Rudd - the Chinese speaking disaster-man (2 Viewers)

[rasengan90]

I wouldn't have voted for him. He has an untrustworthy smile and I don't like the way he treats the Japanese. Respect plz Milky Bar Kid.

 

[Iron]

it's that thieving dick again
/labor in power

 

[ASNSWR127]

hang on this is the guy that was scared of unions!!

what a dick lol

mind you

BRING BACK GOUGH!!

 

[ASNSWR127]

I wouldn't have voted for him. He has an untrustworthy smile and I don't like the way he treats the Japanese. Respect plz Milky Bar Kid.

the japs are just sore that they couldnt hack it in the second world war - ATTN you lost! you were smashed! you were the aggressor and good men and women died cos of you!

so now they hunt the whales and make dicky signs and stupid police cars.

bastards.

 

[impervious182]

hang on this is the guy that was scared of unions!!

what a dick lol

mind you

BRING BACK GOUGH!!

Scared of unions, that's a bit of an exaggeration. You're an idiot though, if you don't see that tipping the weight in any direction when it comes to IR laws is bad.

It just happens that Gillard (former union lawyer) has introduced IR laws which tip the balance to unions. These unions bully employers and make it very expensive, even to take legitimate actions, if an employee complains or feels bitter.

Good idea about bringing Gough back though, because he really has proven, that in tough economic times, he is a good economic manager... Oh wait, that was Howard and Costello... that's right... it's all coming back to me now. Gough was idealist, so ambitious that it eventually led to his dismissal.

 

[ASNSWR127]

Scared of unions, that's a bit of an exaggeration. You're an idiot though, if you don't see that tipping the weight in any direction when it comes to IR laws is bad.

It just happens that Gillard (former union lawyer) has introduced IR laws which tip the balance to unions. These unions bully employers and make it very expensive, even to take legitimate actions, if an employee complains or feels bitter.

Good idea about bringing Gough back though, because he really has proven, that in tough economic times, he is a good economic manager... Oh wait, that was Howard and Costello... that's right... it's all coming back to me now. Gough was idealist, so ambitious that it eventually led to his dismissal.

but it was OK for Howards and co to tip the balance in the favour of the employer and big business was it hmmmmm?

Gough was the person that did more in 3 years than any other PM has ever done.

Unless of course you dont like medicare and the idea of affordable uni?

oh no wait sorry that probably doesnt affect you cos you come from some rich household....

 

[impervious182]

but it was OK for Howards and co to tip the balance in the favour of the employer and big business was it hmmmmm?

I didn't say that. WorkChoices needed to be scrapped and new IR laws implemented. Just not these ones, which might just be as bad as Howard's only opposite.

Gough was the person that did more in 3 years than any other PM has ever done.

That's true. If you count getting dismissed, creating puns, being surrounded by scandal and deepening debt doing 'more in 3 years than any other PM.'

Unless of course you dont like medicare and the idea of affordable uni?

I like the idea, but I prefer the idea of economic sustainability. Without doubt, Gough implemented these policies at the wrong time and knowing when is just as important as knowing what's right when it comes to politics.

oh no wait sorry that probably doesnt affect you cos you come from some rich household....

Er...not really. My parents aren't paying for my uni either (debt, here I come). There are plenty of high, middle and low income earners alike who believe Whitlam was a shocking economic manager. I mean, it's almost undisputable.

 

[spiny norman]

Good idea about bringing Gough back though, because he really has proven, that in tough economic times, he is a good economic manager... Oh wait, that was Howard and Costello...

What tough fucking economic times were Howard and Costello in???

 

[ASNSWR127]

I didn't say that. WorkChoices needed to be scrapped and new IR laws implemented. Just not these ones, which might just be as bad as Howard's only opposite.


That's true. If you count getting dismissed, creating puns, being surrounded by scandal and deepening debt doing 'more in 3 years than any other PM.'



