We are forced to vote for fear of cancelled licence and $500 fine, but apparently it doesn't really matter, as the Polititians themselves vote what person runs Australia as Prime Minister. Its all too common now. I think this act is WRONG, if not ILLEGAL. Where do we draw the line? Before we know it, Labor only serves half a term, before the Liberals move in. I'm sick of being forced to mandatorily vote and all for nothing. So what if Rudd sucks (they all do?), he was the Public choice (no I didn't vote for him) and he should suffer the full term along with the party who put him there for the original contention. This is bordering upon 'mental abuse'.
Anyone else open for this discussion? This 'Mutiny on the Bounty' style of Politics has got to stop (the rot)!

you're not wrong; and you're not alone. But - you'll find pretty quickly that this forum is almost entirely full of lefties who will vehemently oppose your view.
Good luck.
Good on ya.

This is the point of our system - we can get rid of the PM without an election. Putting too much power in the hands of one person is dangerous. Sooner or later you will elect a lunatic and want to get rid of him.

It is a good thing.

yes. just as well they haven't been able to get rid of the vice regal system in this country. That's good for sacking out of control governments. Probably need it again one day.

"We" as in the Public or "We" as in the Polititians themselves ??

i think he means 'we' the public.
the consensus here seems to be that gillard and labor are going to romp it in. What you are saying, from what I can see out there in internet land, is what most people are saying, despite what newspolls are saying.
Have a look at these comments, they are usually spot on re public opinion. The vast majority of these are 'not happy':
http://www.news.com.au/national/australians-would-rather-have-a-beer-with-julia/comments-e6frfkvr-1225884626157

Agree. Nothing against Gillard, but "we - the Public" did not put her there and if the 'Media' deems that they know how we feel then why should we all vote if the Media knows what we are thinking?
USA Polititians have to practically buy votes to give them the Right and Freedom to do what they like.
If we, the Public, are made/forced to vote, then our Political Industry must adhere to our (the Public) desires via Vote/Referendum
...this is where the RePublic debate comes into it.

Quote:

Agree. Nothing against Gillard, but "we - the Public" did not put her there and if the 'Media' deems that they know how we feel then why should we all vote if the Media knows what we are thinking?

You don't ask a journalist to do it. You ask your local MP.

a lot of the journos are leftist in this country. The Australian media is a political player with a two way relationship with the community. On one hand they go with what they perceive is the populist thing to say, and at the same time try to reinforce it and generate it in mirror-image so they get greater audience and establish themselves as an "authority" in the community.
I don't read, watch or listen to the Australian news media if I can help it. In respect of global matters there is much better information out there on the net. In respect of local matters, I can make up my own mind.
Good on you.

see, one of the ironies in Australia, is that we have a british parliamentary system, but most of the people these days think about politics in terms of the american republican system.
They want to be able to vote directly for the president as well as their local member. It is frustrating to Australians today that they can't do that. Yes, you have to leave it to the party to decide who the "president" is going to be; and this is what happens. You get someone you didn't vote for or think was going to be in charge. P*sses a lot of people off.

So FreeDiver (Yes I love to Dive too), you are saying a 'majority' of the Australian Population ...the voting population, rocked up to their local MP's and said "Drop Rudd, put in Gillard" and so the MPs, the Labor MP's (for starters) did the dirty upon a Political Leader who was strong upon an International Front and a United Nations, rather than United States one at that. A Political Leader who was a promotion of the Linguistics rather than the Spin Doctoring or Salesmanship of Politics that we have seen for many, many decades. A Political Leader who was hard upon his Staff (especially if they 'stuffed up') but soft upon us the Public. Like I said: I didn't vote Rudd in, but I can't help but think Australians are being shafted by a very rotten Political Industry that has just gone completely overboard.

It_is_the_Darkness wrote on Jun 26^th, 2010 at 10:35pm:

We are forced to vote for fear of cancelled licence and $500 fine, but apparently it doesn't really matter, as the Polititians themselves vote what person runs Australia as Prime Minister. Its all too common now. I think this act is WRONG, if not ILLEGAL. Where do we draw the line? Before we know it, Labor only serves half a term, before the Liberals move in. I'm sick of being forced to mandatorily vote and all for nothing. So what if Rudd sucks (they all do?), he was the Public choice (no I didn't vote for him) and he should suffer the full term along with the party who put him there for the original contention. This is bordering upon 'mental abuse'. Anyone else open for this discussion? This 'Mutiny on the Bounty' style of Politics has got to stop (the rot)!

