Not-That-Bright
Andrew Quah
Link?
I think that's totally wrong.
The official IR reform thread! (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter townie
- Start date
I think that's totally wrong.
Rafy
Retired
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2004
- Messages
- 10,719
- Gender
- Female
- HSC
- 2005
- Uni Grad
- 2008
Not-That-Bright
Andrew Quah
Lol that's right in Sydney... That's not so bad. From just the title I thought they were blocking it around say the mechano set, effectively pissing 1000's of people off.
erawamai
Retired. Gone fishing.
...well again you can't say that all people who follow john howard is based on their support for his economic position. It is well known that if the australian population were to do the political compass test most would come out let wing. They support john because of his image and because he appeals to maintream social values...not because they understand dry neolibral economics.frog12986 said:
Not-That-Bright
Andrew Quah
Well no, but I think if you asked most Australians say... "Should you be paid based on your contribution to society, or based on your needs" almost all would say based on contribution. Then if you gave them some questions like "should an aboriginal recieve more support than another person" I'd say most would say no...
erawamai
Retired. Gone fishing.
...that's not neoliberal dry economics NTB. Today people are paid based on their contribution to society. Hence why some people are paid more than others. Even in the awful (shock horror) collective bargaining state we live in income based on contribution is a norm supported by everyone and probably the greens too.Not-That-Bright said:
the reforms will just make your income more in accord with your contribution to society rather than your 'needs'. As such neoliberal economics doesn't see anything as an inherent need that is immune from the market.
Last edited:
Not-That-Bright
Andrew Quah
Well it is unsupportive of government structures to support people, so what is it? Social Democratic governments do not support 'pay for your contribution', they support giving many subsidies to disadvantaged people even if they have not made an equal contribution as someone who is not disadvantaged.
The point of a protest is to be make a public statement by being an inconvenience. However, given the nature of Australian society at the moment, such an inconvenience is no longer considered by many to be a constructive way in which to contest the status quo (or the incoming status quo).Rafy said:
Not-That-Bright
Andrew Quah
It's not fair to hurt others just because of your problems.
Sure, make an inconvenience but if they had truely shut down the entire M4 to get their point accross that would simply be too destructive in my books.
Hurt? A minor inconvenience (a few hours on one day) is a destructive act? Right on, NTB.
This isn't just a minor issue, NTB, so please don't try and suggest that this is a 'problem' faced by the protestors alone.
Edit: Of course, some may benefit from the supposed reforms, too.
This isn't just a minor issue, NTB, so please don't try and suggest that this is a 'problem' faced by the protestors alone.
Edit: Of course, some may benefit from the supposed reforms, too.
erawamai
Retired. Gone fishing.
frog said:
...so what are the 'aformentioned factors' you speak of which make people support the Liberal party. If its not economic policy (ie IR reform) what are they then?frog12986 said:
Last edited:
Not-That-Bright
Andrew Quah
A few hours in a day can mean students turn up late for their exams / people turn up late for work / etc.
I don't believe they did shut down the entire m4, what they did was fairly minor.
Aforementioned factors being the lack of clear party platform and a recognisable stance on a variety of issues..not purely economic issues..The fact that although Kim beazley has publicly denunciated the plaform that Mr Latham's campaign pertained to, nothing has been done to establish a new approach or policy base.
Last edited:
erawamai
Retired. Gone fishing.
...so people support the liberal party by default? Not because their economic policy is valid. But because, according to you, the ALP has no clear stance on anything.frog12986 said:
Kinda defeats the idea that support of IR reform is based on the population's innate understanding of the implications of neo liberal economics being further applied to the Labour market.
Last edited:
Not-That-Bright
Andrew Quah
People support the liberal party for the following reasons;
- They are doing better now than they did under the Labor party, so they feel they're better for the economy.
- They are anti-immigration.
- They are anti-aboriginal.
- They believe in neo-liberal economics.
- etc
That's what I think anyway, there also seems to be a favouritism by strong religious conservatives.
- They are doing better now than they did under the Labor party, so they feel they're better for the economy.
- They are anti-immigration.
- They are anti-aboriginal.
- They believe in neo-liberal economics.
- etc
That's what I think anyway, there also seems to be a favouritism by strong religious conservatives.
erawamai
Retired. Gone fishing.
All those things...I actually believe most people vote howard because of his social policy. His rhetoric is very mainstream totally non intellectual. He never lectures the community from an intellectual POV even if it is the best POV. He never labours on correcting popular opinion (the exception is IR reform...he has such a big majority he could do anything....he doesnt have to justify it)...he embraces mainstream views on immigration even if they are incorrect. John Isn't about telling people they are wrong. He is all about saying he agrees.Not-That-Bright said:
I don't think many people vote for him due to his dry neo liberal bent. I think most people find dry neoliberal economics rather offensive. However its well packaged by the Liberal government. Any simmering resentment of howard government economic reform is lost when people have got a new car in the driveway (financed of course) and they like Howards social policy.
I mean Howard went to the 2001 election with a social policy (stop terrorist boat people. We decide who comes here and the circumstances in which they come (regardless of whether they are legit or not)...John Hewson went into his election with an overt dry neoliberal ECONOMIC POLICY and Keating, using social policy, ate him up.
Social policy is always more popular than economic policy. Especially when most Australians would do the compass test and come out onthe left side of neoliberal economics.
IMO Aussies vote for the Liberals because of what 'intellectuals' call mainstreaming. Never speaking down to the population. Using social trends for gain rather than lecturing the population on why the social trend is wrong. Anyone who dissents against the social trend is an 'intellectual'.
Last edited:
The Liberal party has:
- a clear stance on economic issues; deregulation, societal contribution and incentive; fiscal responsibility aligned with targetted monetary policy usage.
- emphasised the need for morals and values that reside with many within the community
- emphasised the notion of the individual whilst concurrently supporting those of less opportunity and more need; welfare expenditure justifies this claim
- strong and secure borders and security (both parties support this)
These are the big three, among many..
NTB Anti-immigration? you're joking aren't you? This govenment has actually increased the overall level of immigration consistently over the past 10 years.
- a clear stance on economic issues; deregulation, societal contribution and incentive; fiscal responsibility aligned with targetted monetary policy usage.
- emphasised the need for morals and values that reside with many within the community
- emphasised the notion of the individual whilst concurrently supporting those of less opportunity and more need; welfare expenditure justifies this claim
- strong and secure borders and security (both parties support this)
These are the big three, among many..
NTB Anti-immigration? you're joking aren't you? This govenment has actually increased the overall level of immigration consistently over the past 10 years.
erawamai
Retired. Gone fishing.
Liberal party rhetoric is anti immigration. Anyone who hates asians immigrating or thinks there are too many immigrants is going to vote for the Liberal party not the ALP...regardless of whether the Liberals have increased immigration or not.frog12986 said: