Here we have labour suggesting they will return us to surplus.

Do they think the voting public are fools, I mean, how many times did that fool, (the smartest man in the world) say we would return to surplus the last time.

In fact, right up until the 11th hour he still insisted it would happen. Who will ever forget those famous words 'at any cost'.

Yea right, pull the other one!

It is true, I believe him. Dated April 1ST 2016.

"Here we have labour suggesting they will return us to surplus."

Is that some kind of comedy routine Rehctub?
I don't think any of them know what the word 'budget' and 'debt' actually mean.
I'm not sure they have ever experienced these things for themselves.

the socialist sent Greece broke and then just use violence in order to protect those on the public purse. The unions/socialist will continue to do the same here. Unfortunately secularism equates to total selfishness. Malcolm Rudd will be as bad as Mr feminist (forget allegations from past) Bill Shorten.

Why, since when is it even forbidden to make promises?

Hear the words of Israel's former prime-minister, Levi Eshkol:

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
”I know I promised, but I never promised to keep my promise.”
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

http://andyboy1.com/2011/12/21/levi-eshkol-in-his-own-words

rehctub,

While we're reminiscing - do you recall Joe Hockey telling us all the Coalition would give us a surplus in the govt's first year...and every year after that?

Hockey: "‘Based on the numbers presented last Tuesday night we will achieve a surplus in our first year in office and we will achieve a surplus for every year of our first term.’’

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/abbotts-about-face-on-surplus-guarantee-20130127-2dfn9.html#ixzz4B5ABysvN

Which, of course, was hilarious back then - and even more so now as we see that instead of multiple surpluses, they've dug us $160 billion deeper in gross debt.

Good old Joe - and he was the more competent of the Coalition's two Treasurers!

So Pirot, who was it that helped stop his savings measures?

You still have not told us how much of that $160 Billion was spent on dealing with labors illegals, stopping the boats, or the unfunded promised Labor committed us to.

Are you seriously that stupid that you think people actually think the libs caused that extra $160 billion all by them selves?

Give it a rest Poirot, at least until you provide some balanced numbers. Surely that's not too much to ask?

The who point is here is a guy, a major contributor to the failed Rudd Gillard government, who expects us to believe he has all of a sudden found the magic pudding.

The numbers speak for themselves, as we have a record number of voters poised to shift from the majors to the minors. This clearly shows that they, like myself, see Turnbull as a 'dud', and cant bring themselves to trust labor again, especially given Bill was such a huge influence on the Rudd/Gillard debacle.

rehctub,

Hurling nearly $9 billion at the RBA was one of Hockey's first acts - money they didn't want, need or ask for.

"Surprisingly, Hockey’s budget has government spending at a hefty 25.9% of GDP in 2014-15 and staying at that elevated level in 2015-16. Even at the end of the forward estimates in 2018-19, government spending is high at 25.3% of GDP. Peak government spending under the Rudd government stimulus measures during the global crisis was 26% of GDP in 2009-10 as it ramped up spending in response to a severe global recession. It is noteworthy that after the stimulus in the wake of the global financial crisis, spending fell to 24.6% of GDP in 2011-12 and then 24.1% in 2012-13."

http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2015/may/12/big-spending-joe-hockey-delivers-a-federal-budget-that-will-please-no-one

How's that for balanced numbers?

So much for Hockey's "savings measures".

"Are you seriously that stupid that you think people actually think the libs caused that extra $160 billion all by them selves?"

One of us here is "seriously that stupid" - but I don't think it's me : )

Still no recognition as to what amount of that $160 B was spent servicing labor caused issues. You have identified $9 billion, so there is only another $151 billion to be accounted for.

It does not surprise me that you appear unwilling to answer my question, which is why I suspect you may either be a politician, or a retired labor puppet.

Waiting Poirot.

Just a hint, as if you need it.

Simply start with the $151 billion, deduct all monies wasted on labor caused issues, then use the remainder to define the real % of GDP from the libs. Remembering of cause to include ALL MONIES spent on illegals as not a red cent would have been needed had we not gone down the Kevin 07 road.

Well that's not quite true, because there were two detainees, so I will credit you for those. From 2 to 2000, that's a mighty achievement hey Poirot.

They are all gone now, the 1998 brought in by labor and the boats have stopped, but at what cost. The floor is yours my friend.

Oh come on Rehctub, if you believe ANY of the parties could return Australia to surplus then you must be very naive.
All politicians lie before elections. It is almost a prerequisite for the job.

rehctub,

Lol!...

You're a doozy. This govt lurches about, cut's programs by the the hundreds and hundreds, can't past a budget - and there you are blaming Labor.

Here's a good one - how about all those dodgy private training colleges the LNP (state and federal) are so fond of. These "set-ups" have been gobbling up govt largesse hand over fist in the last few years - and collapsing with monotonous regularity after they've taken the money and not trained the students who've signed up.

All in an effort to destroy TAFE.

"She was assigned to teach 80 students at Sydney's Unique International College, but hairdressing teacher Penny Martin never heard from any of them, a court has heard.

They were some of the more than 2000 students that Unique International College recruited to its campus in Granville, while the college accrued more than $57 million in taxpayer funding."

"On Wednesday, the college and its owner, Amarjit Singh, faced the Federal Court on a charge of unconscionable conduct in the first of a series of trials as the government attempts to reclaim more than $420 million in taxpayer funding from the vocational education sector."

http://www.smh.com.au/national/education/unique-international-college-teacher-never-heard-from-her-80-students-court-told-20160608-gpejsh.html#ixzz4B8LE9gjs

Here's some more - defence spending as a way of avoiding negative growth.

"A surprise 41.5 per cent jump in government spending on defence equipment helped Australia's economy grow by 0.2 per cent for the three months to June.

If it wasn't for that spending, the economy wouldn't have grown at all."

"ABS data shows government spending on defence equipment in the December quarter last year was worth $1.7 billion (a 41.4 per cent increase on the previous quarter), then $1.4 billion in the March quarter this year (a 14.1 per cent decrease), then 41.5 per cent last quarter (worth $2 billion)."

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/abbott-government-spending-on-defence-equipment-keeps-economy-growing-20150902-gjdgdw.html#ixzz4B8MJtDr

Suse,

"All politicians lie before elections. It is almost a prerequisite for the job"

We'd have to dredge the depths to see a party outfit which lied as fulsomely as the Abbott Opposition did.....once in govt, their policies bore almost no resemblance to their pre-election spiel.

They set a new benchmark for lying to win govt IMO

We do better with a small deficit. When there is a surplus the party in power directs money to where it will pick up the most votes - not where it is most needed. With a deficit they are not as free to do that sort of thing. A surplus means your taxes are used to buy elections.

Its still far more believable than ANYTHING that comes out of the mouths of the liars in the lying liars party.
You liars that support the lying liars party have nothing but lies and hypocrisy to offer.

Both parties have promised a return to surplus.
Both parties have previously promised a return to surplus but failed to deliver it.

In 2010, Labor promised a surplus "come hell or high water". This time they're being more sensible, prioritising economic growth.

And who could forget Joe Hockey's "emphatic" commitment to "a surplus in the first year and every year after that"?

Australia is a sovereign currency issuer with a floating currency, so (as long as the government sticks to its current policy of only borrowing in Australian dollars) we can never run out of money. Therefore I don't consider the timing of our return to surplus important. It's something that will be required sometime in the future to keep our interest rates low, but as they're already at record lows it really shouldn't be a priority.

However if I had to pick which party's plan to return to surplus is more credible, there's no doubt in my mind that it's Labor, for two reasons:
Firstly, the Libs' company tax cut will result in more money going overseas, which will make it harder to achieve a surplus here.
Secondly, when the private sector is weak, tightening fiscal policy weakens it further. This will decrease tax revenue and delay a return to surplus. Labor's plan of a higher initial deficit will giver the private sector more opportunity to grow before fiscal policy is tightened, making it much easier to sustain a tightening.

This has echos of the Global Warming argument.
It does not matter who may seem to have the correct policy they are
both going the wrong way.

At a moment in the next few years, and don't ask me how many ?, we will
run into the next GFC. You might notice that oil production is falling
and the price is rising. If the price gets up near $US100 then the
economy will start closing down and in Australia at least will cause
a property price collapse.

The effect in Europe will be a decline in interest rates from near
zero to perhaps -2% or -3%.

The magic price seems to be US$80 as that is Saudi's break even price.

Has Butch learned how to spell all of a sudden or do we have a ring in.
Bazz stay away from those conspiracy magazines.

Neither major party has been honest with voters about
Australia's revenue problem.

The following link explains:

http://newmatilda.com/2016/06/09/labors-first-big-mistake-of-the-campaign/

Suze, no I don't believe either party can achieve what they say they can, however, has Hockey got his budget measures through the senate I think would have made a huge difference.

Poirot, I will gladly do the math, just give me the figure ive asked for about ten times.

579, thanks for the gold star, but don't get to comfortable because I do have my bad days.

Bazz, if oil prices rise, so too might gas prices which may reignite our stagnate CSG industry.

Oh 579, I did not realise that you are a politician !
Conspiracy ?
My goodness what do you mean ? Production figures are there for real.
I suppose you are one of those that insist peak oil is a theory, are you ?

