It takes a lot of gall to grandstand on populist single issues when the dogs are barking that the federal government's revenue base is shrinking and it faces increasing payouts for (to take a couple of examples) the aged and for a dramatically increased population through record migration past and present (and future it seems).

Enough of the cargo cult. Someone has to pay eventually. Any young workers reading this should realise that any lost belt-tightening opportunities right now - particularly where Labor left so many swinging from the guvvy teats - will rebound on the young workers very, very, soon indeed and will affect their standard of living for decades, perhaps for life. Say goodbye to that family you were thinking of and it will be even more migrants instead - that you pay for.

Emmmmm ? I harbour certain suspicions concerning Ms LAMBIE'S motives for her 'impressive' stance on pay increases for the ADF ? From what I've observed, she wasn't particularly well regarded when she served, herself ? A person of limited reasoning, and with little grasp on the more important issues confronting our nation, but a bucket load of pure animal cunning.

I really wonder whether or not it's a case of an unremarkable, relatively uneducated individual, with a limited intellect, who wishes to be regarded as a vitally important cog. Notwithstanding how destructive her stance may be on any of the government's fiscal policies ?

A clear matter of Ms LAMBIE first, second, and last ! A very selfish, self-centred, narcissistic individual I think ! Who wishes to elevate her own profile at any cost, in the governance of this great Nation of ours.

Whatever criticism you choose to make of Lambie should go to Clive Palmer. He is a knowledgeable businessman who has hired and fired many people and accumulated a large amount of money while doing so. He presumably chose her because he thought she would be as malleable as Lazarus. I doubt that any election will be fought in Australia with armed forces' pay as a key issue. Her boundaries are limited to a minor issue and Palmer's to his financial well-being. As inadequate as Abbott and Shorten are I prefer either of them to Lambie and Clive.

Jayb to CH = "So you want a system that rubber stamps everything at the expense of ordinary Australians. Then why have a Voting System at all. Oh, I forgot you would like an Anarchy System, as from your previous post."

I have no idea what you are talking about or the previous post you are referring to. Never have I said anything that even remotely promotes anarchy. And I would be opposed to a system that rubber stamps everything at the expense of ordinary Australian. I'm totally baffled as to how you came to these conclusions about me.

My sincere apologies CH, it was Yutsie.

"I am one of those who oppose the very idea of democracy. I do not agree that a majority has a right to impose its decisions over minorities and individuals (neither a minority over the majority of course)." Yuyutsu

Sorry once again.

Dear David,

<<As inadequate as Abbott and Shorten are I prefer either of them to Lambie and Clive.>>

I disagree. The war is lost and save for a major tsunami wiping Australian cities, foreign invasion, monetary collapse or an Ebola pandemic, Australian politics will remain dominated for any foreseeable future by the two dinosaurs, Tweedledum and Tweedledee.

Given this sad fact, the only remaining chance by which a citizen can save themselves from the worse of the worse of government decrees, is to form a minor party which will concentrate only on fighting to repeal that one statute which afflict them most, then hope that the dinosaurs will be more-or-less even between them to need that party.

You may be aware that early elections were called in Israel. The reason is that the coalition-parties could no longer sustain their in-fighting. Until the latest elections, the Ultra-Orthodox parties, but especially the older of the two, the "Torah Judaism" party, were always part of the coalition, Left or Right. The "Torah Judaism" party was always a stabilising factor which allowed most coalitions to stay for the full term: they were easy to deal with because they weren't interested in ministries, in the economy or in Israel's relations with the Palestinians - they only demanded one thing: "Keep our sons out of the army". At the last elections, the new meteoric "Yesh Atid" party vowed to crush Ultra-Orthodox people and force their children into the army - well they now are in disarray and it's doubtful they will get enough votes to survive the coming March elections, when the Ultra-Orthodox will be back in coalition well before the major parties had time to harm any of their children.

So I believe that this is how it should be - as many cross-benchers as possible each with one simple single goal which on its own is not too hard to satisfy, each protecting the pupil of the eye of their electors, but leaving the major parties to mess around as they please with the perennial but less-important tasks (such as economy, immigration and defence).