would be embarrassing if he got dumped by a nervous
party - should there be a slide in the polls.

Because lets not forget his desperation to become PM.

Only a desperate politician could offer one
Independent a $1 billion hospital if he backed a
Coalition minority government.
I believe his mentor - Mr Howard did something
similar.

Well Belly, at least you an I can agree on something, however, I would have said she would have looked better, emerging from the kitche, with tea towle draped ove her shoulder saying, "scones are ready".

She is, and always has been an embarrassment.

Lexi, if your beloved labor party had a moral back bone, they would simp,y call an election and let the PEOPLE decide.

Lexi>> Some people simply refuse to acknowledge the realities
around them.<<

Labor promises:

260 child care centers
2650 trades training centers
Hospital reform commission
31 super GP clinics
9250 new nurses
2500 aged care beds
Housing for indigenous communities
There will be no carbon tax

JUST LIE AFTER LIE LEXI

No reality darkens your reality my girl, does it.

Dear SOG,

Glad to see how really objective you are
in your political observations.

But don't worry old chap - eventually Australia
will end up becoming the same as the US - run by
religious fanatics, extreme nationalists, and
avaricious corporations - if there's a change of
government at the next election

Gillard's speech was the same one she gave with South Korea and the IMF, who agreed with the same strategies.

The IMF subsequently recommended structural reforms including “product and service market reforms, underlining the importance of tackling vested interests in sectors such as distribution and regulated professions" - which Gillard and Swan specifically mention.

Gillard's been verballed by partisan journo Dennis Shanahan and the remarks attributed to EC chief Jose Manuel Barroso were alleged to have been made about the Candian PM - not Gillard.

Of course it was all different back in 2002 when Howard lectured the Germans about how to run their economy, except that back then we had higher interest rates, inflation and unemployment.

Never let the truth get in the way of political bias and lies.

Thanks for the comprehensive reply Hasbeen... I think! ( :>|

<< Then on the second day -. >>

Then on the second day, you’d be running for your life, bcoz there’d be several million people to get ya!! ( :>)

My other question to you was:

<< …is there anyone out there in our wonderful country that you feel could do this? >>

Who could possibly implement the sort of policy platform that you desire? Do you know of anyone? Any party? Any organisation?

This thread, for those with open minds supports my thought Gillard has to go.
No more HSU/Thomson's no more power brokers over ruling the voters or the party.
A battle is to begin, post the unavoidable defeat if Gillard stays.
This thread its few in comparison views, is Representative of media coverage of the government.
It is spin and untruth, posing as? anti spin!
Like 1972 till 1975, EXACTLY MIRRORING! that time, Labors wrongs are wrong, but minor in comparison to the charges against it.
It is now clear, the EU words while naming us came as an answer to another country's statements.
And that almost every country said the same.
Clear too that the words needed to be said.
And last? that this country's deficit, record making, in the last two years came in record breaking times.
And despite this governments refusal to let unemployment rage, business stop, we are on top, not just mining,we are by past actions of both forms of government due to past changes , doing very well.
Those forming a que behind hasbeen, the thread title refers to you.

But Belly,

You said Gillard would govern wisely and be loved for it.

The reality is that she is not going to let power slip from her grasp. The trashing of Rudd did nothing for labor, but damaged her only real threat.

The hypocritical finger wagging at the EU was for Australian voter consumption and simply made enemies for Australia.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/national/europe-furious-at-julia-gillards-nagging-over-economic-management/story-e6freuzr-1226401649109

Labor accuses Abbott of a hunger for power, but he is eclipsed in this regard by Juliar.

Thanks for the comprehensive reply Hasbeen... I think! ( :>|

<< Then on the second day -. >>

Then on the second day, you’d be running for your life, bcoz there’d be several million people OUT to get ya!! ( :>)

My other question to you was:

<< …is there anyone out there in our wonderful country that you feel could do this? >>

Who could possibly implement the sort of policy platform that you desire? Do you know of anyone? Any party? Any organisation?

Reposting this, with the MISSING WORD inserted! Sheesh, this missing word syndrome is driving me up the wall!!

No mate, I'd be perfectly safe. Your 1 million would have no chance of getting any where near me. They would never get through the 20 million cheering supporters surrounding me.

I did not mention I'd chuck our the carbon tax, & the mining tax, but I would have done it first thing.

There might be 1 million after me, all the rent takers & con men, who have been fostered by this mob in ripping us off. There might be a few public servants, but the academics would be too busy pontificating on my failings to ever do any thing.

On the second day I'd put back the 1.2 billion a year these fools have ripped out of defence, but I'd add 0.25 billion a year to the previous lot. Without boarder security you've got nothing. Now with that fire power behind me, I'd could start to get some real work done.

<< Your 1 million would have no chance of getting any where near me. They would never get through the 20 million cheering supporters surrounding me. >>

AAAHHH HAAA Hahahahahaaaaaaaaa !! !! !!

