Long-un strategies for NUS (yet another VSU thread) (2 Viewers)

[walrusbear]

I don't think there is even close to being a majority. As much as you don't like it the numbers at the rally are a good measure.

they're some measure

not enough to claim a majority in favour of VSU

although that's all academic really, it's not like VSU is preventable or anything

 

[walrusbear]

If the unions have so little support that they are that severely reduced then they shouldn't have any power because they would no longer be representing the majority of students.

so does it remain a union in that case?
if it can't perform any of the roles of a union?

 

[iamsickofyear12]

well you can hardly say that occurred
liberal party ran a campaign accusing the labor party of being likely to raise interest rates
many voters would interpret this as the liberal party maintaining current interest rates
i'm not so sure people were aware of unions under attack or if they'd agree that the privatisation of telstra is 'just a matter of time'

To a degree you are right about the interest rates. The government can't guarrantee interest rates not to rise, but I think they were correct in the sense that they would increase more under a labor government.

 

[walrusbear]

To a degree you are right about the interest rates. The government can't guarrantee interest rates not to rise, but I think they were correct in the sense that they would increase more under a labor government.

perhaps, is that really true (anyone studying eco who isn't extremely bias against the labor party??)
it's still the type of deception that undermines the sense of democracy though

 

[Not-That-Bright]

perhaps, is that really true (anyone studying eco who isn't extremely bias against the labor party??)
it's still the type of deception that undermines the sense of democracy though

Well, historically it was worse under labor.
And alot of it can have to do with government policy, however they don't have COMPLETE control.

edit: in my bias analysis.

 

[iamsickofyear12]

so does it remain a union in that case?
if it can't perform any of the roles of a union?

Not really. But 30% is probably enough for the union roles to be continued, although I would disagree with the union saying they are representing 'all students' if its only 30%. They can still perform union roles with a large enough %, they don't need the majority.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

hmmm.. what % of the population voted in the liberals?

 

[iamsickofyear12]

perhaps, is that really true (anyone studying eco who isn't extremely bias against the labor party??)
it's still the type of deception that undermines the sense of democracy though

Its true, although I am bias I didn't just make it up.

 

[Generator]

Its true, although I am bias I didn't just make it up.

Remember that the circumstances that previous governments found themselves working within are quite different to those of today (just as the Coalition and the ALP have changed over time).

 

[iamsickofyear12]

Remember that circumstances that previous governments found themselves working within are quite different to those of today (just as the Coalition and the ALP have changed over time).

I'm not saying it because of previous history of the ALP and interest rates, although that may also be a factor. The amount of spending, the areas of spending and some of the policies involving allocation of resources are the main reasons for saying that interest rates would be higher under labor.

 

[walrusbear]

I'm not saying it because of previous history of the ALP and interest rates, although that may also be a factor. The amount of spending, the areas of spending and some of the policies involving allocation of resources are the main reasons for saying that interest rates would be higher under labor.

perhaps the potential for social reform is worth the slightly higher interest rates?

or are a lot of the economic reforms the liberal party instituted irreversible without disaster?

 

[Generator]

I'm not saying it because of previous history of the ALP and interest rates, although that may also be a factor. The amount of spending, the areas of spending and some of the policies involving allocation of resources are the main reasons for saying that interest rates would be higher under labor.

By and large, the ALP presented socially-responsible policies that should appeal to most people (or all who truly value the ideal of a 'fair go' for all) yet people apparently ignored this given the threat of interest rates at a time of high household debt. To be expected, I guess.

As not-that-bright says, it wasn't just a simple 'interest rates' contest.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

Ya there were alot of factors.

- Religious Right
- Interest rates
- Strong economy
- War Time Leader
- Australia seems to have gotten used to him
- The unions down in taz turning to the libs.
- The handshake between latham and howard that got splattered all around the news.

 

[iamsickofyear12]

By and large, the ALP presented socially-responsible policies that should appeal to most people (or all who truly value the ideal of a 'fair go' for all) yet people apparently ignored this given the threat of interest rates at a time of high household debt. To be expected, I guess.

Well thats exactly what it comes down to. The socially-responsible policies of the ALP sound alright but I don't think sacraficing the economy is acceptable. It's not only about interest rates but I guess for most people thats all they know about the economy.

In my opinion, a better economy is more socially-responsibly as in theory it will make everyone better off in the future and doesn't mean sacraficing now.

 

[Generator]

addymac, sorry about the tangent. I'm sure that someone will get back to the idea of a new form of USU in the near future.

 

[walrusbear]

Well thats exactly what it comes down to. The socially-responsible policies of the ALP sound alright but I don't think sacraficing the economy is acceptable. It's not only about interest rates but I guess for most people thats all they know about the economy.

In my opinion, a better economy is more socially-responsibly as in theory it will make everyone better off in the future and doesn't mean sacraficing now.

so is social reform at odd ends with the economy?
if so that's really uncool

 

[Generator]

Well thats exactly what it comes down to. The socially-responsible policies of the ALP sound alright but I don't think sacraficing the economy is acceptable. It's not only about interest rates but I guess for most people thats all they know about the economy.

In my opinion, a better economy is more socially-responsibly as in theory it will make everyone better off in the future and doesn't mean sacraficing now.

Part of the problem is that the economy was never going to be sacrificed, and I doubt that even the Greens would go to such lengths in order to implement their policies. Sure, there is always the possibility that the economy may not as productive in a Coalition sense (partially achieved through increased casualisation and lower levels of employee representation coinciding with the big business push), but for many people that wouldn't be such a bad thing.

I do know that the process much more complex than I suggest with the above paragraph (and open to interpretation, too).

 

[walrusbear]

May i point out that you pro-VSU people have NO refutation to make against the loss of universal student representation and on campus welfare support.

so i guess your support is a big fuck you to anyone who needs childcare??

 

[Not-That-Bright]

I'm 100% willing to fund childcare. There SHOULD be a compulsary childcare fund.

 

[walrusbear]

I'm 100% willing to fund childcare. There SHOULD be a compulsary childcare fund.

i think there should be too

hopefully the universities will take over here and fork out the funding since the students don't want to.