I like the idea, but I prefer the idea of economic sustainability. Without doubt, Gough implemented these policies at the wrong time and knowing when is just as important as knowing what's right when it comes to politics.



Er...not really. My parents aren't paying for my uni either (debt, here I come). There are plenty of high, middle and low income earners alike who believe Whitlam was a shocking economic manager. I mean, it's almost undisputable.

I agree with you in full there for everything you said

however I do not look at it in a boring stuffy neo-con look at life...

the man was a simply a great man - no doubt about that.

Rudd is however a dissapointment

 

[impervious182]

What tough fucking economic times were Howard and Costello in???

None. They didn't implement expensive policies in a time when they couldn't afford it either though did they? Whereas Gough did.

The fact is, in their time they handled themselves well; so your argument is just revolutingly left-wing and narrowminded.

FYI I very much like many of Gough Whitlam's policies. However a PM, who doesn't know when to implement policies is not suitable for the job. A PM is supposed to be a leader, not a radical money spender (even if it's directed at good ideas).

 

[Trefoil]

When he wasn't being a tool, Whitlam did a lot for Australia (especially universal healthcare).

It's just a pity he was the bastard that basically gave Indonesia the green light to invade East Timor (and specifically encouraged it).

 

[impervious182]

When he wasn't being a tool, Whitlam did a lot for Australia (especially universal healthcare).

It's just a pity he was the bastard that basically gave Indonesia the green light to invade East Timor (and specifically encouraged it).

Sometimes Trefoil makes a lot of sense - most of the time not - but in this case, he does.

I 100% agree.

 

[spiny norman]

The fact is, in their time they handled themselves well; so your argument is just revolutingly left-wing and narrowminded.

My argument is not my being left-wing. You said Gough couldn't handle the economy in tough economic times, which is something Howard/Costello could do. Now you go and pretend your original statement of contention was not the one that it is.

It is you who is revoluting, my friend.

 

[impervious182]

You said Gough couldn't handle the economy in tough economic times, which is something Howard/Costello could do. Now you go and pretend your original statement of contention was not the one that it is.

Actually I think you've misinterpreted my argument. I meant that Howard and Costello were good economic managers, not that they managed the economy in a particularly difficult time.

Sorry if it was my wording which caused this.

 

[nikolas]

Sometimes Trefoil makes a lot of sense - most of the time not - but in this case, he does.

I 100% agree.

That's, actually quite funny, from you especially.

 

[aq15]

Actually I think you've misinterpreted my argument. I meant that Howard and Costello were good economic managers, not that they managed the economy in a particularly difficult time.

Sorry if it was my wording which caused this.

though it was from Gough Whitlams, micro-economic reforms that has given Australia the 17years of economic growth, all i see from howard was riding the please of Gough's implementations (medicare, low uni fees, fair pay for females)

Howard and his 10 year reight brought in no new micro-economic reforms hence, Australia was experiencing a high level of inflation before the economic-crisis.

If more from Howard had been done, inflations wouldn't have surged to 5% of GPD nor would the interest rate go up to 7%.

It is just, that Australia wanted a change and voted in favour or labour, and that Rudd (labour) is in the wrong era of prime minister to give him a good face.

 

[impervious182]

though it was from Gough Whitlams, micro-economic reforms that has given Australia the 17years of economic growth, all i see from howard was riding the please of Gough's implementations (medicare, low uni fees, fair pay for females)

Howard and his 10 year reight brought in no new micro-economic reforms hence, Australia was experiencing a high level of inflation before the economic-crisis.

If more from Howard had been done, inflations wouldn't have surged to 5% of GPD nor would the interest rate go up to 7%.

It is just, that Australia wanted a change and voted in favour or labour, and that Rudd (labour) is in the wrong era of prime minister to give him a good face.

Gough Whitlam's spending was unsustainable. That's a fact. you can site his as many micro-economic reforms, which may have been effective in the future, as you want. However, essentially they didn't help at the time.

