Oz election thread #3 - Rudd's Labour

msolga wrote:

lezzles wrote:
How many O/S trips has the Dudd had so far?

"The Dudd"?

Not quite yet, lezzles. :wink:

To me, he seems to be attempting to establish (reestablish?) certain important Oz positions internationally, as fast as it can be done. A lot of fixing & corrections to be done around the planet, about our international position on so many important issues, following you-know-who!

Sorry, dear, I've said before I'm a total cynic regarding Aussie pollies, and did I not think it all rather sad I would be somewhat amused by the euphoria surrounding the New Utopia government. (Meanwhile, back at the ranch....... interest rates, petrol prices, health scandals, housing chaos, indigenous welfare - just a few, for starters - are all being given the usual lip service.)

I don't often post in this thread, I know my opinion of Mr Rudd is gloomy (I see him as limp celery, a damp squib, whatever) and I don't want to spoil the fun the rest of you seem to have singing his praises; but every now and then something hits me as being worth a comment - and it does seem that he has been out of the country more often than he has been in it since the election. (Actually I did not make a comment, I simply asked a question). :wink:

0 Replies

Funny you should say 'aussie pollies' - are there better ones somewhere else?

Personally I would take almost anyone to get rid of Howard. I think Kev's approach is rooted in public service administration (good public service administration). Laying down KPIs openly so his performance can be measured is smart and wise. You just know if John Howard had been asked what he intended to achieve, say for indigenous people in a 3-year period, he would have been hedging around so that no comment could be dragged up again in 18 months to embarass him (he learnt from 'no GST') so that in effect there were no performance targets.

Those of us with a long memory of Australia's social/political/economic history know that the Howard government rode on the benefits accrued by hard decisions made by labour in the 1980s and 1990s, and that it failed to invest those profits in building Australia's human capital - so we are still China and Japan's hole in the ground. Kev aint perfect but at least long term issues are being raised without business and 'next election' concerns determining responses.

0 Replies

hingehead wrote:

Funny you should say 'aussie pollies' - are there better ones somewhere else?.

I doubt it, hinge, but that does not excuse ours. They are supposed to be the 'cream' of our society. (This does not mean they should be the richest, prettiest or have private school education, they should just be the best people for the job.) We should not expect them to be anything less nor should we accept them being anything less.

hingehead wrote:

Personally I would take almost anyone to get rid of Howard.

A dangerous idea.

hingehead wrote:

Those of us with a long memory of Australia's social/political/economic history know that the Howard government rode on the benefits accrued by hard decisions made by labour in the 1980s and 1990s, and that it failed to invest those profits in building Australia's human capital - so we are still China and Japan's hole in the ground..

No comment here, hinge, except that I remember that period very well and my memory is even longer than that. I'm just going to pour myself a stiff brandy - not sure whether to laugh or cry at your statement.

hingehead wrote:

Kev aint perfect but at least long term issues are being raised without business and 'next election' concerns determining responses.

Nowhere (that I am aware of) have I held John Howard up to be a great PM or even a good PM. I am not a Liberal Party supporter and my background is Labor. But, I never have and never will, taken my opinions from journalists or party propaganda. I would dearly love to eat my words about Kevin Rudd but I just can't see it happening. :wink:

0 Replies

hingehead wrote:

On the down side I heard that the shrub has passed the 'man of steel' job on to Kev. (you should read Anton's post again - I was going to offer a riposte from personal experience - but WTF)

Ah well, GWB will be gone soon. (Yes! Very Happy

) So Kevin won't be stuck with any of his labels for long ....