Dear oh dear. Your reaction is similar to what that Minister of the
Crown said. Can't possibly be true, that right ?
The Labour politicians are making the same assumptions as the Liberals
and even the Greens are deluding themselves, but in a somewhat
different way.

Once the price gets to a level some believe is around $US80 some
of the shale fracking companies will restart production.
However a large number of them are now bankrupt and the financiers
are now thinking the business is too risky.

The price volatility was predicted back in 1990 as a feature of peak oil.
Of course that occurred in 2005 for crude oil, and was on a bumpy
plateau until it started declining.
Tight shale oil is now also declining.
The only conspiracy is by the politicians to pretend there is no problem.

This is Labor's pathetic attempt to get out of a hole it had dug for itself:

"THIS was the week that was supposed to bolster Labor’s economic management credentials, but the plan backfired because of a silly misjudgment. The attempt to present a glossy and shallow PR pamphlet as a 10-year plan for Australia’s economy was greeted with almost universal scorn.

The lack of detail in the lightweight document about how a Labor government would tackle Budget repair enabled Bill Shorten’s critics to portray him as a leader not serious about matters economic. Labor gave the impression of trying to spin its way out of a damaging admission — that, if Shorten wins the July 2 election, there will be bigger deficits over the next four years than under the Coalition.

Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull and Treasurer Scott Morrison quickly and skilfully applied pressure. As a result, when Shorten yesterday produced a Budget repair strategy with savings that included support for some measures Labor has previously blocked in the Senate, the government was able to claim he had been pushed into it."

"Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull and Treasurer Scott Morrison quickly and skilfully applied pressure...."

Lol!...you make them sound so noble, SM - you'd never know that they're such a pair of useless twats.

Rather than worrying about a surplus it should be the concern of government to see that all Australians are getting adequate education and adequate health care. If they are not and more money is needed for those purposes taxes should be adjusted accordingly even if it means raising them.

P,

When you start using profanities then I know I have you on the run.

Labor finds itself skewered and twisting in the wind.

Labor economics is best understood with a hefty dose of marijuana.

SM,

"Labor economics is best understood with a hefty dose of marijuana."

I wondered what you'd been smoking.....

Lol!...

David F, if you want more money for education and health, look no further than the 20 plus thousand free loaders each party intend to bring in, with a STAGGERING 40% illiterate in their own language. It's laughable to say the least.

Dear rehctub,

People who have been brought in as refugees can become productive citizens. The money spent on them may be paid back.

We have many subsidies to industries, private schools, the military and agriculture. I don't know if we need 12 more subs, subsidies to private schools or miners. I suspect much of that money is simply transferred from the taxpayers to those who don't need it. Australia is a very dry country. It is predictable that trying to farm where there is not enough water is a losing proposition. However, instead of taking the land out of agricultural production the farmers will get subsidies for doing what shouldn't be done. It is predictable that they will run into trouble. It is predictable that you would rant about freeloaders.

Clive Palmer's nickel corporation collapsed. Apparently he siphoned big amounts from the corporation to support his political party. He was milking the business to fund the Palmer United Party. He was a massive freeloader. however, his freeloading doesn't concern you. You have a number of prejudices, and they inspire your rants.

SM,

You, being OLO's resident right-wing moral crusader, will like this one:

rehctub too! - I wonder if this small business owner endures the onerous weight of penalty rates?

"Liberal candidate resigns over Frankston brothel ownership"

"A Coalition candidate has quit after it emerged he owns a Frankston brothel called Paradise Playmates.

Taiwan-born massage therapist John Min-Chiang Hsu resigned as the Liberal Party candidate for the Victorian seat of Calwell after his ties to the brothel were revealed on Saturday.

The Victorian Liberal Party said in a statement it had come to its attention that Mr Hsu had "not fully declared his business interests prior to applying for endorsement as required"."

"The Liberal Party had previously described Mr Hsu as a "passionate supporter of small business"."

Hey, hey! : )

"The six-room licensed brothel, which offers both erotic massage and full sex services for between $60 and $350 with Thai and Chinese women, is billed on its website as the "best brothel in Frankston"."

http://www.theage.com.au/federal-politics/federal-election-2016/liberal-candidate-resigns-over-frankston-brothel-ownership-20160611-gph1lt.html

SM & rehctub, I fully expect you both to jump onto this thread and bluster about this - don't hold back....

It's most likely the oldest profession known to man, yet it still seems to bother some.

Here we have a registered person providing a service for a paying customer, both are of adult age yet others can't help but stick their noses into these legitimate arrangements.

of cause the alternative would be to do as I do, and just ignore it.

I just don't get it.

I would suggest the biggest threat to licenced brothels would be an ipad and a can of lube.

P,

As John Min-Chiang Hsu did not declare his business interests as he should then he should resign, or join the labor or greens parties where it seems to be perfectly acceptable.

As the left whinge moral crusader, do you think that Richard Dinner Tally should resign for not declaring his business interests?

Dear David, if memory serves me well, you are in your 80's are you not.

If this is the case, then you, better than anyone else I know on this forum could answer this one simple question, how has the make up of immigrants changed since the 40's and 50's, even the 60's?

From my prospective early immigrants came here with literally nothing, and came here with a vision to make something of themselves, in fact, I feel they went one better and actually helped make this country what it is. Or at least, what it was during my late teens to early adult hood, mid 70's to 80's.

I am sure you will agree that those being forced upon us now are much less likely to make so much of themselves (I am generalizing) and more likely to willingly feed from our over generous welfare system, a system that often favours such folk at the detriment of our own, and that's just not fair, no matter which way you look at it.

Another huge problem is the fact that not only are many of these people from backgrounds known for supporting and/or inflicting terror onto others, but it has been suggested that up to 40% of them are illiterate in their own language, the consequences of which do not need explaining.

So you tell me where I am wrong David?

SM,

Leaving aside the allegations of money laundering through Parakeelia:

"The Liberal campaign is resisting calls for greater transparency about its financial relationship with a voter monitoring company run by the party, as it can be revealed state MPs also use taxpayer money to pay it amounts likely exceeding $100,000 a year.

Parakeelia has transferred more than $1 million to the federal division of the Liberal party in the past three years, in growing amounts that recently made it the party's second-largest single source of revenue last financial year."

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/federal-election-2016/federal-election-2016-mystery-deepens-over-parakeelia-as-cormann-ducks-question-20160609-gpfmp1.html#ixzz4BJHMJE00


Hockey's cab charge questions:

"Former federal treasurer Joe Hockey tried to block the release of five-year-old hire car travel details by arguing it could put him at risk by allowing prediction of his movements in a heightened terrorism environment.

The argument was made during a freedom of information battle with Fairfax Media, which on Monday revealed the rules for MPs using privately chauffeured hire cars were repeatedly broken in relation to Mr Hockey's Cabcharge account as shadow Treasurer.

It revealed drivers from a favoured hire car company – Ecotaxi, owned by former policemen Russell Howarth – had filled out and signed on Mr Hockey's behalf Cabcharge dockets worth at least $10,000 from as early as 2009."

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/joe-hockey-sought-to-block-cabcharge-details-citing-terrorism-risk-20160530-gp776y.html#ixzz4BJIAOjJK

Here's a good one:

"Key Liberal fundraising body took Mafia money for access"

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/key-liberal-fundraising-body-took-mafia-money-for-access-20150628-gi07yb.html

Here's another gold-plate candidate:

"Liberal candidate Chris Jermyn's missing millions after social media flop"

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/federal-election-2016/liberal-candidate-chris-jermyns-missing-millions-after-social-media-flop-20160610-gpg2rl.html

The Coalition would have to accommodate the dodgiest practices in our political landscape.

John Min-Chiang Hsu is the least of our worries....

SM, note how quickly Piorot can summon up a list of references to
things that the Libs have done or not done.
It would take me a couple of days to compile such a list.
I once accused her of being a computer, such accusation to which she
appeared to object.
So be it, but I suspect she has access to the Labour Party dirt files.

We all know how they have dirt files on each other.

cntl c d

Bazz,

I have a good memory...and twitter provides a constant feed of allegations of dodgy LNP practices.

There's usually a new one every few days.

Let's face it - when you have a party that can't seem to keep its nose out of the trough, it's not that hard to access articles on these subjects.

Gauwd Poirot, you RELY on Twitter ?
I presume then that twitter did not report that Bill Shorten sold
the cleaners down the river.

Really, rusted on does not do you justice, cast in the same mould
at the same time seems more appropriate.

Bazz,

No, I don't "rely on twitter" except, in this sense, as a conduit for articles.

Those article links above are from MSM - not idle twitter chatter.

There are, no doubt, plenty of articles on Shorten and Labor - and anyone here is welcome to post them.

I doubt, however, posters would be able to produce the constant stream of allegations of dodgy dealings which serially plague the Coalition.

No one sold anybody down the river, those cleaners and mushroom pickers were all 457 imports.

Hows Abbott distancing himself from his ambition of being PM. That sounds like a staged announcement.

Turnbull is not what was hoped of him, he's far to soft to be PM.

