Australian Politics (1 Viewer)

[Lentern]

I don't understand how the territories work. I thought it was simply two seats up for election at every election, how can 40% get you two seats? On the implications this has for the Greens they need to decide what they want to move onto after they win the balance of power. For the better part of the decade winning the balance of power has been the objective to work towards. I think Brown should not recontest the senate but stand in Tanner's electorate. With a candidate of Brown's stature they can probably win it, maybe enter Andrew Wilkie in Sydney. The next step is really to force a hung parliament and I think the way to do that is line up some candidates in the socialist seats so when the Rudd government becomes older and unpopular they can whack them from the flank.

 

[S.H.O.D.A.N.]

I don't understand how the territories work. I thought it was simply two seats up for election at every election, how can 40% get you two seats?

You are correct. My mistake: the territories put up all their Senate seats (two) for election every single election, rather than half. And the territories use preferential voting instead of proportional representation for the Senate. Odd.

On the implications this has for the Greens they need to decide what they want to move onto after they win the balance of power.

Indeed. It'll be a very interesting election, whenever it comes.

For the better part of the decade winning the balance of power has been the objective to work towards. I think Brown should not recontest the senate but stand in Tanner's electorate. With a candidate of Brown's stature they can probably win it, maybe enter Andrew Wilkie in Sydney.

That would certainly be interesting.

The next step is really to force a hung parliament and I think the way to do that is line up some candidates in the socialist seats so when the Rudd government becomes older and unpopular they can whack them from the flank.

What's a hung parliament?

I'm wary about the Greens aligning themselves with the socialists (because I firmly believe the Greens are at their best as a centrist/centre-left party). There's grudging respect at the moment, but the socialists often get annoyed that the Greens 'steal' socialist votes without actually believing in socialism whatsoever.

 

[Lentern]

You are correct. My mistake: the territories put up all their Senate seats (two) for election every single election, rather than half. And the territories use preferential voting instead of proportional representation for the Senate. Odd.



Indeed. It'll be a very interesting election, whenever it comes.



That would certainly be interesting.



What's a hung parliament?

I'm wary about the Greens aligning themselves with the socialists (because I firmly believe the Greens are at their best as a centrist/centre-left party). There's grudging respect at the moment, but the socialists often get annoyed that the Greens 'steal' socialist votes without actually believing in socialism whatsoever.

A hung parliament is when no one party can form a majority. It's a long way off yet but with the Greens looking like they have secured the balance of power in the senate for a while to come I can't really imagine what meaningful gains they can make unless its towards the hung parliament. Whether they have 8 or 18 senators it will still grant them largely the same amount of power. Control eight or nine seats in the house and in a very close election they could be kingmakers in a hung parliament.

I didn't mean to place the greens in any group I was merely refering to seats with progressive mentality as opposed to the other kind of safe labor seat which is very trade union oriented. Eg Grayndler=progressive seat, Reid=union seat.

 

[S.H.O.D.A.N.]

Ah, I see - a minority government. I suspect they'll get about 2 to 3 Lower House seats next election. Besides a hung parliament, then, the next goal would be to become the official opposition party in the upper house (i.e. beat the Liberals, which is plausible around the 20 seat mark). It wouldn't provide any meaningful change in their Senate power (if you think about it the Greens will be as powerful as the Liberals in the Senate next election), but it'd be a massive psychological boost which often leads to more votes.

Also, consider party size status. More seats = more electoral money. E.g. Because the WA Greens just one the Fremantle by-election, they now classify as a minor party (5 elected members), for example, which means additional party funds and media access.

 

[Graney]

Guys, if both the greens and coalition agree to block something, how many independent senators do you need?

I'm praying the changes to remove the $19'000 test for independence, as a means of accessing youth allowance, will be blocked.

 

[S.H.O.D.A.N.]

Guys, if both the greens and coalition agree to block something, how many independent senators do you need?

I'm praying the changes to remove the $19'000 test for independence, as a means of accessing youth allowance, will be blocked.

If both the Greens and the Coalition are against something, it cannot pass.

If the Coalition is against something, then Labour needs every single other Senator on board - all Greens and Xenophon and Fielding.

 

[Lentern]

If both the Greens and the Coalition are against something, it cannot pass.

If the Coalition is against something, then Labour needs every single other Senator on board - all Greens and Xenophon and Fielding.

What he said and thats unlikely to change anytime in the near future. It will be alot harder for the ALP to ever wield a senate majority than it was for the coalition because of the presence of the Greens on the flank. Aside from the short lived Hanson phase there was never a genuine third party outflanking the coalition on the right.

As for the greens overtaking liberals in senate representation my instinct is to say that it is not gonna happen. I think it is alot more likely the Greens pick up a handful of house seats and the two major parties fail to establish a majority. Despite the woes of Brendan and Malcolm the liberal party will before too long cruise to a landslide victory, narratives will be written about Peter Costello or Joe Hockey or Steve Ciobo or whoever the conquerer is about them having that certain something that made them pm material unlike Brendan, Malcolm, Julie and their funster mates.

Electoral funding is a good point though.

 

[S.H.O.D.A.N.]

More evidence Australia is the most financially sound country in the (Western?) world.

Goldman Sachs predicts Australia's economic output gap (caused by this crisis) will have closed by 2013. Next is the UK and Canada in 2015, then America in 2017, etc. Japan and Spain don't close recover ground lost until 2020! Ouch.

Similarly, Australia is the second country to return to trend for economic growth. The first is, oddly, Japan.

We can, however, do some sums and the final graph shows some work by Goldman Sachs on the possible recovery profile for a number of developed countries. Here Goldman Sachs is looking at the trends in the economies rather than the trend in public finances, but it would follow that the quicker you can get the economy back to trend growth the better chance you have of getting public finances under control.

