Labor vs Liberals. whats the big differences? (1 Viewer)

[T_M_K]

The difference is Labor will screw it up like they always do. We really cannot afford another Labor government, especially our economy

.

That was great. I suppose you're swallowing the same brain dead crap that comes out of costello's mouth oh-so frequently.

I notice you didnt bother to explain why the labor would run the economy into the ground. The usual right-wing garbage of 'spending beyond our means', 'pressure on interest rates', is quite frankly boring and irrelevent to australian politics.

I wonder if you noticed that rudd's almost as conservative as howard, which means there would be no drastic change in economic policy and or economic performance.

Whats you've just said is a boring sales pitch developed by the right-wing nuts of Austalia. A 7 yr old watching a howard advertisement on tv could have told me as much

 

[Iron]

Hahahahahahahahahahaha that is the biggest fucking wank I've ever seen/read anywhere/ever.

Sure there’s a lot to be disillusioned with, but apathy helps no one.

I think this thread is interesting because so many people don’t identify with either party at all. Traditionally, it has been more than policy. It's about your own identity and your personal construction of the world. It's about farewelling innocent childhood and committing yourself to a belief system - a system which should change to suit the times, and which you can be a force in changing. If you resign yourself to merely dismissing political parties, you end up with the production-line, soulless leadership you deserve. This cult of satire is bullshit - you shield your own beliefs, if any, by mocking those with the balls to stand for theirs.

 

[Iron]

They were pretty words; words which aimed to make men's heart's soar like the graceful yellow feathered black cockatoo. They were not the petty words of a boy who illustrated the point on apathy, while grovelling to gain the favour of a person greater than himself - even by using an identical opening.

 

[aussiechica7]

http://www.familyfirst.org.au/familyfirst.php

look at the policies. they're conservative socialists basically.

 

[Sparcod]

More like social conservatives.

 

[Triangulum]

Don't EVER vote for Labor

You run the risk of the candidate you THOUGHT would represent you, being replaced completely UNDEMOCRATICALLY with some UNION HACK no one has EVER voted for

DON'T RISK LABOR IN YOUR SEAT

A: Preselection is run by the parties. There's no requirement for it to be 'democratic'. The parties can draw lots and let the Holy Ghost decide who's going to be the candidate if they so wish.
B: Preselection being handled by head office is not really much less desirable than preselection being handled by no more than a couple of hundred jaded ALP members who call each other 'comrade' and have never risen above the rank of branch secretary. In some senses, it's better, because head office will be looking for someone who will be an asset in parliament and who is electable, rather than the candidate being decided via some petty local factional rivalry or branch-stacking.
C: No one is being 'replaced undemocratically' in a seat. Greg Combet et al will still have to be elected by the voters of whatever seat they've been preselected for. The original MP can still run as an independent. The choice of who will be MP remains that of the voters.
D: The vast majority of Australians couldn't care less which representative of a party is their MP. Most would not be able to tell you anything about their local MP beyond their party affiliation and their party's beliefs.

 

[Captain Gh3y]

Yeah tell me something I don't know

But you're not the one who just had Combet dumped in your seat with something like a 100% chance of being elected

 

[Triangulum]

Yeah tell me something I don't know

But you're not the one who just had Combet dumped in your seat with something like a 100% chance of being elected

Touche. But I have no problems with Greg Combet. Nor do I need to worry anyway, because my ALP candidate is Bob Debus, who is intelligent and can do righteous anger pretty effectively.

Incidentally, is the local ALP branch making a fuss about Combet like Kingsford-Smith ineffectually did about Garrett? I haven't been following the story.

 

[Nebuchanezzar]

Yeah tell me something I don't know

But you're not the one who just had Combet dumped in your seat with something like a 100% chance of being elected

and?

 

[jb_nc]

no body likes a parachute candidate

 

[Lorie]

Yeah tell me something I don't know

But you're not the one who just had Combet dumped in your seat with something like a 100% chance of being elected

*cough* Malcolm Turnbull

 

[Lorie]

It would be different if Combet lived in the seat like Turnbull did, He also competed against the sitting member who stood as an independent.

Yeah and Peter King was banned from the liberal party for 10 years for it.

 

[jb_nc]

sorry about the bias. My fault
one last thing, education. seeing as this is a website that targets high school students it is very relevant. In the old labor days, Uni was freeee! completely free. now prices are hiking, as are UAI scores, as universities want more full fee-paying students. Many aren't getting into the courses they want, or into uni at all as places are being taken by fee payers. Services are degrading, and so is the standard of educaiton. My theory - J.H. don't want nobody being educated proper, cause if they were they would realise what a dumb ignorant ass he is, and wouldn't vote for him. So, if you wnat a good, cheap education - vote labor! or better yet - vote greens!

The Vice-Chancellors Committee said there are enough HECS places. There are less and less people missing out on university places. I'm sorry you think every Tom, Dick and Harry should go to university because that's plain wrong. You don't even know how HECS/DFEE places work.

Only fools vote Greens; you'd get a "free" education but never a job because of the crippling effects of their terrible policies on the economy. You'd probably have to power your home with a push-bike, too. Not to mention it would be A-OK to shoot heroin in the street, thanks Bob Brown!

Um, I'd do the rest of your post but you're a fucking idiot, I'm really sorry.

Nutfuck alert.

Lolin' on line.

 

[Xayma]

I remember in NUS propaganda the whingers were saying how public education costs in Australia is the second highest in the world; I assume they mean HECS, but doesn't US and the England both have higher costs? I'm rather certain they do... or are they telling the truth?

Either way, I don't know what the fuck they are complaning about <$8 000 for all degrees a year is fucking good. Just crybaby faggots can't get YA.

The UK public universities can now charge top-up fees of up to £3000 a year, as of last year. Which corresponds to about AU$7200 which is between Bands 2 and 3. If you take the maximum we pay more. An important thing to note is that this just began last intake of the UK (ie mid last year) so the NUS information might have been older then that.

The US is a more difficult case. The US has a large number of private universities but also a large number of grants. Also the public universities are all state based, and charge differential state resident, nonstate resident amounts. For example the pricing of UCLA for instate residents is (and this is all mandatory fees including student association fees and mandatory health insurance) US$2381.41 for Spring 2007 which corresponds to AU$2900 which is almost a thousand dollars less than the HECS cost for the lowest band in Australia. For non residents (and you can typically get residency after a year is closer to AU$10000 which is above even the top band of HECS) Then again you can go to 40k US for some of the private universities however a LOT of students will not pay anywhere near that due to grants and other factors.