Bazz,

Poirot is using the old labor trick of guilt by association,

Hockey used a taxi company that was crooked, thus he must be crooked,

A mafiosa donated money to the coalition, thus the coalition must be linked,

Tony Abbott stood in front of a placard of "ditch the witch" therefore he completely endorses the sentiment.

It is all smoke and mirrors completely devoid of fact. What Parrot and others forget is that there are plenty of deeply corrupt Labor MPs, and that by comparison Labor is a bunch of thieves.

SM,

"Hockey used a taxi company that was crooked, thus he must be crooked,"

But what?....

"Former federal treasurer Joe Hockey tried to block the release of five-year-old hire car travel details by arguing it could put him at risk by allowing prediction of his movements in a heightened terrorism environment."

Oh right!

"Tony Abbott stood in front of a placard of "ditch the witch" therefore he completely endorses the sentiment."

Hohoho!...I'm sure Tony knew he was standing in front of a placard of "ditch the witch"...but he wasn't there merely for moral support - he addressed the crowd "in front of a placard of "ditch the witch".

Bless him....

And then there are peripheral chappies like these...

"Damien Mantach, former Victorian Liberal Party director, pleads guilty to fraud charges"

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-02-17/former-victorian-liberal-party-director-pleads-guilty-to-fraud/7176154

"Malcolm Turnbull sacks Stuart Robert over China trip"

http://www.theage.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/malcolm-turnbull-sacks-stuart-robert-over-china-trip-20160212-gmsbtc.html

...and - ho hum...

"Tony Abbott and other Liberals took Rolexes they thought were fake"

http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/feb/10/liberals-took-rolex-and-other-designer-watches-assuming-they-were-were-fake

Now, SM, don't disappoint me.

You come straight out and defend these fellas by using the line "They only took them because they thought they were fake."

Exoneration right there!

Dear rehctub,

I will be 91 in October.

You wrote: “I am sure you will agree that those being forced upon us now are much less likely to make so much of themselves (I am generalizing) and more likely to willingly feed from our over generous welfare system, a system that often favours such folk at the detriment of our own, and that's just not fair, no matter which way you look at it.”

I don’t agree. Nobody is being forced on us. Australia is not a colony. Our democratic government has decided on a certain population intake. You along with others elected that government.

Two phrases in the above statement concern me. They are “our over generous welfare system” and “a system that often favours such folk at the detriment of our own”. I don’t think we have an over generous welfare system but rather the current government with its cuts has produced an inadequate system that does not meet needs. I suspect that you would call any welfare system over generous if it existed at all. Who are our own folk? I am reminded of the Nazi saying “ein volk, ein Reich, ein führer”. Any Australian citizen is our own folk even if that citizen has a dark skin, oriental features, is not Christian or wears a turban. The Australian Constitution does not differ among Australian citizens on the basis of race, ethnicity or religion. I don’t see why anyone else should.

I don’t see any unfairness.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_Australia tells about immigration to Australia. Employment visas (sponsored by an Australian business or state that needs that category of workers, Student visas (Australia makes money from the holders of those visas.) Family visas (types include spouse or contributory parent), Skilled Visas (needed skills that Australia doesn’t have).

There is also a Humanitarian program which in 2012–13 was set at 20,000 places.

continued

continued

The Humanitarian Program is "for people who are subject to persecution in their home country, who are typically outside their home country, and are in need of resettlement. The majority of applicants who are considered under this category are identified and referred by UNHCR to Australia for resettlement. The Refugee category includes the Refugee, In-country Special Humanitarian, Emergency Rescue and Woman at Risk visa subclasses."

It is also "for people outside their home country who are subject to substantial discrimination amounting to gross violation of human rights in their home country, and immediate family of persons who have been granted protection in Australia. Applications for entry under the SHP must be supported by a proposer who is an Australian citizen, permanent resident or eligible New Zealand citizen, or an organisation that is based in Australia."

My wife has been a volunteer to the Refugee Council of Australia. She has taught English to refugees. Those that she has taught are most eager to learn about Australia and become part of the society.

You are whinging about a small group in need.

There are also undocumented aliens – the boat people and others. Regardless of their qualifications they are sent to offshore detention centres which are apparently so bad that the government supported by Labor has passed laws penalising those who speak about what is happening in them.

You also wrote: “Another huge problem is the fact that not only are many of these people from backgrounds known for supporting and/or inflicting terror onto others, but it has been suggested that up to 40% of them are illiterate in their own language, the consequences of which do not need explaining.”

Many of these people come from horrible backgrounds. One reason many of them come here is that they are trying to get away from those backgrounds. By that reasoning one could deny refuge to the Jews who were trying to get away from Nazi Germany since they are coming from a violent country.

continued

continued

I just read “Infidel” by Ayaan Hirsi Ali. She was a Muslim from some of the worst places on earth.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infidel:_My_Life

“Hirsi Ali writes about her youth in Somalia, Saudi Arabia, Ethiopia and Kenya; about her flight to the Netherlands where she applied for political asylum, her university experience in Leiden, her work for the Labour Party, her transfer to the People's Party for Freedom and Democracy, her election to Parliament, and the murder of Theo van Gogh, with whom she made the film Submission.”

Who knows how many there are like her who would benefit themselves and the society from living in a free society?

Who suggested up to 40% % of them are illiterate in their own language?

You wrote: “So you tell me where I am wrong David?”

You are wrong when you wrote prospective when you probably meant perspective. You are wrong for sounding off without knowing the facts. You are wrong in not wanting to help people in need. You are wrong in being insular and prejudiced. You are wrong in not being critical enough of what you are told. (40% illiterate in their own language) You are wrong in feeling victimised. (“those being forced upon us”) You are wrong in not seeing who the big free loaders are (Our military-industrial complex, our rich private schools wanting subsidies, our tax-exempt churches, our corporate interests wanting handouts).

SM, see what I mean, 23 minutes after your post and she has put a
response up with three more links.

Hmmm

Lol!....Bazz,

Okay, you got me....

I'm currently sitting in the central command base of the Labor Party deep in the bowels of our fortified briefing station...dirt files at the ready!

As you can imagine, our priority at this stage of a double dissolution election campaign is to have senior operatives such as moi, spend inordinate amounts of time arguing with Lib supporters on garden variety innocuous sites like OLO.

Astounding I know - but there you have it.

The conspiracy theory is a labor dirt file on the Coalition. Well that conspiracy could actually be one that comes true. You have to get one in in every million or so.

The dirt has to be there before you can throw it, it's not hard to find. It would be to much to ask that no dirt be thrown. Abbott says he has lost interest in the leadership now. Now that is calculated dirt throwing. Of course it's all B/s

People are not stupid, taking that as gospel when it comes from Abbott, he has never told the truth ever.

knew it, I knew it I knew it !

Hiya folks,

Back at the control panel....

Here's some more shonky activity in the Liberal camp.

"Parliamentary staff were working for the Liberal-linked software company that has transferred large sums of money to the party exceeding $1 million, emails obtained by Fairfax Media show.

The emails suggest that Parliament House staff were simultaneously doing work for Parakeelia Pty Ltd, a company that MPs pay $2500 a year in taxpayer allowances to use its Feedback software. Parakeelia has in turn become the Liberals' second-biggest source of income."

"More than $1 million has been sent to the Liberal party by Parakeelia in the past three years; the party has refused to say how much of this is a surplus generated from taxpayer allowances.

The Liberal campaign has refused to say conclusively whether the company generates a surplus from tax-payer allowances but has said Parakeelia incurs costs, including paying its staff.

Former Liberal staff, including John Adams, an ex-adviser to Arthur Sinodinos, have confirmed similar sessions were run frequently in all major cities.

"It looks like a scam," Mr Adams said of growing questions about the company's relationship to the party. "How much does the software cost them to run? If that's $500 then they should be charging $500, not $2500."

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/federal-election-2016/government-staffers-provided-free-training-for-liberal-software-donor-20160612-gphdz9.html#ixzz4BP2iQFN

Parrot,

I guess that for technical ignoramus's such as left whingers software = something you buy at office works and install once and it miraculously produces the results.

Wrong.

Our company uses specialised control software, which with updates modifications and technical skills costs about $500 000/yr year to maintain on no more than a dozen computers. Sounds crazy? Hardly, it pays for itself 10x over.

Similarly data mining software does not produce the results without a lot of manpower entering and analyzing the data, incl ministerial staff.

Once again we have innuendo posing as fact from left whingers who happily ignore the $ms of corrupt money going to labor and the greens from the unions that expect obedience from Labor MPs.

SM,

Data mining software?

Not necessary when you've got a brain - and a little too much time to waste bantering with odd-bods on public forums.

Here's the brilliant Abbott attempting to fulfill his Churchill obsession:

"Tony Abbott's office floated sending Australian troops into Ukraine conflict, defence expert claims"

"Tony Abbott's staff considered involving Australian troops in the conflict between Ukraine and Kremlin-backed rebels during the MH17 crisis, potentially making them targets, a leading defence scholar says.

Former Australian Army officer James Brown, writing in the latest Quarterly Essay, described Mr Abbott's handling of defence as "the clearest case in recent times of a prime minister struggling to grasp the limits of Australian military power".

