2007 Federal Election - Coalition or Labor/Howard or Rudd? (1 Viewer)

[withoutaface]

Aus debates are shit. Iemma versus Debnam was a snorefest. They don't fire into each other and the moderator ruins the thing.

The only "interesting" debate I can remember watching was on the West Wing with Alan Alda, haha.

The Iemma/Debbers debate was shit because the Premier insisted it be seated and put a whole heap of other provisos on it.

EDIT: Traditionally debates are bad for incumbents because they give the opposition a platform they wouldn't normally get through mainstream media, though this time it seems this is less of a factor because of the unusual amount of coverage Rudd is getting compared to previous opposition leaders.

 

[Triangulum]

The Iemma/Debbers debate was shit because the Premier insisted it be seated and put a whole heap of other provisos on it.

+ it was hosted by Quentin "I'm pretty awesome. Look at me!" Dempster.

 

[Rafy]

Galaxy poll shows Rudd in trouble at home

Labor would win only 2 seats in QLD.

 

[Iron]

Ouch! That's a bit depressing this far out.
But I feel that Labor would have to make a huge positive mistake (which the Coalition would leap on) to lose. Rudd, like Howard, is too careful for this to happen. Like Keating, the Coalition will become more desporate to pry Rudd apart, and look pathetic, spent, and defeated in the process. I predict a lot of attrition, which will see Rudd as default winner.

 

[bazookajoe]

That's because politicians are shit.

There we go

 

[Triangulum]

Labor's first ad has arrived: New Leadership: Rudd & Labor's positive plan for Australia. Nothing much new in there, just a list of the key policy propositions (education revolution, fair workplace, happy families, sunny beaches, ending blame game - although I was happy that universities got a brief mention, which is more than we've seen from either party all year). No new attack ads yet.

 

[Rafy]

Libs announce five-year tax cut plan

"Treasurer Peter Costello has announced five years of progressive reductions of income tax that will see the current tax system eventually reduced to four tax brackets -- 15, 30, 35 and 40 cents in the dollar.

The plan would see the tax-free threshold raised to $14,000 next year, while the lowest tax rate would kick in on earnings over $34,000.

In following years, the top tax rates would be lowered while the tax-free threshold would be lifted again.

Mr Costello has said the goal of the restructure was to arrive at a tax-free threshold of $20,000 and for there to be only four marginal tax rates, with the top rate set at 40 cents in the dollar.

The changes, to be introduced gradually, will see the tax threshholds for lower income earners increased and the reduction of the percentage of tax paid in the top two tax categories -- currently 40 and 45 percent.



The changes, to be introduced gradually, will see the tax threshholds for lower income earners increased and the reduction of the percentage of tax paid in the top two tax categories -- currently 40 and 45 percent."

 

[romancandle]

If labor gets into power, Australia is destined for the gurdler. Almost every, single labor government has screwed over Australia. Look at Hawke, Keating, the gough years.. all sent us back into the past and loosened our stance towards the top of the international ladder.

The Howard government, a liberal government, has been able to keep unemployment at a 30 year low, reverse the huge debt created by previous governments, almost 90% of which was created by labor dominated governments and has been able to lower taxes, increase our GDP and overall create a stronger and stablelised economy.

Just think about the labor party... this is a party that voted Mark Latham into power, put Julia Gillard in charge of something and has a member who defended the lives of those terrorists who took away so many innoncent Aussie lives in Bali.

If you need a case study.. take a look at New South Wales! Bob Carr was a rat jumping from a sinking ship. I couldnt beleive it when Iemma got back in. NSW is literally being completey screwed by an incompetent party which has a labor orientation. Roads, infrastructure, the health system are all totally screwed because of this stupidity. Just imagine.. all this put on a national scale

Above everything else... I cant possibly fathom having PM of Australia who's first name is KEVIN!