Overall the effect of Gough Whitlam's policies were negative. Of course people who get a bunch of free handouts loved him at the time, but realistically he wasn't a sensible Prime Minister. There's nothing more to it.

As for Kevin Rudd. I don't judge him solely on the economy and in fact, the economy has helped Rudd more than it has hurt him. It is in the future though, when his poor economic management will come back to bite him in the bumb. (Particularly his promise to guarantee all bank deposits, at any bank. Stupid, stupid, stupid.

Swan will also hurt him. However it is mainly Kevin Rudd's lack of character, lack of values and the perception that he is too media-orientated and acts like a windsock of popular opinion that will lead to a Labor loss of support. People will begin to see his hypocrisy and when people see that a leader changes his tune a lot, they will begin to feel he is incompetent and without values of his own. It links back to his inexperience as both a politician and lack of diplomatic skill.

 

[rasengan90]

the japs are just sore that they couldnt hack it in the second world war - ATTN you lost! you were smashed! you were the aggressor and good men and women died cos of you!

so now they hunt the whales and make dicky signs and stupid police cars.

bastards.

I am pretty sure I am British and I didn't lose WWII or commit atrocities. This is nothing at all to do with WWII, except that if we are on the subject its funny that Japan is the 2nd largest economy in the world after losing and Australia is in the 20's.
I fully acknowledge that Japan was the aggressor in the Pacific and the Japanese government has come to agree with this view. If you read the news you would know that in the last month the head of the Air Force was dismissed for saying otherwise.
I also disagree with Japanese whale hunting yet Kevin Rudd's 'call in the navy' approach is needlessly provocative. Japanese police cars aren't dicky at all, I was there less than a year ago and they seem quite normal and stylish to me.
What I mean by a lack of respect is Kevin Rudd bypassing Tokyo, the capital of Australia's largest trading partner to meet with Hu Jintao in Beijing on his first overseas trip. China is, let us remember, a one party dictatorship which deprives its people basic human rights and oppresses its minorities, Japan however is a thriving democracy. IMO he obviously has a similar uneducated opinion of modern Japan which is unbecoming of an Australian Prime Minister though expected of a Sinophile. Rudd is a commie bastard.
edit - John Howard however showed the Japanese great respect and met on a number of occasions with the Prime Ministers Junichiro Koizumi, Shinzo Abe, Yasuo Fukuda and the Emperor. My opinion is not uncommon, the Liberal party often blazes Rudd for his lack of respect towards Japan.

 

[impervious182]

That's, actually quite funny, from you especially.

Thanks, but I'm usually this funny. Ever since I bought my great sense of humour on eBay a few years back. You should really look into getting one, it does wonders.

Anywho, a few of you said I was being unreasonable when I claimed that Kevin 24/7's staff find him unbearable to be around, then came this revelation;

Staff flee 24/7 Rudd regime

​

THE pace of the 24/7 Rudd Government has taken its toll, with staff walking out in droves.


Prime Minister Kevin Rudd has lost about 40percent of new appointments to his private office since last December, and his deputy Julia Gillard has lost nearly 50percent.


About a quarter of ministerial staffers appointed between December last year and October have fled, figures provided to Liberal frontbencher Senator Michael Ronaldson reveal.



"At a time when the international financial markets are in free-fall, there is a complete lack of stability and leadership in Kevin Rudd's own office and ministerial wing," said the shadow special minister of state.


​

http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/staff-flee-247-rudd-regime/2008/12/06/1228257383096.html

 

[Trefoil]

its funny that Japan is the 2nd largest economy in the world after losing and Australia is in the 20's.

Actually, we're the 14th largest economy in the world, and Japan is 2nd largely because of American aid and embracing Western democracy as well as any traditional Western country.

Australia's GDP: $1 trillion USD
Australia's population: 22 million

Japan's GDP: $4.8 trillion USD
Japan's population: 130 million

If Australia had as many people as Japan, our GDP would be about $6 trillion. Put another way, Australia's GDP per capita is about $50K, while Japan's is $40K.