"On the MH17 response, Mr Brown said Australia's military planners "worked up options" for Mr Abbott to send as much as a brigade – about 3000 soldiers – onto Russia's doorstep to help secure the crash site, though this would have included a contribution of Dutch forces."

"But Mr Brown, who is now research director at the US Studies Centre at the University of Sydney, has also written that "further curious military proposals were floated by staff from the prime minister's office" including one that would have had Australian troops effectively involved in the conflict between pro-Ukrainian and pro-Kremlin forces.

"One of them – to commit uniformed Australian military logistics personnel to help the Ukrainians improve their own systems – seemed to ignore that this would make them legitimate targets for separatists fighting in Eastern Ukraine," he said."

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/federal-election-2016/tony-abbotts-office-floated-sending-australian-troops-into-ukraine-conflict-defence-expert-claims-20160612-gphbab.html#ixzz4BPLAMvAR

"Once again we have innuendo posing as fact from left whingers who happily ignore the $ms of corrupt money going to labor and the greens from the unions that expect obedience from Labor MPs."

Lol!...btw, Brian Loughnane is the director of Parakeelia....

Parrot,

"Brian Loughnane is the director of Parakeelia" (He is one of several directors)

So What?

Again nothing but innuendo. All you have is that a company that does work for the government is a donor to the liberals. So what?

SM,

"Again nothing but innuendo. All you have is that a company that does work for the government is a donor to the liberals"

Lol!....

Funnelling taxpayers money into a Lib org - nice work if you can get it.

Liberals - dodgy as!

Parrot,

It is not a liberal organisation. It has one person that is an ex lib that spends a few hours a month sitting on the board of directors.

Again feeble innuendo. This is at best a pathetic muck racking exercise.

SM,

Ho hum....poor old Shadow Minister always resorts to "Parrot" when he's down on the canvas.

Btw, it's pretty shabby stuff for a guy with all those degrees, SM - can't you debate someone without resorting to grade 3 antics?

Anyhoo...

"It is not a liberal organisation. It has one person that is an ex lib that spends a few hours a month sitting on the board of directors."

Oh really?

"A company Liberal MPs direct taxpayer funds towards to monitor voter behaviour has become a major source of income for the party, raising questions about whether taxpayers are indirectly donating to the Liberals.

Fairfax Media can reveal nearly all Liberal MPs pay a company, Parakeelia Pty Ltd, $2500 a year to use "Feedback" software, money understood to come from their taxpayer-funded office allowances.

Parakeelia is registered to the same inner-Canberra office building as the Liberals. The company's directors include the Liberal Party's federal director, Tony Nutt, and president, Richard Alston. It is registered with authorities as being associated with the party.

Last financial year, Parakeelia transferred $500,000 to the federal Liberal division, making it the party's second-biggest single source of funds. The year before it came in fourth with $400,000; before that $200,000.

But the Liberals would not say how much of the company's revenue began as taxpayer funding.

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/federal-election-2016/election-2016-mps-directing-taxpayer-funds-towards-liberal-partylinked-company-and-donor-20160608-gpe87q.html#ixzz4BPdNIdFu

Again - "...It is registered with authorities as being associated with the party."

Brian Loughnane is also the Financial Controller of Parakeelia.

Again Parrot, So what?

No one has suggested that anything illegal occurred. Labor does it all the time, under Juliar tonnes of cash was given to the unions by the government for "training" which came straight back to labor, in return for stacking FWA with ex union heavies.

Ho hum....poor old Shadow Minister always resorts to "Parrot" when he's down on the canvas.

What a sad act....

When you parrot the labor line without question I call you parrot.

I know it annoys you when you desperately claim to have me on the carpet.

Labor's past includes 100+ Cfmeu officials charged, but not a single charge against any liberal MP, and now we have Daniel Andrews trying to bully the CFA on behalf of the UFU to which he is beholden.

When you have one point where a lib MP has broken the law then I might care what you post.

SM,

"When you parrot the labor line without question I call you parrot"

Okay....and in future each time you act like a five year-old, I'll stop the conversation.

Simples...

Dear David, firstly, being a man of your vintage you have my upmost resect however it is totally undeniable that the number one contributor to the appalling situation these less fortunate from aboard find themselves in, is themselves as they simply will not stop breading.

Furthermore, as we sit on the brink of an era not witnessed by people of my generation, with slash and burn announcements every day, why on earth would anyone think it is wise to bring people in who first have to be educated, prior to even trying to find active work for them.

Having said this, you of anyone I know are entitled to your opinion.

Dear rehctub,

There is no need to have respect for my extreme age. I just didn't die when I should have. I have no medical problems so I may be around a while longer. I agree that uncontrolled population growth is the cause of many of our problems. I feel quite guilty for the number of descendants that I have. Although they are all bright and beautiful together they make a heavy carbon footprint. My oldest granddaughter has promised me that she will not give birth to any children although she may adopt some. None of the others have given me such assurances.

Unfortunately many interests push population growth. There are ways to stem the growth - education for women is one. Unfortunately at the Cairo population conference Catholic church representatives got together with Muslims. In return for the Catholics agreeing not to support education for women the Muslims opposed abortion.

Sex education including methods of preventing pregnancy, provision of contraceptive materials, availability of abortion etc. are some of the ways of controlling population growth. Italy, Japan and Ireland have managed to cut down their growth - mainly because women in those countries are free to decide not to have babies, and religion does not have the hold that it used to have.

http://population.org.au/ is the website of Sustainable Population Australia (SPA). They are an independent not-for-profit organisation seeking to protect the environment and our quality of life by ending population growth in Australia and globally. We can work to end it globally by including such efforts in our foreign aid.

It is good that you have given the matter thought and can see what is a tremendous cause of our environmental and other problems. Just as inflation is the result of too much money chasing too few goods, Conflict and environmental destruction are the result of too many people chasing too few resources. Medical science has managed to decrease the death rate including deaths due to infant mortality. Unfortunately the birth rate has not declined to match it.

continued

continued

Perhaps Australia has already reached the limit of people it can hold and keep its standard of living. One limiting factor is the availability of fresh water. Australia is roughly the same size as the USA, but has only 3% of the fresh water the USA has. Australia's population size is almost 8% of US population size. By that measure Australia is overpopulated.

However, you were concerned over Australia's refugee intake. Australia has about 25 million people. If the refugee quota of 20,000 per year is filled the addition to the population by refugee intake is .08% - not even a tenth of 1% - 8 people in 10,000. Is that a number to worry about? Is that going to make a great difference? Try to put numbers on your concerns, and then ask yourself whether they are worth worrying about.

Dear David,

I wholly support your ideas and effort to reduce population in Australia and elsewhere.

However, I am unhappy with your blaming of religion as the culprit for overpopulation.

Not only the environment, but religion too suffers from overpopulation: overpopulation brings about a stressful lifestyle which leaves no room and peaceful time for the practice of religion.

Religion teaches that one should restrain their sexual energy so it can be used to concentrate on God instead. When one needs to care for a family, it is much harder to find the time to reflect on God, pray and serve Him. While anyone who wants God should try to abstain from (or at least limit) sexual activities, this is very difficult so at the point when one finds it too difficult, they better use contraceptives to avoid pregnancy and other complications. How possibly the Catholic Church and Islam arrived at the opposite conclusion, is beyond me - and I believe that it has everything to do with culture, genetic-pressures and hypocrisy and nothing to do with religion.

Dear Yuyutsu,

You wrote: "Religion teaches that one should restrain their sexual energy so it can be used to concentrate on God instead."

Some religions teach that. Others, like Buddhism, do not acknowledge God. Your statement is not applicable to all religion. To me it seems rather stupid to restrain one's sexual energy to concentrate on something that doesn't exist unless it is good fiction or entertaining myth. To restrain one's sexual energy to concentrate on science, mathematics, nature, literature, music, philosophy or cooking has a point. The restraint can lead to knowledge or other sensual pleasures. I believe in maximising sensual pleasures. Nonsense as in Lewis Carroll is also a sensual pleasure, but too much time can be wasted in such silliness as belief in god, devil, heaven, hell, messiah, nirvana and all the other nonsense associated with religion of one kind or another. Pleasure should be restrained for a useful purpose not to concentrate on the inanities of religion.

At 90 years of age I look back on some opportunities for sexual pleasure that I didn't take advantage of with wistful regret. I also regret not letting go of the idea of God earlier in life.

Dear Yuyutsu,

Sexual pleasures do not have to result in procreation. Part of the nonsense that some religions promote is that sex not resulting in progeny is somehow sinful. They actually encourage procreation.

Let us enjoy the full range of pleasures that sex can provide according to one's inclinations. Oral, anal and homosexual sex do not result in progeny. Contraceptives prevent conception in genital intercourse. Some religions discourage all of the foregoing. They encourage uncontrolled population growth.

More sex for recreation. Less sex for procreation. More sex. Less religion. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

David, numbers are not a problem, nor is water because what we consume is miniscule to the amount we waste, or allow to be wasted, then there are options such as desalination, so no real problems t, while allowing non productive people in.here in my opinion.

