withoutaface
Premium Member
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2004
- Messages
- 15,098
- Gender
- Male
- HSC
- 2004
Next galaxy will be released on the 19th or thereabouts, supposing they're still doing it fortnightly.
In the end though, the spending commitments won't really be all that different from each other will they? They'll both still number up in the 30+ billions (if you count tax cuts as 'spending' lol).Triangulum said:Incidentally, Peter Hartcher makes the good point in today's herald that it was a bit of a strategic error for the liberals to schedule their launch before the ALP. It lets the ALP make sure its spending commitments are less than the government and then say how economically irresponsible the government is.
Basically yes. But it means that the ALP can be slightly more moderate and accuse the government of a spending spree, which is exactly the line that the government needs to be running against Labor. I can't imagine why they didn't wait until Labor announced its date to schedule theirs.volition said:In the end though, the spending commitments won't really be all that different from each other will they? They'll both still number up in the 30+ billions (if you count tax cuts as 'spending' lol).
More or less the Labor plan, with a trust-fund element. Plus, the government paying into the accounts! Yay, middle-class welfare!Mr Howard has promised that the Coalition will introduce "home saving accounts" for all Australians saving money for a deposit on their first home. Up to $1000 a year would be tax deductible while all interest would be tax-free.
The plan would allow parents and grandparents to create trust funds for their children that could be used for a deposit after they turned 18.
Mr Howard has said the Commonwealth would consider plunging money into those accounts from Budget surpluses if "economic conditions prevail".
Is he supporting Labor's increase in the rebate percentage? If not, then this isn't really that big a change.Mr Howard has said a re-elected Coalition government would pay the childcare rebate in advance rather than through the tax system.
The rebate would be given directly to childcare providers in a bid to reduce the fees parents must pay.
A cheaper version of the Labor plan. Plus, public subsidisation of private school fees! Just what the underfunded public school system needs.Mr Howard has also announced a plan to offer tax rebates for education expenses, including on school fees.
Parents would be paid up to $400 annually for each child in pre-school or primary school. Up to $800 would be paid for each child in secondary school.
"I know that for many parents this is the most important investment of all, but of course they face many competing pressures on the family budget," he has said.
The rebates would be available to all Australians, not just to those on Family Tax Benefit A, as it would be under Labor's "education revolution". "All Australian families will benefit from the full value of the rebate irrespective of their income," he has said.
jb_nc said:Howard is porkbarrelling the middle-class welfare...
Peter Costello also had something to say about ‘reds under the beds,’ which I didn’t quite catch, but I think he was warning Australians of the danger of obscure Victorian factional groups in the early 1980s. I’m scared!
Lie about Labor policy. Plus, misuse of semicolon. Hate.THERE WILL BE NO CHECKS AND BALANCES. IT WILL BE THE MOST POWER, IN THE HANDS OF ONE POLITICAL PARTY, EVER.
THAT MEANS:
-The Liberals won't be there to stop unions going into small business and dictating economic policy; costing jobs.
...because there would be if there were liberal state governments? What the hell? Anyway, I love the way that they're dog-whistling on immigration. The Sudanese gangs are coming!-There will be nothing to stop a softening of our immigration laws.
God, I can't wait for these people to go away. Meanwhile, today we also received a nice positive pamphlet from Bob Debus talking about his track record and Labor's policy, rather than sledging his opponents with vague, threatening accusations. The contrast is very stark.blah blah blah blah unions blah blah blah blah debt blah blah blah blah interest rates blah blah blah blah 'anti-business', whatever the hell that's meant to mean blah blah blah blah $1.1 trillion economy blah blah blah blah unions want to rape your children blah blah blah blah.
http://www.smh.com.au/news/opinion/...poorest-workers/2007/11/12/1194766584976.htmlatreus said:did anyone read keating's opinion piece in smh today? he should have a regular column.
I'm not quite sure who to believe. On the one hand, Dani Ecuyer is clearly a massive publicity whore, as the 'climate hunks' strategy demonstrates, but on the other hand Caroline Overington and the rest of the Australian's political team are so hopelessly and comically biased that it wouldn't surprise me if she'd done exactly what Ecuyer is accusing her of.An independent candidate in Wentworth claims a senior journalist with The Australian newspaper lobbied her to direct her preferences to the Environment Minister Malcolm Turnbull.
Danielle Ecuyer says The Australian newspaper's Caroline Overington offered her front page coverage if she gave her preferences to the Liberal Party.
Ms Ecuyer, a former partner of the Labor candidate, George Newhouse, is running on an anti-pulp mill ticket.
She has not yet revealed who she will preference but says she was shocked to be lobbied by a senior journalist from The Australian.
"I received an email on October 26 from Caroline Overington at The Australian, asking me how my preferences were going, and I responded that, at this point in time, I was not going to give up my preferences. I hadn't decided. It was too early," she said.
"And her response was, 'Too early my girl? You've got four weeks. Please preference Malcolm'."
Ms Overington denies she was trying to influence preferences and says the email is a running joke between her and Ms Ecuyer.
And by column you mean long and painful death.did anyone read keating's opinion piece in smh today? he should have a regular column.
It quite often slips his mind that he was shit and should stfu, too. Nobody wants political advice from Paul Keating...It's like, I don't know, taking advice on Nuclear Phyics from a cashew. It's talking to you but you know it shouldn't be.Little does he remember, that he was destroyed in a massive swing in '96.
Peter Costello would not become prime minister for at least 18 months should the Coalition win this month's election, John Howard says.
In his clearest indication yet of when he intends to hand over to his Liberal deputy, Mr Howard said it would not be for at least 18 months or two years.
Mr Howard has previously promised to retire as Prime Minister "well into" his next term if he is re-elected on November 24, but has refused to say exactly when.
"Peter Costello, if we win, will not become the prime minister until well into the next term, and that would be a matter for him and the party to decide in the tradition of the Liberal Party," Mr Howard told ABC Radio in Adelaide today.
"It would be a choice that could be made by the new deputy leader, but that's two years on at least - or 18 months, two years on."
Mr Howard has previously said that he wants to stay on as Prime Minister to steer through a referendum on formally recognising indigenous Australians in the constitution, which he has pledged to hold within 18 months of the election.
I don't know that having the moronic Australian electorate dislike him will vindicate him for being an idiot.If anything the fact that the moronic Australian electorate dislikes him adds to his credibility.