Ok, I’ll try and undertake some sens.. haa… sensib….hahaha… sensible…. hihihi… an… mwaa …..analysis…. mwaaahahaha uhh… um, some sensible analysis of your approach to Australian pol… hhhahahu …politics… if I could just…mwaaahaha….. stop myself from cracking up!!

No, it’ll have to wait. I can’t... huhuhu….. stop….. hehehaa…. laughahahahaaafing!! !!

Oh dear, if nothing else, you are certainly an entertaining poster. You really do raise the quality of my OLO experience. Your posts almost cancel out the rage I repeatedly feel from that mongrel missing word syndrome!!

Ludwig,
Knowing you support lowering world population growth and that you also are supportive of human induced climate change theory, I have a question.

Can you, or anyone, tell me why the supporters of hunan caused climate change never talk about stabilizing or reducing the world population to do two things.

1. Reduce populations in the countries that are suseptable to famine.

2. Assist in reducing carbon emmissions.

It seems to me that if demand by humans is responsible for more and more carbon being put out, the less number of humans the better off we would be, and we would save many from starvation.

It seems that 45-50 million died in the China famine, 1958-62 and i do not see why such deaths could not occur again. We have just emerged from a 12 year drought in Australia, so given the right conditions famine can occur, especially in over populated countries.

Iran has shown that birthrates can be lowered by education in family planning and providing the means. Iran went from 6.5 per woman to 1.7 per woman.

If the population continues to grow then wholesale starvation in some countries is inevitable.

So with the added benefit of lower carbon output, why are not the powers that be advocating this or even discussing it at any of the talkfeasts they have?

<< Can you, or anyone, tell me why the supporters of hunan caused climate change never talk about stabilizing or reducing the world population… >>

It’s a very good question, Banjo.

I find it absolutely extraordinary that all this concern about AGW, as well as peak oil and a host of other things, hasn’t transformed itself into a holistic push for sustainability.

Most people who are fighting the good fight regarding one or other environmental issue continue to do it in isolation.

Population growth continues to be outside of the brain-space of most environmentalists, renewable energy strategists, international aid workers and the like, even though it is intimately linked to all their issues.

I would have hoped that Sustainable Population Australia, Dick Smith, Kelvin Thomson, Bob Carr, David Attenborough, Melinda Gates, etc. would have raised the profile of the population issue in recent times to the extent of getting a whole lot more action happening towards reducing population growth and getting all these abovementioned types people who should be very concerned and active about it, concerned and active!

But alas, it’s just not happening.

I don’t understand why, especially given Iran’s example of how effectively it can be done.

Ludwig,
I am dissappointed, as i thought about it today and am stumped, thought you would know reason. It seems a win, win situation to me, lowering population, saving lives and reducing carbon output at the same time.
Funny thing, the UN is deeply involved in both climate change and feeding kids through the World Food Programme. Treating symptoms!

They do not even want to discuss world population.

I don't know, maybe Hasbeen, Belly, Pericles, Robert or Lexi,or others, will have some thoughts on it.

Sorry Hasbeen for butting in on your thread, I thought Ludwig could help me with the question.

<< Ludwig, I am disappointed >>

So am I Banjo. Very much so indeed.

I have pondered over it for many years. This amazing lack of interest in population stabilisation amongst environmentalists was the reason I didn’t nominate for a second term as the president of the North Queensland Conservation Council twenty years ago….and all this time later, I am no closer to understanding it!

<< Treating symptoms! >>

Tell me about it! So totally NOT holistically focussed!

I just don’t know. But I am pleased that you passionately share my concerns. Cheers.

PS. I’m sure Hasbeen won’t mind this line of discussion even if it is a bit off-subject, if it helps revive his ailing thread…. and gives him another opportunity to be a really funny old fart, like he was in his last post!! Heheheheheee!

No problem Banjo, as Ludwig says, I'm only too pleased.

I believe an original poster gives a thread air, but it is the other posters who give it life. I love those threads that develop a life of their own, with a number of posters taking them all over the place. They are the most fun.

Hello All,
There is an article on the Energy Bulletin that addresses
this problem of people not being prepared to accept a situation that
seems to be overwhelming and prefer not to talk about it..
The article, if I remember correctly, showed how the same phycological
phenomena occured for a number of subjects.

I believe politicians have an overdose of this because they might be
asked to do something about it.

Bazz,
You might be right. People see the problem as too big and choose to ignor it. Yet Iran has shown the world how it can be done, without draconian methods. Maybe Iran is seen, by the west, as bad and will not acknowledge anything good that comes from there.

I can see that in Christian countries religion plays a part, so the Vatican needs a good shake up. I think Islam also dreams of breeding their way into world dominance. Don't know about the others.

I am an AGW sceptic, but even I can see that lowering carbon output should be welcomed by the warmist brigade, and lowering population would do that.

I still think that those in deveoping countries have a far greater chance of starving than they do of being affected by climate change.