Abbott/Liberal Govt Watch

[Sky Pilot]

And further more, if its okay for you leftie socialists to bag media people like Bolt, how on earth can you cut any slack and give any credibility to Kerry O'Brien? I wouldn't be surprised to learn he spends his holidays in some dodgy Gulag on a lake in Russia and has a condo in China. He drives a red car, wears red underpants, has red hair, goes red in the face when someone with an intellect greater than a throat lozenge challenges him and he was probably the first Australian to download the Thoughts of Mayo on his Kindle (which has a red cover)

[Sky Pilot]

Mayo was a typo. Mao will do so save your acidity

[Psyber]

I've actually got a copy of the works of Chairman Mao on my bookshelves next to the complete Karl Marx, and I've read both.
That may surprise a few here..

[Gozu]

I've actually got a copy of the works of Chairman Mao on my bookshelves next to the complete Karl Marx, and I've read both.
That may surprise a few here..

Comrade Psyber, you might be interested in this piece in the SMH:

Labor's anger towards the Greens reflects the fear that the party is cannibalising its vote on the left, while the Coalition fears the Greens' progressive populist agenda will hurt its corporate constituency.

The Greens may be the most left-wing party in Parliament but that is only because the other parties - but not the public - have veered so sharply to the right.

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/ ... z1SKA6n914

[Psyber]

Comrade Psyber, you might be interested in this piece in the SMH:
Labor's anger towards the Greens reflects the fear that the party is cannibalising its vote on the left, while the Coalition fears the Greens' progressive populist agenda will hurt its corporate constituency.

The Greens may be the most left-wing party in Parliament but that is only because the other parties - but not the public - have veered so sharply to the right.

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/ ... z1SKA6n914

Yes, I don't have a problem with most of the Greens policies as listed there.
The only one I'd argue with is that, rather than a levy on bank profits or mining profits, I'd like to see legislation that limited the massive pay outs to executives and how much foreign ownership is permitted.

I have a personal bias here - I don't think enough profit gets to us shareholders, who depend on it to save us from becoming Centrelink clients.
It seems ludicrous that my cash in ordinary savings accounts is earning me a better percentage return than my share portfolio.

My big argument with the Greens is that they won't even consider modern, safe, low carbon, nuclear power and use old technology failures to justify their line.
Professor Mike Young, of the Uni of Adelaide's Environment Institute, mentioned at his talk I attended recently that Fukushima was also out of date and should have been shut down a few years ago but wasn't, with government approval, to save money.]

[Bat Pad]

In my opinion there is no way to justify taxing anyone 50% of their income. I don't care how high it is.

And right or left wing is relative. To say both parties have lurched to the right is a bit of an exaggeration. Both are now skewed slightly to the right in Australian political terms, but really they are both centrist. But both would be considered Left Wing in North America, Right Wing in areas like the Mediterranean or Scandinavia.

[Psyber]

In my opinion there is no way to justify taxing anyone 50% of their income. I don't care how high it is.

And right or left wing is relative. To say both parties have lurched to the right is a bit of an exaggeration. Both are now skewed slightly to the right in Australian political terms, but really they are both centrist. But both would be considered Left Wing in North America, Right Wing in areas like the Mediterranean or Scandinavia.

You are probably right there.
But I see them both as a little right for my taste, and only joined a political party at all in the mid-90s because of the lurch right over the previous several years.

I chose the Liberal Party for two reasons:
1. The abusive and authoritarian Paul Keating had put me off the ALP.
2. I thought the Libs were at least a bit more democratic and would let dissidents have a say.

The latter assumption seems to have been proved true as I have been elected to office within my branch of the party despite my known and unfashionable "wet" views.
[As I've said elsewhere, at my lunches with old school friends who are ALP members I find myself right of them on some issues and left on others.]

[Q.]

Centrist my arse.

[Bat Pad]

Centrist my arse.

Do go on

[Q.]

Centrist my arse.

Do go on

How many examples do you want? Opposing gay marriage would be a start...

[Bat Pad]

Centrist my arse.

Do go on

How many examples do you want? Opposing gay marriage would be a start...

But they do allow gay couples all the financial and ' social' rights as a heterosexual couple.

That is both parties' policy.

So the liberal side of the issue is to allow gay marriage
The conservative is to deny homosexual couple any rights that come with a defacto relationship

They both follow the middle ground, both more skewed to the left


They both have taken the middle ground

[Q.]

It's not an economic matter. It's like saying there's a middle ground for allowing women not to vote. Opposing gay marriage is a repressive policy.

[Bat Pad]

It's not an economic matter. It's like saying there's a middle ground for allowing women not to vote. Opposing gay marriage is a repressive policy.

The oppressive policy is that goverment has any say in Marriage what so ever, regardless of who it's between, provided it is consenting.

If you're going to take singular points of policy across a much broader issue then you're not going to find middle ground anywhere.

But on the broad issue of how homosexuals are treated by government policy in general, both parties are liberal on all issues but one. For you to claim that makes them conservative (I refuse to use the terms right or left wing, they have no place in the discussion of Gay Marriage) then surely you would agree that if they both decide to allow gay marriage yet remove every other equality granted beforehand then they would both still be able to then be considered Liberal.

[Q.]

Yep, a bad example, as I don't see a middle ground. IMO opinion financial equality is a central point, but idealogically irrelevant.

[Q.]

Perhaps illicit drug policy is a better example.

[Bat Pad]

Perhaps illicit drug policy is a better example.

That's an interesting one.

I am not up with all the facts, but I think both parties support heroin injecting rooms.

I think neither believes in jail time or criminal records for possesion, only distribution.

Do we have a Federal Law regarding illicit drugs or are they all state laws? As I do know it differs state to state.

[Q.]

Federal and State laws apply.

AFAIK supervised injecting rooms come under State policy.

Nevertheless, both major Federal parties have a zero-tolerance philosophy.


I actually think you and I could discuss ad nauseum the leanings of party policies and ideologies and get nowhere. Maybe we are best served waiting until a specific discussion arises as we don't want to hijack a thread about that delightful Abbott character.

[Bat Pad]

Federal and State laws apply.

AFAIK supervised injecting rooms come under State policy.

Nevertheless, both major Federal parties have a zero-tolerance philosophy.


I actually think you and I could discuss ad nauseum the leanings of party policies and ideologies and get nowhere. Maybe we are best served waiting until a specific discussion arises as we don't want to hijack a thread about that delightful Abbott character.

Fair enough

[Sky Pilot]

Federal and State laws apply.

AFAIK supervised injecting rooms come under State policy.

Nevertheless, both major Federal parties have a zero-tolerance philosophy.


I actually think you and I could discuss ad nauseum the leanings of party policies and ideologies and get nowhere. Maybe we are best served waiting until a specific discussion arises as we don't want to hijack a thread about that delightful Abbott character.

Fair enough

We agree on something quiche

[Psyber]

Centrist my arse.

The two major parties are fairly evenly balanced most of the time and elections are usually determined by relatively few swinging voters in the middle.
Also both are pitching their sales pitch at that central group that does change their vote from time to time - that must make them "centrist" in Australia.
It would be hardly fair to set up, say, Sweden as the "centrist" standard, and declare both our major parties to be "far right" on that basis..

But, yes, farewell it, and let us watch Tony Abbott, who seems to be in the ascendant now whether any of us like it or not.
[Though a lot could change between now and the election...]