I will read that post again. I'd like to hear what you have to say, too! (Go on! :wink: )

0 Replies

lezzles wrote:

...I don't often post in this thread, I know my opinion of Mr Rudd is gloomy (I see him as limp celery, a damp squib, whatever) and I don't want to spoil the fun the rest of you seem to have singing his praises; but every now and then something hits me as being worth a comment - and it does seem that he has been out of the country more often than he has been in it since the election. (Actually I did not make a comment, I simply asked a question). :wink:

I have made a quite a few criticisms of Kevin Rudd in this thread, lezzles. It hasn't all been singing his praises. (& BTW I didn't vote Labor. I voted for the Greens.)
But like hinge, I'm hugely relieved to see the last of the Howard government. Best thing that could have happened for the country, I reckon.
And you are most welcome to post your thoughts & opinions here any time. We don't all have to agree, ya know!

0 Replies

lezzles wrote:

hingehead wrote:
Those of us with a long memory of Australia's social/political/economic history know that the Howard government rode on the benefits accrued by hard decisions made by labour in the 1980s and 1990s, and that it failed to invest those profits in building Australia's human capital - so we are still China and Japan's hole in the ground..

No comment here, hinge, except that I remember that period very well and my memory is even longer than that. I'm just going to pour myself a stiff brandy - not sure whether to laugh or cry at your statement...

I wish you would expand on that, lezzles. I'd be interested to hear what you have to say.

0 Replies

I think Rudd has done a great job on his OS trip. He's managed to maintain Australia's important strategic and business relationships, while not making us a pathetic lapdog, as did Howard.

0 Replies

He got the thumbs up from the Guardian and the Independent according to Insiders on sunday. Of course that won't impress anyone on the right.

When you think about it, not much has changed in reality but the mind set and approach seems different.

The opposition seems impotent - but there isn't much to oppose. It's pretty much steady as she goes. It's funny how the razor gangs aren't getting much media coverage - the administrative functions (as opposed to the service delivery arms) of the public service really are getting hammered.

0 Replies

Quoting me....
(How ever, this time i voted for Rudd, not the labour party as such. I have great expectations of him, but will be glad when he's finished the gabfest of mob pleasing-political correct hot air and get down to doing something a little more buisnes like. )

I'm happy with his accomplishments so far.. was sensible informing others in the important (to us)parts of the world and for them to know who and what he's about as a party leader and only hope they see him as he portrays himself, and not as a bag of wind.
Am a little perplexed with his attitude to the global warming religion, unfortunately we are a hole in the ground and commercial vegetable garden and will stay that way for the foreseeable future, so he will have to tread a very delicate path if he want's to appease us peasants and keep the home fires burning.

0 Replies

That's the trick though isn't it - is global warming a religion? Or is it fact? Are you willing to risk your children's children's future so you can leave a light on all night etc.

Personally, at an intellectual level, I'm all for treating it as real, because it results in addressing issues that need to be addressed in any case - like basing your entire economy and lifestyle on a non-renewable resource that degrades the quality of our atmosphere and perverts our geopolitics.

Read Jared Diamond's 'Collapse'. It's not about global warming, but it is an interesting exploration of once robust societies that became extinct and why (Greenland norse, the Anasi indians, and Easter islanders for example). As well as why other societies did survive.

0 Replies

Hello all

One thing about politics has always bemused me - how many people believe they can judge a PM's performance when he has just entered govt....well, I noticed lots were doing it before he entered office too.

For me, I think it will be around the 2 year mark before I start seeing things that indicate whether or not he's making a good PM.

In the short term, he's talking the talk, and the talk seems very effective.

I personally have no issues with overseas trips by PM's, and given Rudd's background in Foreign Policy, such is even more understandable. Further, given the internation climate, I expect that this PM, and future PM's will have a higher percentage of overseas trips than past PM's.

The 2020 summitt, which no doubt produced a lot of hot air, a lot of bad ideas, a lot of expensive ideas, and perhaps some good idea's, is still a worthy concept.

As for holding Politicians to greater accountability, I've been pleasantly surprised with a number of things Rudd has done to increase accountability, though hopefully more is still to come. The secrecy of the Howard Govt wasn't healthy (and neither is the secrecy of the Labor Govt in Qld).