 

[Triangulum]

If labor gets into power, Australia is destined for the gurdler. Almost every, single labor government has screwed over Australia. Look at Hawke, Keating, the gough years.. all sent us back into the past and loosened our stance towards the top of the international ladder.

The Howard government, a liberal government, has been able to keep unemployment at a 30 year low, reverse the huge debt created by previous governments, almost 90% of which was created by labor dominated governments and has been able to lower taxes, increase our GDP and overall create a stronger and stablelised economy.

Just think about the labor party... this is a party that voted Mark Latham into power, put Julia Gillard in charge of something and has a member who defended the lives of those terrorists who took away so many innoncent Aussie lives in Bali.

If you need a case study.. take a look at New South Wales! Bob Carr was a rat jumping from a sinking ship. I couldnt beleive it when Iemma got back in. NSW is literally being completey screwed by an incompetent party which has a labor orientation. Roads, infrastructure, the health system are all totally screwed because of this stupidity. Just imagine.. all this put on a national scale

Above everything else... I cant possibly fathom having PM of Australia who's first name is KEVIN!

Well, thanks for that intelligent and well-considered post. What with the extensive deregulation and opening of the Australian economy conducted by the Hawke/Keating government, which commenced the sustained growth period we're currently enjoying, it's obvious that Labor has never done anything for this country.

and loosened our stance towards the top of the international ladder.

What?

 

[jimmayyy]

Coalition faces annihilation: poll

Monday Oct 15 05:55 AEST


The latest Newspoll shows the Coalition is facing annihilation in the federal election on November 24, with Labor sitting on 56 per cent of the vote, compared to 44 for the Coalition, on a two-party preferred basis.

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=305495

theres been some interesting swings though;

However, the poll appears to show a negative reaction to Labor leader Kevin Rudd after Labor's confusion over the death penalty for the Bali bombers.

His personal approval rating has dropped two points to 60 per cent since the last poll two weeks ago, and is down five percentage points since mid-September.

By comparison, Prime Minister John Howard has received a positive reaction to his promise of constitutional recognition for indigenous Australians.
Mr Howard's personal approval rating has lifted to a 12 month high of 47 per cent.

in the overall personal preference, both have gone up slightly and theres still something like 10-11% (according to these stats) undecided (or apathetic), enough to throw howard in front come election day even if these trend continues.

also should be noted that 75% of the results were compiled before the election announcement.

 

[Iron]

Tax-cuts. Surprising.
The Federation is bordering on farce. The Cth has more money than it can spend, while the States are forced into debt to build the vital infrastructure. The Coalition knows that if it can starve the States of grants, it can keep claiming that Labor's no good with the money (while the Coalition are god-genius').
But sure, see what happens when you ask people to choose between plans for the future and the hip-pocket. This is filthy, blatant, short-term bribery

 

[volition]

With all this talk of how labor was the group who deregulated certain aspects of the country, as far I'm concerned I don't really see how its relevant unless there are actually plans to deregulate more stuff in the future.

All I've seen so far are plans for increasing government involvement/force in our lives. (which isn't a good thing)

edit: rephrase
As for talk of "tax cuts as bribery"... I think its sad that people don't seem to realise that they're just getting to keep more of what was actually their money in the first place.

It's a bit rich to think that democracy could ever function as a true indicator of what people actually think is best, when there will always be options that will effectively 'pay' them more than others.

Would you consider it a 'bribe' that politician X wants to create a govt net filter service? How about a farm subsidy? It no longer matters that the person might think its a good/bad policy, they'll just vote for it to get the extra money. How could that ever be held to be a representation of what the majority wills? (this is not to say that whatever the majority wills, makes it right)

 

[cheesman]

if i could, id vote for howard over kevin DUDD lol haha

 

[Triangulum]

if i could, id vote for howard over kevin DUDD lol haha

lololololololol GENIUS.

While I know very little about economics, isn't a $39b+ (over a few years) program of tax cuts going to be inflationary? That said, I'm generally in favour of tax reduction. Then again, there are areas where the government should be spending more, so I'll be interested to see Labor's tax policy once it turns up. (I suspect that part of the strategy of announcing significant tax cuts is to force Labor into trying to substantially match it, which then limits the ALP's ability to make spending promises. This limits the Coalition as well, but spending promises always look more professional coming from a government than from an opposition.)

 

[volition]

While I know very little about economics, isn't a $39b+ (over a few years) program of tax cuts going to be inflationary?

Well I don't really think it would be that inflationary. What causes inflation is the RBA/govt increasing the money supply, not really anything else. It's kinda silly to think that the amount of consumption in an economy somehow means inflation will go up, and its even stupider of our govt agencies to think that they can increase the money supply without necessarily increasing inflation.

in short: consumption is a red herring, if banks and govt didn't just create more money out of nowhere, we wouldn't have inflation.

Anyway, if this was really a problem, the govt could just up the compulsory super contribution (forcing the money to be saved), rather than taking our money away from us "because otherwise it'll create inflation".

 

[jimmayyy]

if i could, id vote for howard over kevin DUDD lol haha

the thing is, my ignorant friend, a vote for the liberals isnt a vote for howard, its a vote for costello.

 

[volition]

the thing is, my ignorant friend, a vote for the liberals isnt a vote for howard, its a vote for costello.

I wonder if Gillard will challenge for Labor party leadership some time down the track, she looks pretty ambitious to me.

I'd still rather Costello to Rudd/Gillard anyway.

 

[absolutlaura]

Does anyone feel slightly nauseated seeing Peter Garrett on dancing with the stars?.... Labor sucked him in and sold him out.

 

[Triangulum]

I see this as a desperate grab for votes rather than a sustainable policy.

At election time? No, couldn't be. I'm appalled by your cynicism.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/10/15/2060274.htm

Senior economist with HSBC, John Edwards, says the tax cuts would put upward pressure on inflation.

"It certainly means interest rates would be higher than they would otherwise be," he said.

"I cannot imagine were it not for an election the Treasurer would be contemplating these tax cuts of this order.

"It means that household consumption is going to be higher than it otherwise would be, residential construction is going to be higher than it otherwise would be.

But Peter Hendy from the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry (ACCI) disagrees.

"The fact is that the Australian economy can always easily afford income tax cuts," he said.
...
Shadow Treasurer Wayne Swan says Labor will not be outlining its tax plan until he has had time to assess the Coalition's tax proposal.

Mr Swan says Labor will make a responsible judgement on tax cuts before the election.

"The only responsible course of action here is to study the detail. We've said we'll put out all our policies well before the election and we'll do that," he said.

"But in terms of what the Government's put forward, we will take our time to study the detail. That's the only responsible and reasonable thing to do."

 

[LCollins]

I look at his topic and all I can see is economics, economics, economics. Whilst it's unarguably a very important issue in any election, am I the only one who seems to think issues of human rights and social equity are important?

Whilst Howard has ultimately been beneficial to Australia in the big picture, isn't a change desirable, isn't his time past?

Over his time in government, he has let David Hicks sit in jail for 5 years without trial. I'm no legal studies student, but isn't it innocent until proven guilty? Over his time in government, poverty has also increased (whilst you can argue what the definition of poverty is in a country like ours, one thing is clear, the benefits of the prosperous times are not being shared by all).

During his 11 years of government, aborigines still have a life expectancy 20 years less than everyone else.

During his time in government he has introduced WorkChoices, which for you die hard economists, means less money for you as a young person in a retail job (or if you just happen to be female, an immigrant struggling a little bit with the english language or if you work in some profession that is not a skills shortage).

Maybe I suggest to people (particularly to Johnny supporters), that for the Senate, you vote for the Democrats - it seems in these times of terrorism we have lost our focus on having the very values we talk about - mateship, a fair go and an egalitarian society.