by fulltimestudent 197 Replies latest social current
fulltimestudent:
Trouble is, fellow aussies - is the ALP really that much better [than the LNP].
I'd say Labor is definitely better. But not much better. I really don't want another Campbell Newman running the country though.
I haven't finished reviewing all the minor parties yet.
All political parties make promises they cant/wont keep , thats a given. However PM kevin rudd wins hands down with his promises/policies that even stretch into decades beyond this election.He almost does as many flip flops on policy as the WatchTower does ( notice I said almost )
Anybody who still beleives anything that comes out of his mouth....well ...words just fail me.
smiddy
I've now compared all the parties, including each party's preferences of all the other parties. So I have a very good idea of how I'll be voting.
It's all very detailed, and not very interesting.
Another problem with the Australian political scene is the ignorance of electors. Economics is a complex study and few people in the community can understand the issues. Yet economic statements by political parties requires a great deal of knowledge to critique them.
The problem is made worse by practises such as the Liberal-National parties refusal to release their proposed policy costings until its too late to analyse them. Why would they do that, if all the promises have been properly costed.
My guess is that it is impossible for them to do what they say they will do, that is, to reduce taxes, and at the same time increase benefits to the general community. So some promises will be broken and the excuse will be the same old excuse - the previous government was deceitful and had not accurately reported the true financial. Well that may be so, but in the end the financial reporting of the nation is supposedly in the hands of the impartial and independent Treasury, Finance Dept and Reserve Bank. They should be required to publish annual reports that are independent of the government. Butg I guess that is never going to happen, because western governments are not truly democratic and have little interest in reporting the truth to their theoretical masters (the people).
IF the topic matters to anyone (and, it should to Australians) read the Fairfax's Ross Gittin' opinion on Abbot' financial promises in todays Fairfax newspapers.
See: http://www.smh.com.au/business/why-taxes-would-rise-under-abbott-20130901-2sytp.html
So Tony Abbot's vote buying will be paid for in the end, by? Who else but the taxpayer. So these govt. programs are just a way of distributing income away from the thrifty and sensible to the wasteful, profligate and stupid.
Of course, the plain facts apply to the Labour side - will they also increase taxes? You bet, if buying votes is important to them!
BTW: I love Gittins' introductory sentence:
"Election campaigns have become works of fantasy where, to enter the spirit of things, you have to suspend disbelief. "
Yup! Political party promises are not different to the promises of the Governing Body (the JW one, or the Catholic one, or any) when they promise that if you work hard for them, then you will have a wonderful reward in the future.
BULLSH*T
fulltimestudent:
My guess is that it is impossible for them to do what they say they will do, that is, to reduce taxes, and at the same time increase benefits to the general community. So some promises will be broken and the excuse will be the same old excuse - the previous government was deceitful and had not accurately reported the true financial.
Abbott claims that his paid parental leave scheme (which pays more to people who are already wealthy) would be paid for by a 1.5% "levy" (i.e. tax) on big companies. But he also claims he's reducing company tax by 1.5%. So the levy will make less than the existing tax because it's only on a subset of companies.
I just hope there aren't enough people who fall for Abbott's deception.
Krudd's put-down of a Pentecostal pastor on the topic of gay marriage:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v89vo3AHUkw
On the topic of the 'naturalness of slavery' it was a line of thought in antiquity. Aristotle, in his The Politics, argues that slaves were a sort of living piece of property and a tool.
And goes on in section I v to consider whether slavery is contrary to nature and concludes that some humans are slaves by nature. It is quite likely that this attitude colored the views of early Christians also - hence Paul's words.
Rudd should have added that not everyone in Australia is Christian, and marriage isn't restricted to Christians, and secular laws about marriage should not be restricted by religious definitions.
While Rudd's answering the question, the pastor seems to be hoping that staring at Rudd so intently will make him burst into flames.
Probably the only direct honest thing KR has ever said.
FullTime
And goes on in section I v to consider whether slavery is contrary to nature and concludes that some humans are slaves by nature . It is quite likely that this attitude colored the views of early Christians also - hence Paul's words.
mP:
Of course Paul was influenced by these thoughts. It just goes to show he was a man of those times. Theres no univeral wisom or ideas from a superior kind god. Paul was a fake and a fraud and a liar.
mP:
Probably the only direct honest thing KR has ever said.
I guess that makes him one up on Abbott.