The disturbing part for me is that while there may only be 8 per 10,000, of those 8, 3.2 are illiterate in their own language, so we are essentially inviting passengers, with little or nothing to offer by way of contribution.

As for religious beliefs, we as the people have been powerless to pick and chose who comes. A position we still have no say in.

rehctub wrote: “numbers are not a problem, nor is water because what we consume is miniscule to the amount we waste, or allow to be wasted, then there are options such as desalination, so no real problems t, while allowing non productive people in.here in my opinion.”

Dear rechtub, Unfortunately your opinions seemed to be backed by a lot of prejudice but a great lack of facts. Water supply is a great problem which does not have an easy solution. You might start learning about it.

http://www.natsoc.org.au/our-projects/biosensitivefutures/part-4-facts-and-principles/ecological-issues/water-issues-in-australia is a place to start.

You wrote: “The disturbing part for me is that while there may only be 8 per 10,000, of those 8, 3.2 are illiterate in their own language, so we are essentially inviting passengers, with little or nothing to offer by way of contribution.”

What is the source of “3.2 are illiterate in their own language”? You throw out these figures, but you don’t back them up with sources. I have already questioned you on 3.2, but you merely repeat the statement. Repetition is not validation.

You also wrote: “As for religious beliefs, we as the people have been powerless to pick and chose who comes. A position we still have no say in.”

Australia has a constitution which does not allow favouring or suppressing any religion.

Article S. 116 of the Australian Constitution: The Commonwealth shall not make any law for establishing any religion, or for imposing any religious observance, or for prohibiting the free exercise of any religion, and no religious test shall be required as a qualification for any office or public trust under the Commonwealth.

You want to discriminate according to religion? Change the constitution.

I would appreciate it if you would back up your opinions with facts rather than just rant on. I don’t want to waste more of my time.

Dear David,

Regardless of the different rationales/theologies given, religions explain that:
1) One should concentrate their energy on some higher purpose; and
2) If one dissipates their sexual energy every time it rises, then one will lack the energy to concentrate and break through beyond their current comfort-zone towards whatever they wish to achieve, be it material of spiritual, including science and mathematics, etc.

We have been discussing religious beliefs before and we could well also discuss the merits and demerits of sexual pleasure, but both would get us even further from to the topic at hand, my whole point here being that religion is not responsible for the scourge of overpopulation.

Whoever invented this stupid idea that "sex is more sinful if it does not result in progeny" was not a religious holy-person but probably a manipulative politician who wanted others to produce more children so they become their slaves and cannon-fodder.

Yuyutsu wrote: "We have been discussing religious beliefs before and we could well also discuss the merits and demerits of sexual pleasure, but both would get us even further from to the topic at hand, my whole point here being that religion is not responsible for the scourge of overpopulation."

Dear Yuyutsu,

Religion is partially responsible for the scourge of overpopulation. Various religious groups have opposed sex education, use of contraceptives and education for women. Those are all measures which could counter the scourge of overpopulation.

Your whole point is wrong. Religion not only clouds the mind with its mumbojumbo but shares the guilt for overpopulation. Religion has not only opposed measures to control overpopulation but has actually encouraged people to multiply without restraint.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quiverfull tells about one such group.

"Quiverfull is a movement among some conservative fundamentalist Christian couples, chiefly in the United States, but with some adherents in Canada, Australia, New Zealand, United Kingdom and elsewhere. It sees children as a blessing from God and promotes procreation, abstaining from all forms of birth control, including natural family planning and sterilization. Adherents are known as quiver full, full quiver, quiverfull-minded, or simply QF Christians. Some refer to the Quiverfull position as Providentialism, while other sources have referred to it as a manifestation of natalism. Currently, several thousand Christians worldwide identify with this movement.[

Dear David,

These Quiverfull people, between changing nappies and chauffeuring their older children, when do they ever find time for God?!

David, the 3.2 (40%) is what was mentioned on the news a while ago.

Until I see otherwise I have no reason to disbelieve it.

However, should you choose to challenge my figures, that is your given right, and should I find such info I will forward it.

In the mean time, you are welcome to bury your head in the sand and pretend we don't have a huge problem looming.

As for water, we are so stupid that we treat all water as 'A' grade drinking water, then we bath in it, wash to car, the boat, even the dog. We wash the driveway and hose the plants as well, and of cause we consume about 2%. There in lies the answer.

Add to this the billions of litres washed down our rivers and stormwater drains, much of which could be harvested, problem solved. And if these measures don't work, we have desalination to turn to.

In essence, we don't have a water problem, we have a water usage problem, one that is curable.

Dear rehctub,

In denying we have a water problem you are sticking your head in the sand. It is a far greater problem than our refugee intake.

http://www.wentworthgroup.org/docs/Chartres_&_Williams.pdf

"Australia is a continent of extremes with respect to water resources; relative abundance in the tropical north where few people live and relative scarcity in the more populated, temperate south. In addition, both south and north are a#ected by wet/dry seasonal climatic conditions and the south, in particular, by increasing climate variability marked generally by declining rainfall. In the south, previous poor governance systems have led to the over allocation of surface and groundwater supplies and there is increasing competition for water from irrigators, urban/domestic, industrial and mining users. As a consequence, there has been a major deleterious impact on the health of many rivers and their associated environments. Therefore, Australia is confronted with a major question; can water productivity and water governance be improved to ensure environmentally sustainable and productive river systems? This paper examines how this may be achieved. It concludes that economic reforms coupled with scientific and management innovation may alleviate many of the water scarcity issues."

Note the last sentence. The problem is so severe that their recommendations MAY alleviate many of the water scarcity issues. They cannot be sure.

Dear rehctub,

I am glad that I live in a country where the government shows compassion by taking in refugees. You are worried about how productive they will be. I don't understand that kind of worry. When you lend somebody in need a helping hand if you are a caring person you don't worry about what that person can do for you. Take in someone who needs help, and you may have to continue to help them. Is there anything wrong in that? Are we to supposed to be so hard-hearted that we cannot help somebody without asking something in return? There is too much of the "What's in it for me?" attitude in this world. None of the Arab countries, as far as I know, are offering to take any Syrian refugees in. They are hard-hearted. Would you like us to be like them?

We see the world very differently. Sometimes my government does something to make me proud of it. Taking in refugees is one of those things. It makes me feel my taxes aren't entirely wasted.

Dear David,

I admire your sentiment.

However,

When a person does charity, they benefit from it even more than the recipient: it purifies their heart, improves their character and removes their guilt.

But when government takes our money away without leaving us a choice, then we are denied the opportunity to donate that same money ourselves along with all the accruing benefits. The result as you can see, is more hard-hearted people that ask "What's in it for me?".

Allow ordinary Australians to compassionately vote with our own purses how many refugees we accept.

Dear Yuyutsu,

You wrote: “Allow ordinary Australians to compassionately vote with our own purses how many refugees we accept.”

It requires more than money to bring in refugees it requires organisation. We could also say, “Allow ordinary Australians to vote with our own purses how much military we need.”

Who would collect the money? Who would organise an army, navy and air force? Would you do it?

Government does things that we can’t do as individuals. At one time the anarchist philosophy was very attractive to me. When I was much younger I thought government was an unnecessary burden on us that we could do without. We could organise things ourselves. In October I will be 91 and my wife will be 80 years old. I don’t want to organise transport for refugees or join the army (They wouldn't take me.). Actually my wife volunteered with the Refugee Council of Australia to teach refugees English so she has committed time, effort and skills to help refugees. We depend on government to organise some things such as the military and bringing in refugees. They use our taxes to do these things. That’s the way it works. Money isn't enough

Dear David, the world you live has moved on my friend, as for every single non contributing person we bring in, one of our own misses out.

Besides, in your own words, we don't have the water. So which is it, do we have the water, or don't we. You cant be half pregnant here David, either immigration is sustainable, or it's not.

Back on to water, do you think it is wise to wash the dog in 'A' class treated drinking water?

Our homes should be plumbed to recycled water and we should either boil that for drinking, or buy drinking water.

"Our homes should be plumbed to recycled water and we should either boil that for drinking, or buy drinking water."

That is really something, rehctub!

One of my favourite assignments at uni was on the sanitary revolution around the turn of the 19th & 20th centuries. My study was mainly of London and the improvements made at that time. It was surprisingly fascinating.

You obviously have no idea of types of disease spread through dodgy water.

"I'll have a white with two sugars and a dash of typhoid - there's a good man"

So recycled water that one has to boil is very bad bad bad idea.

Guess who'd be the first outraged butcher who would jump up and down at the govt paying for all the hospital bills of those sickened by ingesting waterborne nasties - where people neglected to treat their recycled water or didn't do it properly.

It's an area where we defeated disease with science and innovation.

Bottled water is the biggest con ever - a modern fancy - that is really only useful for bringing aid to places whose water supply has failed or been poisoned...like the city of Flint in the US where authorities changed water supplies and neglected maintenance that leached lead into the water.

It’s strange to think that idea about recycled water came from someone that handles meat. Or maybe we are thinking about the wrong sort of meat.
What ever way it is I would not be in favor of drinking or any thing else done with recycled water.

Dear rehctub,

You wrote: "the world you live has moved on my friend, as for every single non contributing person we bring in, one of our own misses out."