0 Replies

I'm perplexed.. Most posts still seem to be saying that they are so happy that Howard has been dumped as leader of this country, it's repeated time and time again, I recognized Howard's faults and only when I felt their was more good to be gained to us all, that I felt a change in a leader was warranted. ( hence my little vote for Kevin not the labor party as such )But, bringing up the faults of a past leader is of no consequence as to the superiority of the new leader, I'm sure he will make many mistakes and more than likely the unions will eventually be his downfall ( well that's my guess anyway )
For the time being it's going to be easy to point out that past actions caused todays ills, but how Kevin rectifies these ill's will be the proving ground for future handling the country as a whole.
In other words excessive wind has been known to produce a lot of s-hit.

0 Replies

anton bonnier wrote :-

Quote:

Never could understand how running a country with the mindset of labours-- It's the workers
who make a business work, so pay us what we think we are worth. Irrespective of whether it's
affordable or not. Consequently I never voted Labour.

Quote:

I'm sure he (Rudd) will make many mistakes and more than likely the unions
will eventually be his downfall ( well that's my guess anyway )

Its interesting to note that many years ago, an editorial in a local paper complained
about the excessive demands of unions in their log of claims. What the editor failed to
realize at the time, was that it was the law to submit an ambit claim. This meant that
once all the claims had been met, no further negotiations could take place.
This is the reason the claims were ridiculous, so as to allow room for negotiations in the future.

When I started work, annual leave was 15 days per year, sick leave 4 days.
Every year, we had to negotiate a new agreement. In every single instance, the employer
opposed every wage claim in the commission.
Believe me, conditions we have today were not given willingly by any employer I worked for.
People like to bash unions, but we all benefit from their struggle to improve living standards
and safety in the work place. One thing I did notice, was that when the union movement won
some gains, non-union members were there with their hands to receive the same.

Just my 2 cents worth.

0 Replies

bungie wrote:

anton bonnier wrote :-

Quote:
Never could understand how running a country with the mindset of labours-- It's the workers
who make a business work, so pay us what we think we are worth. Irrespective of whether it's
affordable or not. Consequently I never voted Labour.

Quote:
I'm sure he (Rudd) will make many mistakes and more than likely the unions
will eventually be his downfall ( well that's my guess anyway )

Its interesting to note that many years ago, an editorial in a local paper complained
about the excessive demands of unions in their log of claims. What the editor failed to
realize at the time, was that it was the law to submit an ambit claim. This meant that
once all the claims had been met, no further negotiations could take place.
This is the reason the claims were ridiculous, so as to allow room for negotiations in the future.

When I started work, annual leave was 15 days per year, sick leave 4 days.
Every year, we had to negotiate a new agreement. In every single instance, the employer
opposed every wage claim in the commission.
Believe me, conditions we have today were not given willingly by any employer I worked for.
People like to bash unions, but we all benefit from their struggle to improve living standards
and safety in the work place. One thing I did notice, was that when the union movement won
some gains, non-union members were there with their hands to receive the same.

Just my 2 cents worth.

There's plenty of weasels in the Australian community benefiting from the gains made by unions on the one hand while criticizing them on the other.

0 Replies

Quote..
When I started work, annual leave was 15 days per year, sick leave 4 days.
Every year, we had to negotiate a new agreement. In every single instance, the employer
Opposed every wage claim in the commission.
Believe me, conditions we have today were not given willingly by any employer I worked for.
People like to bash unions, but we all benefit from their struggle to improve living standards
And safety in the work place. One thing I did notice, was that when the union movement won
Some gains, non-union members were there with their hands to receive the same.