Australia is in the best position (followed actually by New Zealand, not shown). It went a little later into the cycle (blue blobs show the bottom); it should be back to its trend growth some time next year (red blobs); and by 2013 it will have made up the ground it has lost during the recession (green blobs).

The UK is not in quite as good a position, not returning to trend until the end of next year and not regaining lost ground until 2015. The US is in a worse position still and that of the big Continental nations don't bear thinking about. Japan is perhaps the most interesting, though. It gets back to its trend growth very soon. But it has lost so much output during the recession that it will be 2020 before it has got back to where it ought to be – that is assuming that the next downturn has not struck by then.

Hamish McRae: America's fiscal position is even worse – will it lose its AAA rating? - Hamish McRae, Business Comment - The Independent

Similarly, it's pretty clear that Australia's level of debt is of relative insignificance compared to our economic power and growth.

 

[S.H.O.D.A.N.]

You want to know what's funny? The more money America prints (i.e. raises inflation), the more they lower the value of their debt. Haha sucks to be China.

 

[Rafy]

Question time. Rudd. Finally said 300, billion and debt in the same sentence.

 

[B_B_J]

does anybody think the LDP will ever get a seat? LOL

 

[Lentern]

More evidence Australia is the most financially sound country in the (Western?) world.

Goldman Sachs predicts Australia's economic output gap (caused by this crisis) will have closed by 2013. Next is the UK and Canada in 2015, then America in 2017, etc. Japan and Spain don't close recover ground lost until 2020! Ouch.

Similarly, Australia is the second country to return to trend for economic growth. The first is, oddly, Japan.



Hamish McRae: America's fiscal position is even worse – will it lose its AAA rating? - Hamish McRae, Business Comment - The Independent

Similarly, it's pretty clear that Australia's level of debt is of relative insignificance compared to our economic power and growth.

Relative insignificance is not insignificant, The shadow treasurer correctly pointed out Australia also had the lowest comparative debt prior to collapse of Fanny Mai. With that being said I'm convinced Swan must know his economics because he can't possibly have been chosen for his political skills, he is actually getting worse in parliament. I can't believe it.

 

[withoutaface]

Relative insignificance is not insignificant, The shadow treasurer correctly pointed out Australia also had the lowest comparative debt prior to collapse of Fanny Mai. With that being said I'm convinced Swan must know his economics because he can't possibly have been chosen for his political skills, he is actually getting worse in parliament. I can't believe it.

Swan's a fucking arts major. He was picked because Rudd had to appease the roosters and couldn't have a leftie in the treasury.

 

[Lentern]

Swan's a fucking arts major. He was picked because Rudd had to appease the roosters and couldn't have a leftie in the treasury.

The Roosters are gone, they've lost their authority in the party room. Rudd and his supporters were pivotal to the dominance Beazley and co used to have over the smaller factions. Unlike Latham and Crean who relied almost entirely on the support of Gillard and the lemmings Rudd actually had a substantial number of personal followers, most of which voted for Beazley in every prior ballot. The only faction Kevin really needs to placate is the Ferguson left, doubtless that is why the better known Ferguson, Fitzwhatsits and Julia all have such prominent positions(Julia probably warrants hers but still would not have it in Beazley government.) And even if all you said was true, that he wanted someone close to Beazley as treasurer to ensure they don't try and raise another challenge like they did to Latham and Crean who would you put you rather have spruiking your budgets?

 

[S.H.O.D.A.N.]

The problem with Rudd is he's tone-deaf to the plights of Somalian midget astronauts.

 

[Silver Persian]

The Roosters are gone, they've lost their authority in the party room. Rudd and his supporters were pivotal to the dominance Beazley and co used to have over the smaller factions. Unlike Latham and Crean who relied almost entirely on the support of Gillard and the lemmings Rudd actually had a substantial number of personal followers, most of which voted for Beazley in every prior ballot. The only faction Kevin really needs to placate is the Ferguson left, doubtless that is why the better known Ferguson, Fitzwhatsits and Julia all have such prominent positions(Julia probably warrants hers but still would not have it in Beazley government.) And even if all you said was true, that he wanted someone close to Beazley as treasurer to ensure they don't try and raise another challenge like they did to Latham and Crean who would you put you rather have spruiking your budgets?

 

[blue_chameleon]

Precisely.

 

[S.H.O.D.A.N.]

Holy shit it's a fucking zombie.

 

[Lentern]

Oh I agree don't get me wrong he should have the job but he's not one of the former Beazley crew. I wouldn't even have Smith as my second choice treasurer he is the top rooster. I would rank treasury options Tanner, Mcmullan(why isn't he in cabinet?), Emerson, Smith, Gillard, Smith, Crean, Shortin, Clare, Swan, Bowen, Garret, Plibersek, Fitzgibbon, abolish portfolio, Laurrie Ferguson.

 

[Graney]

Aussie dollar to rise against greenback: strategist


Nearing parity: The Australian dollar is nearing 80 US cents (ABC News: Giulio Saggin, file photo)

The Australian dollar is nearing 80 US cents, and analysts say it is likely to rise through that barrier as traders exit the US dollar.

A currency strategist at the Commonwealth Bank, Joseph Capurso, expects the Australian dollar to reach 84 US cents by the end of the year.

He says the US dollar is falling against almost every other currency in the world.

"Investors are now getting concerned about the large US Government debt, also as the world economy improves, US investors look at other places to park their money and one of those is the Australian market," he said.

Joseph Capurso expects it to trade back above 90 US cents next year.

"We're attractive because we've got a very high commodity exposure, we've got a very solid banking system, and by comparison to other economies we actually look in quite good shape," he said.

The local dollar has hit a seven month high, and was trading at 78.77 US cents at 10:00am (AEST).

brb visa debit.