The world you live in is a very narrow one. Who is 'one of our own'? We humans are one species. Every human that lives is one of my own. Unfortunately we don't always get along with 'one of our own'. Nevertheless we are all kin.

Davi

Ok David, so let's cut to the chase.

You say you want all these refugees to be welcome with open arms. So tell me, how do you propose we cater for them.

Our health system is not coping, and there appears no money to fix it. Same goes for education.

We don't have the funds for a state of the art NBN, although I doubt we actually need one, rather, let those who do need it, pay for it, because as it stands many who benefit from it will be to download movies quicker, or play more/better online games.

By all means take it to the node (not sure of spelling) then allows those who want, pay to have it connected.

Now while that's a bit off track, it highlights the simple fact that we ant care for our own needs, let alone freeloaders, and whether you like it or not, many who come will be just that.

We are approaching a revolution in this country, where those who pay the taxes will reach boiling point as like myself, we've had a gut full of our taxes being pissed against the wall so as to speak. And of cause, if you make way for a great life for these unfortunate folk, birth control will be the last thing on their minds.

Dear rehctub,

I also pay taxes. We give too many subsidies to tax-exempt churches, rich private schools wanting subsidies, corporate interests wanting handouts and other freeloading leeches. If the government teat was cut off from those free loaders we might have enough for the poor, for international aid, education and health. If we still wouldn't have enough we could raise taxes.

In my opinion your boiling point is way too low. I have the impression that you resent any help given to the needy. In a previous post you referred to our over generous welfare. That tells me a lot about you.

I am very much in favour of sex education including education in use of contraceptives and encouragement in their use. However, there are also people who are already alive and who need help. If my taxes can help that's a good use for my taxes.

I live well in Australia. You probably also live well. I am grateful for what I have and am happy to share some of it. I doubt that you really have anything legitimate to complain about. I have seen many of your posts that are simply a variant on rehctub, the victim. Try to appreciate what you have.

Dear David,

<<We could also say, “Allow ordinary Australians to vote with our own purses how much military we need.”>>

Sounds really good to me: Rehctub can ear-mark his taxes for submarines and jets while you can ear-mark your taxes for health, education and foreign-aid and I would ear-mark my taxes for direct welfare to the needy. This way we all be happy and just imagine - people will then be very happy and proud to pay their tax and no longer attempt to minimise it!

One option is to let government continue to collect our taxes and continue to organise the army using Rehctub's money.

Another option is to have several independent public bodies managing different societal functions. Being practical, they could still share one tax-office.

My seeming anarchism is derived from the religious principle of Ahimsa=non-violence (made known in the West by Mahatma Gandhi). I consider that idea as if a group of people may violently impose themselves and their laws on others without their consent, as monstrous, totally evil. However, once consent is freely given, I have no objections to rules and government.

The function of security is essential and security forces (internal and external) are the only bodies which may legitimately force themselves on others - as required for protecting the community, as the last resort in self defence. It is not imperative that the same body that deals with security and therefore has such extraordinary powers, should be the same body that deals with welfare, health, education, etc.

Yuyutsu wrote: "The function of security is essential and security forces (internal and external) are the only bodies which may legitimately force themselves on others - as required for protecting the community, as the last resort in self defence. It is not imperative that the same body that deals with security and therefore has such extraordinary powers, should be the same body that deals with welfare, health, education, etc."

Dear Yuyutsu, What would be the selection process to fill the different bodies? One virtue of a democratic society is that the security apparatus is under civilian control. I fear the consequences if it would be an independent body. An independent security apparatus could more easily develop into an instrument of oppression.

Dear David,

Indeed, what stops the security apparatus from continuing to be under civilian control as they are now? Have I suggested otherwise?

We could and should still elect the body which controls the security forces, just as we do now. We would similarly also be electing the different bodies responsible for welfare, health, education, transportation, etc.

For most bodies, I think that those who contribute a higher percentage of their tax should have more say in the operation of those bodies, but perhaps security-forces should be an exception due to their sensitive and unusual powers.

Dear Yuyutsu,

It would more complicated to have elections for the different bodies. I think it better to have one controlling body and one person - one vote. No doubt we will disagree again.

Dear David,

Complicated - I agree.
Yet feasible, I believe.

Any universe where people have a greater say on how they want to live is more complicated than a universe where everything is dictated from above, including whom you marry and what you have for breakfast.

A sketch of the current electoral system is:

You can freely choose whether to marry person A and have C for breakfast;
or to marry person B and have D for breakfast.

But marrying person A and having D for breakfast is not an option.

I rather be able to decide separately on whom I marry and what I have for breakfast. Don't you?

So David, we currently have around 150,000 homeless in Australia.

Do you think they are less deserving of your help than those from over populated countries whos one aim in life is to breed, despite knowing full well there is insufficient to go around.

Im sorry to break this to you at your age David, but your generosity is actually doing more harm than good, because you are giving these who have nothing, false hope by encouraging them to continue breeding.

Even the animal kingdom is smarter than that, but put the likes of kangaroos into a controlled environment, where there is food and water on tap, and they will multiply three fold.

This is essentially what you are doing, while at the same time ignoring your own needy.

david f,

rehctub posts this:

"So David, we currently have around 150,000 homeless in Australia.

Do you think they are less deserving of your help than those from over populated countries whos one aim in life is to breed, despite knowing full well there is insufficient to go around."

And this:

"This is essentially what you are doing, while at the same time ignoring your own needy."

I'd just like to point out that from past experience of rehctub's attitude to "our own needy" - he doesn't appear to give a hoot about them and is quite merciless in his views toward anyone in that position.

He's like a character out of Dickens.

Thank you, Poirot. I feel like giving rehctub the Dickens. His statement about overgenerous welfare reminds me of:

“At this festive season of the year, Mr. Scrooge,” said the gentleman, taking up a pen, “it is more than usually desirable that we should make some slight provision for the Poor and destitute, who suffer greatly at the present time. Many thousands are in want of common necessaries; hundreds of thousands are in want of common comforts, sir.”

“Are there no prisons?” asked Scrooge.

“Plenty of prisons,” said the gentleman, laying down the pen again.

“And the Union workhouses?” demanded Scrooge. “Are they still in operation?”

“They are. Still,” returned the gentleman, “I wish I could say they were not.”

“The Treadmill and the Poor Law are in full vigour, then?” said Scrooge.

“Both very busy, sir.”

“Oh! I was afraid, from what you said at first, that something had occurred to stop them in their useful course,” said Scrooge. “I’m very glad to hear it.”

“Under the impression that they scarcely furnish Christian cheer of mind or body to the multitude,” returned the gentleman, “a few of us are endeavouring to raise a fund to buy the Poor some meat and drink, and means of warmth. We choose this time, because it is a time, of all others, when Want is keenly felt, and Abundance rejoices. What shall I put you down for?”

“Nothing!” Scrooge replied.

“You wish to be anonymous?”

“I wish to be left alone,” said Scrooge. “Since you ask me what I wish, gentlemen, that is my answer. I don’t make merry myself at Christmas and I can’t afford to make idle people merry. I help to support the establishments I have mentioned—they cost enough; and those who are badly off must go there.”

“Many can’t go there; and many would rather die.”

“If they would rather die,” said Scrooge, “they had better do it, and decrease the surplus population.

david f,

Perfect.....

Dear rehctub,

You have used the expression ‘our own’ many times. However, I get the feeling that you really don’t care about anybody but yourself. I get the feeling that you are a hard-hearted, selfish person. I hope my feeling is wrong, and you are not as mean as you sound. Possibly you have a sense of beauty and some feeling that can be brought out by a poem.

John Donne (22 January 1572 – 31 March 1631) was an English poet and a cleric in the Church of England. He had the same feeling as I have about who is ‘our own’.

For whom the bell tolls a poem by John Donne

No man is an island,
Entire of itself.
Each is a piece of the continent,
A part of the main.
If a clod be washed away by the sea,
Europe is the less.
As well as if a promontory were.
As well as if a manor of thine own
Or of thine friend's were.
Each man's death diminishes me,
For I am involved in mankind.
Therefore, send not to know
For whom the bell tolls,
It tolls for thee

Actually, David, during my time as a small business owner, risk taker and employer, I have donated in excess of half a million dollars, all to worthwhile local causes, but not one red cent to the likes of those charities who's salaries are number one priority.

I will always lend a hand to anyone less fortunate who is willing to have a go, but not a red cent to anyone who is in it for the free ride. note I said 'hand' not 'hand out', as there is a huge difference.

So David, I respectfully ask you how is your water argument going, or do the free loaders you want to support in their tens of thousands not require water?

We either have a water shortage, or we don't. So which is it David?

Poirot, try and stay original, you don't need to team up with anyone else, unless of cause they can provide you with the real figures you seem reluctant to provide yourself. I guess I can't blame you, because I would be hesitant if I had to justify my rant, having labors record as my benchmark.

butcher,

"So David, I respectfully ask you how is your water argument going,..."

The question is, how is "your" water argument going?

You know, the one where you advocate we all boil recycled water to drink.

The one which would likely be a vector for all sorts of interesting diseases....