Just my 2 cents worth. End of quote

I started work when I was 14.. No need to remind me of the past "good" deeds of unions. I never saw a union go on strike for workers who had no unions (because they were to small a work force) but did notice that the biggest of the unions and the one's in industries most necessary to everyone... Were the one's who managed to get the higher wages whilst the one's on minimum pay the (majority) stayed the same and only got a increase when the cost of living rose.. ( if you pay more for labor you charge more for your product which causes inflation ) so the unionist standard of living went up and the others didn't till long after.. This scenario still continues today )
That's my 99 cents worth

0 Replies

anton bonnier wrote:

( if you pay more for labor you charge more for your product which causes inflation ) so the unionist standard of living went up and the others didn't till long after.. This scenario still continues today )
That's my 99 cents worth

I reckon that would be a good reason to belong to a union eh anton ?

Some years back, the government of the day imposed a wage freeze. Low and behold, when the next cpi figures came out, there was next to no difference to the previous figures. The business sector just kept increasing prices anyway. It made the argument that freezing wages would control prices very shallow. I did notice that it was only a "wage freeze" and not a "price freeze" as well. (the government of the day was anti-union)
Once you could buy the same items at two different shops and the prices would be almost identical, as they worked on a set formula as a reasonable markup. Now they seem to charge what ever they think you will be prepared to pay regardless of the wholesale price.

What's that old saying ? Capitalism will never fail while the workers are there to pay their taxes to prop it up.
I always thought that to be pretty true.

Just my ramblings.

0 Replies

Thanks to my membership of a union, I've got a 4% pay rise this year, 5% next year, 5% the year after, and 4.5% the year after that. The way I figure it, if our company is going well enough to pay our directors several million dollars in bonuses, then they can easily afford our rises. It only took 5 weeks of negotiation, which means the company obviously agrees with me. As for the non-unionists who don't like it, you scum sucking pr!cks can suck hind tit for all I care. The worthless f@cking weasels are only too happy to work a 38 hour week, take 4 weeks of annual leave and take paid sick leave when they don't feel well, while trying to destroy the very organisations that won it all for them. Hypocrasy personified.

That's my two cents worth.

0 Replies

Just want to say how sorry I am about the demise of the Democrats. For quite a few years they were a positive force in the Senate & it's sad that they won't be around any more.

Too bad about their problems: Cheryl losing her head (over Gareth! Shocked

) & defecting to Labour, then Meg ( Evil or Very Mad

) & her deal with the devil over the GST. All really unfortunate, as the party never recovered from both those episodes.

So now it's just the Greens & some independents left in the Senate, along with the BIG 2.
Sad, really sad. <sigh>

0 Replies

msolga wrote:

Just want to say how sorry I am about the demise of the Democrats. For quite a few years they were a positive force in the Senate & it's sad that they won't be around any more.

Too bad about their problems: Cheryl losing her head (over Gareth! ) & defecting to Labour, then Meg ( ) & her deal with the devil over the GST. All really unfortunate, as the party never recovered from both those episodes.

So now it's just the Greens & some independents left in the Senate, along with the BIG 2.
Sad, really sad. <sigh>

I hadn't seen the news - did they kark it? Proves I'm a political analyst par excellence. Back when Meg did the GST deal I took the unusual step, for me, of writing to her expressing my disappointment and stating that she had signed the death warrant for her party.

In retrospect the GST is a regressive tax but hasn't changed the face of Australia particularly (although I am not living on the poverty line). And Lees might argue that the resulting furore was clearly unwarranted. But my recollection of my anger was my sense of betrayal that the 'keep the bastards honest' party had bent over to a radical policy change and not received any concession for 'battlers'. I remember Natasha fighting for an exemption on books (partly becaused HECSed to death students already struggle with text book fees) and being slapped down by Lees.

Back to my bodgy political analysis. The real reason the democrats are gone is because they positioned themselves between the right (Liberals) and the left (Labor). The political landscape has changed a lot since Don Chipp formed them - there is no space between Labor and Liberal any more (certainly not in terms of economic management) there are differences in approaches but not really in substance. So the minor parties are either far left (Green) or far right (family first).

In short, their ecological niche disappeared.

You'll have to excuse my metaphors, I'm getting into Jared Diamond's 'Collapse'.

0 Replies

Oz election thread #3 - Rudd's Labour

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know