Lol!....still banging on about the fictitious numbers which you are too lazy to produce.

(P'rhaps coz they don't exist)

Get to it, rehctub!

Dear rehctub,

I am glad you have contributed to charity.

You wrote: “So David, I respectfully ask you how is your water argument going, or do the free loaders you want to support in their tens of thousands not require water?”

I support no freeloaders, and I am sick of you calling unfortunate people freeloaders. My father fled from czarist Russia and worked hard all his life. He was a refugee. Later the czarist government was overthrown, and my father was able to bring other members of his family from Soviet Russia to the United States. Some members of his family were young enough to work, and they did. His father was too old to work, and he was supported by the members of his family who were young enough to support him. My mother’s father and mother also escaped czarist Russia and also came to the United States. Since they all came from a non-English speaking country I assume not all of them spoke English. To you they would have been freeloaders. To me they are family.

My wife’s father comes from Norway, and her mother was born in Russia, also non-English speaking countries. I am in Australia because of her. She was born here, grew up here and wanted to come back when I retired..

The refugees you call freeloaders come from horrible places. A person usually does not leave their homeland unless things are going badly there. Both czarist and Soviet Russia were tyrannies, and there were many refugees. That is why my family and many other people left. As you pointed out many of today’s refugees fled from violent countries. You saw that a reason to exclude them. I see that as a reason to welcome them. People leave Australia for one reason or another, but they are not in general leaving Australia because it is a horrible place. To repeat the people you call freeloaders are in the main decent people who come from horrible places.

There is no way one can respectfully call decent, unfortunate people freeloaders. Wash your filthy mouth.

Here you go, butcher,

A nice example of the way these vandals who call themselves a govt have screwed up a perfectly good system - and simultaneously cost the taxpayer more.

"Private vocational courses cost taxpayers seven times as much as TAFE, analysis finds"

"It is costing taxpayers on average seven times more to educate a student at a private vocational college than a public TAFE, according to new analysis of federal government figures.

Taxpayers forked out $73,200 per graduate from private colleges on average, but only $10,500 per graduate in TAFE courses in 2014, two years after the Gillard government paved the way to marketise vocational training."

"The cost blowout is in part because despite deep funding cuts, TAFE maintained significantly higher completion rates than private colleges in 2014 (87 per cent compared with 44 per cent for private providers)."

""In a tight fiscal environment it is criminal to see billions of tax dollars being squandered to prop up private providers who aren't even giving their students a qualification.

"The whole system needs to be scrapped and all government funding for vocational education and training returned to the public sector."

The federal opposition spokesman on higher education and skills, Kim Carr, blamed the blowout on Turnbull-Abbott mismanagement.

"The Liberals have failed to stop the waste," Mr Carr said. "The Turnbull government has paid private providers $5.4 billion of taxpayers' money without any concern about outcomes, such as how many students graduate and the quality of the training they receive.

"Other than cutting $2.75 billion from vocational education to date, their only substantive response has been to release a discussion paper."

http://www.smh.com.au/national/education/private-vocational-courses-cost-taxpayers-seven-times-as-much-as-tafe-20160616-gpk7bf.html

david f:

" ... There is no way one can respectfully call decent, unfortunate people freeloaders. Wash your filthy mouth. ... "

In the days when bars of soap were more common there was a particular brand of the grease cutting variety which was also indicated for these kinds of circumstances. .. can anyone remember the name of it?

..

What a shame the Greens Leader did so poorly in defence of his position visa vi his "Nanny."

Australia really needs a 3rd force in Industrial Relations.
Say no to dead wood, pencil fiddling, $500p.h.++ wig parasites!
Say no to compulsory Unionism!

Rather, say yes to the empowerment of the Ombudsman, where complaints are of the direct and plain english variety. Where outreach is practised. Where the burden of proof is on the employer to prove that they are doing the right thing visa vi a meritorious complaint AND if not, % based fines such that employers be they big or small will feel the pain in their pocket. Additionally, they will if found to be at fault in relation to one employee, thereafter have to prove their position in relation to all of their employees, and be compelled to backpay in toto ++ along with a public apology or liquidate them & pull their ABN.

Say no to your livelihoods been held to ransom to the unreasonable whims of others.

Say no to being gouged by vets and dentists when a family member is in pain. Put them on Medicare. Fixed price with a monthly index along with the rest of the medics.

Wig Parasites back on Legal Aid.

Say no to the idiocy of mainstream politicians and vote for the transfer of key fiscal responsibilities to the Reserve Bank or equivalent independent body.

And say no to rules which allow the banks and others to bind you by contract to effectively do as they please with your money in the midst of the transaction process. And say no to their scrambling of the transaction list chronology.

Wages cannot go up, but some expenses can be forced down.

I don't disagree with you on that one Poirot, those so called training mobs are a rip off and have been for decades.

As for boiling water, as usual you are trying to make a mountain out of an ant hill.

Recycled water is not untreated sewage water as you seem to be referring to, its just that why do we bath in A class drinking water, because to me that's a complete waste. Surely there is a level water can be treated to that is safe for use, just not recommended for drinking. A bit like many bore waters, you can live on them, but they taste like S...

David, a refugee is someone fleeing persecution. If this is the case, why do they pass so many other peaceful nations to get to ours, if it's not for the handouts?

Surely you of all people have seen the change in immigration since your days.

Immigrants used to come here for a better life, and good on them, but you can't tell me these lot are of the same working mentality, wanting to make a go of life here.

But, as I often say David, feel free to turn a blind eye and bury your head in the sand.

I am wondering *David F* how is it that you are happy to live among these people? These are the ones that "turned back the boats" on those fleeing the Nazis.

And the stench of them offends me.

The fell Spirit that motivated their forebears appears to be alive and well to this day.

I was amused to hear brandis stating that "Shorten's" comment that he would consider a "Treaty" with the Original people to be "unhelpful."

How is that these largely filthy white trash reckon that after all of the atrocities that they have committed that they still get to make the rules?

Or is it just that they are less bad than others?

Dear DreamOn,

The ones that "turned back the boats" on those fleeing the Nazis are now either dead or in their 90's.

It might be unpleasant to live among them, but then in order to live only among those that I am happy to live among, I might have to kick out the other 90%...

So assuming we chuck out the window all moral considerations and take the liberty to only invite those whom we feel we like to live among, please allow me to dream too! My very personal and fantastic immigration policy at my pleasure would be:

1. No smokers. Anyone who smoked in the last 10 years will be ineligible to come to Australia, even as a visitor and those who arrive must swear that they will never smoke, so if they ever do, they will be immediately deported and even lose their Australian citizenship.
(this, truly incidentally, would exclude a large proportion of Arab/Muslim males, so you may actually like it)

2. All others may arrive, but must commit not to listen to loud anti-music.

3. No citizenship and no financial/economic benefits for the first 10 years, except for vegetarians who will be exempt and may apply for citizenship straight away.

Will you vote for me?

Dream on, given your 'white trash' statement, I will let you alone to continue 'dreaming on'.

As for your crack at employers, just remember, employing is a voluntary act and without those among us who create the jobs, those in this country who are not 'white trash' will find it very difficult to keep their tax payer funded lives of waste and abuse in place.

Of cause you could go back 200 years and try to invent something, but there are only so many hours in a day to waste, arn't there.

DreamOn wrote: "I am wondering *David F* how is it that you are happy to live among these people? These are the ones that "turned back the boats" on those fleeing the Nazis."

Dear DreamOn,

I would be uncomfortable living among angels because I am not one myself. I also would not condemn all people for the actions of some of them. All Germans were not Nazis. All Muslims are not ISIS. All Americans are not imperialists. All people can be seized by madness and ask when it's over, "Why did we do that?" The Australians in government who refused to admit those fleeing the Nazis are probably all dead now. Their spirit is still alive, but all Australians do not share that spirit. Those who have that spirit are still human beings and may change. I think there has been a remarkable change among many Germans who have rejected the horrible attitudes of many of their ancestors. At 90 I am not the same person I was at 20

rehctub wrote: "David, a refugee is someone fleeing persecution. If this is the case, why do they pass so many other peaceful nations to get to ours, if it's not for the handouts?"

Dear rehctub,

Apparently you don't appreciate all Australia has to offer. A few years ago I gave a paper at the University of Queensland. A Malaysian professor also gave a paper. Afterwards we retired to the University bar to have some drinks. He thought it was great to go into a bar and have a few drinks. He couldn't do that in Malaysia because of the Muslim ban against alcohol. He told me he was an atheist. However, if he was open about that he would lose his job and his family would be on the outs with him. Australia offers a degree of freedom of speech and religion that none of the peaceful countries to the north offer. Since you have not been denied it you may not appreciate it. Forums such as online opinion in the countries north of us are monitored by the government. If you say something the government doesn't like you can find yourself in the poky or worse. In olo you can say anything you like. The only restriction is that Graham will bounce you if he thinks you are viciously attacking another person.

People may value freedom more than handouts. Please read "Infidel" by Ayaan Hirsi Ali. She came from East Africa to the Netherlands and was taken by the freedom and openness in Dutch society compared to her original society. A few years ago a couple we were friendly with suggested going in together and getting some property in Indonesia. In Indonesia with our combined income we could have a staff of servants and luxurious quarters much better than in either Australia or the United States. I would not live in Indonesia if I could live ten times as well there as I do here. I appreciate the freedom in Australia, and I am sure that some who want to come here feel the same way.

Posted by *David F* Friday, 17 June 2016 3:44:33 PM

" ... Those who have that Spirit are still human beings and may change. ... "

I accept what you say for the most part *DF* I would add that on balance and relatively speaking they treat me well enough. But, it is how they are treating others that deeply concerns me.

And that is why I Demonize them.

(and I am not yet convinced by arguments that state that it is always wrong to Demonize.)

A footnote to that it is not acceptable to me to hide behind the veil of polite society whilst concurrently committing Human Rights abuses.

How many child abuse complaints were not recognised by relevant parties because the people complaining were not "speaking nicely." People who use that as an excuse to dismiss serious complaints are in my opinion little better than the perpetrators of the original offence.

Anyway, it begs the question does it not, why should we care how the guvment treats others if they are being nice enough to us personally?

..

re: Indonesia though, it is a place I go to heal, rest and recuperate. And they are far more Free than us in many ways. I would share in detail with you more about my views on that if you are interested but it really deserve its own thread. Exactly what do we mean when we talk about Freedom?

..

*RehTub*

Choosing to employ people is also like travelling. If you can't afford travel insurance, you can't afford to travel.

And if you can't afford to pay at least the lawful minimal amounts in toto, then you can't afford to employ.

Crime and Punishment. The majority of us I would say have had a gut full of the contempt of the law that the business community continues to demonstrate particularly in relation to time, wages and conditions.

David, I do appreciate what Australia has to offer, because I help provide what it is we enjoy.

Your argument is clearly directed towards illegals, not immigrants, and as you have rightfully clarified, not refugees.

You have clearly made reference to what we have to offer, commonly know as 'the carrot'. So, these people go from refugee to illegal the moment the pass by the first safe haven.

An illegal is one who illegally enters our waters, whereas an immigrant is one who applies to immigration, waits the result of the scrutiny process, then either gets rejected, or accepted.

But I do thank you for clearing that up David, because it much easier to have a sensible debate when we are both on the same page.

So having established that, you have still not confirmed if we have a water shortage because if we do, the last thing we need is more illegals.

Dear rehctub,

Perhaps we can clear up another thing. The boat people have done nothing illegal. They may or not be refugees although some of them are. If they had done something illegal the Australian government could charge them, try them and subject them to penalties prescribed by law. However, to be an undocumented alien in a country is not a crime. A country has a right to secure its borders to those who do not have proper documentation. However, those who breach those borders have committed no crime and are not therefore illegals. Those who bring them in are committing a crime and some have been imprisoned in Australian penal institutions. They are illegals, but the people they bring in or try to bring in are not.

O David, have it your way.

So, why is it you protect these people in favour of those doing the right thing and applying for residency? Or is it that you think despite our water shortage (your words, not mine) you see not reason why not to open the doors for both.

While on that note, why would anyone bother applying when they can just come in through the back door, commonly known as cue jumpers.

The plain simple fact is we are not the same country we were prior to the turn of the century as we no longer have the means to provide for our own citizens, so what makes you think we can cater for others, most of which have little to offer?

More importantly, where to you think we should cut funding from to finance this influx of people, most of which will at the very least require training and education, remembering of cause education is also a mess?

Dear rehctub,

I am not protecting anybody. Calling refugees freeloaders and calling people illegal who have done nothing illegal is language expressive of prejudice. You have used the expression, our own, a number of times. Please tell me who do you see as 'our own'. I am not protecting anybody. I try to call things what they are and find your prejudiced use of language offensive.

Cue is something used in billiards. Queue jumping is the expression. In many cases there is no orderly queue. In many places there is no immigration officer to apply to.

You wrote; "More importantly, where to you think we should cut funding from to finance this influx of people, most of which will at the very least require training and education, remembering of cause education is also a mess?"

I repeat: End subsidies to private school, end tax exemptions to churches and end handouts to corporate interests. I don't agree that education is a mess.

There are approximately 50,000,000 refugees in the world, a vast collection of misery - twice the population of Australia. Australia obviously can't take them all in but has a quota of 20,000 a year. Apparently that little effort bothers you.

I think we have the means to provide for own citizens. The fact is that taxes are too low.

Please tell me who you see as 'our own'.

david f,

The Abbott govt cut the annual quota of 20,000 down to around 12,750.

At the same time, it cut overseas aid by $11.2 billion (all of which should thrill rehctub).

And even though it said it would take an extra 12,000 from Syria when that little boy was drowned and the world took note....as far as I'm aware, we've received under 30 in that intake.

David, 'our own' refers to anyone who was either born here, or had immigrated here legally.

I honestly thought you would be clever enough to have worked that out and hope you are not going to use this first Australians line that seems so popular nowadays.

As for cuts to funding.
Private schools I say no. I say this because many of the parents that send their kids to these schools pay their fair share of taxes, and their kids are worth just as much as any other kid. By cutting funding, you are not so much effecting the parents as you are the kids and they don't deserve that cut to their education.

Churches, yes in some cases, but not all.

Like any not for profit organisation, they should be taxed as soon as it is established that they are operating a business, which would then also see the funding gone.

The problem with the likes of churches is that once they invest outside their four walls, they become a competitor in the open market, one with a huge advantage to all others and therefore are running a business.

As for what I call illegals, I will refer to them as unlawful arrivals just for your benefit. However, in a country like Australia, having a dire situation with our water, (your words again) where do you propose the water is going to come from to care for these arrivals.

We know that the main contributor to their own wows is their uncontrolled breeding, as they breed like rabbits in poor conditions, so how do you think they will breed here knowing the tax payer will pic up the tab.

It's a very simple question to your problem, not mine, where is the water going to come from David.

Poirot, I emailed that guy, no response as yet. Not hopeful either but let's see.

We have established that $40 billion of labors debt went to the GFC, so where did the rest go.

Would I be right in suggesting you only look at one side of the ledger Poirot.

Dear rehctub,

You wrote: I honestly thought you would be clever enough to have worked that out and hope you are not going to use this first Australians line that seems so popular nowadays.

It is not a question of ‘clever’. You use words differently from the way I do. I was not going to assume you meant something that you didn’t when you used the words, ‘our own’.

I consider every person on earth my own as I am connected to all of them. I quoted John Donne’s poem to show how I feel on that point. I have nine descendants. None of them are Australian citizens. Are they not my own?

I get into these discussions on olo because I enjoy them. I no longer am enjoying this discussion.

Best wishes.

rehctub,

I doubt if you'll hear from Stephen at the moment - he's one of Australia's top economists...and there's an election happening.

Here's his blog.

http://thekouk.com/

You won't agree with most of it.

...but then, he's an economist and you're a butcher.

P,

SK is one of many top economists in the country. He is also very left whinge, and has been caught out cherry picking information to prove a left whinge point.

No wonder Krudd and Juliar used him to help Kouk the books.

SM,

Still...rehctub seems to complain when I supply figures straight from Morrison.

I once tweeted them attributing them to Koukoulas - who then tweeted me he couldn't take attribution because they were actually Morrison's figures.

The butcher doesn't like those figures.

Poirot, Saul Eslake is also one of our top economists, and when I email him, which I have several times about the Negative gearing, he replies. Of cause he and I hold deferent views on that, but at least he replies. As for your guy, surely a simple 'out of office reply' would be better than no reply at all, especially if he is tied up with the election.

So back to figures. Labor stated with $20 billion in the bank and ZERO DEBT, meaning no interest payments and, they had to care for TWO illegals in detention.

So, we know the GFC cost them $40 billion, so that accounts for $20 of the billions they borrowed, but what did they do with the rest?

Remember, they started with $20 billion and no debt, plus two illegals. They finished with hundreds of billions of debt, and left TWO THOUSAND in detention for Abbott to ONE, care for, TWO, deal with and THREE, stop the boats, which he did.

So to summarise, Abbott paid the interest on Labors debt, he paid to care for, deal with, and stop new arrivals which cost $? billions.

So, you can either come clean with the real figures, or you can make a statement like David F, back yourself into a corner, then take your bat and ball and run.

The choice is yours.

rehctub,

All your silly post does is confirm for me the reason you chose to be a butcher and not an economist.

It's not a matter of backing oneself into a corner or taking one's bat and ball and running - it's about how much drivel does one endure before deciding to end the conversation.

You do like to trumpet your ignorance far and wide on this forum, all the while taking absolutely no notice of argument or facts counter to your own constructions.

After a while, talking to you is a bit like hitting yourself on the head with a hammer....

I feels so good when you stop.

Poirot, you win, I will do the research myself. We will get to the bottom of this somehow.

While at no point have I said you are wrong, I will certainly admit I am wrong if proven to be, so lets see shall we.

Poirot, just an update. I have emailed Saul Eslake and he has provided me with the link and offered to walk me though it if needs be, so lets see how I go.

rehctub,

Good on him...best of luck!

either way Poirot I don't trust either of them to take us on the right path to recovery, but hey, what choices do we really have.