This is caled the Westminster system. You do not vote for prime minister. You vote for your representatives. Your represenatives will elect their leader. The leader of the party with the majority of representatives is the PM.

It has been exactly like this for centuries.

Well I think Rudd and Murdoch exhibited obvious distaste for one another as Murdoch found that Rudd would rather serve the United Nations rather than Murdochs 'precious' United States. Murdoch has obviously helped put Rudd out of the picture.

Then Soren, we should just waste our precious time voting for our Local Council and leave the rest up to them ....eh?

rudd was put up as a vehicle to knock over Howard. Wasn't meant to be there at the end (although he thought he would be). They're doing it again, Gillard is being put up as a vehicle to knock over Abbott.
It worked before, they're going to do it again. I wonder what their plan for Gillard is into the first term. They've got huge deficits, they're going to have to blame someone.

So SynergyShift, will the Liberals bring back Malcolm Turnbull (the guy Don Chipp warned us about as being too personally ambitious) to take on Gillard because he can be more of a bitch than what she could or will they kick off Abbott and make it an all girl fight?

It_is_the_Darkness wrote on Jun 26^th, 2010 at 11:11pm:

Well I think Rudd and Murdoch exhibited obvious distaste for one another as Murdoch found that Rudd would rather serve the United Nations rather than Murdochs 'precious' United States. Murdoch has obviously helped put Rudd out of the picture.

You are ignorant of the political system that you live in and fill the massive gaps with del;uded conspiracy theories.

One more reason to give a great thanks for the Westminster system Your guy, Alvin Green, is on a different thread.

you can see what's going on. labor knows that a sufficiently high proportion of the Australian population these days (and it has taken decades of careful nurturing to get to this, the media has a lot to do with it), is very receptive to *image*. Rudd was a different sort of "sensitive new age man" type of labor candidate, they had never had that sort of image before. Enough of the public bought it hook line and sinker because they didn't look past the face. Now it's just more of the same, "female with a hairdo and a folksy accent", a lot of people will just lap that up. They won't care about substance, they think the image is the substance. Until the economy starts to go belly up.
Look, it takes decades to get a population to this sort of malleability, it's certainly a job well done. You've got to hand it to them.

It_is_the_Darkness wrote on Jun 26^th, 2010 at 11:12pm:

Then Soren, we should just waste our precious time voting for our Local Council and leave the rest up to them ....eh?

Believe it or not, I am not making this up - you are actually living in a country that is governed by the Westminster system. It's a centuries old system. I know it's a shock, but there it is.

Sorry Soren, but 'conspiracy theories' don't work with me at all...they are just theories afterall. I know what I saw as they both walked out from the traditional 'Dinner with Murdoch' as each new PM finds himself. You don't need to be Blind Freddy Fittler knocking on the wrong door to work it all out. Murdoch and Rudd dissapproved of one another and Murdochs face read "This guy will be no pushover". John Howard on the other hand was very pro-United States, hence why Bush labelled him 'Superman'. Who do you prefer Khoffi Annan or Barack Obama? The United Nations path may not be the stronger currently, but it is the more 'right' than wrong.

soren
Quote:

This is caled the Westminster system. You do not vote for prime minister. You vote for your representatives. Your represenatives will elect their leader. The leader of the party with the majority of representatives is the PM. It has been exactly like this for centuries.

and the westminster system is very good.

The Libs could have on the same to Hopward in  but chose not to out of hope and a different kind of code of honour. Hawke did the same thing to Hayden (although they were in opposition at the time, Labor wanted to make absolutely sure that they'd win then). Keating did it to Hawke.

Rees did it to Iemma, Keneally to Rees. The 'class struggle' crowd are much more fond of this sort of thing than the rabid rightwing lapdogs of Amerikkka.

the liberals will keep Abbott I predict. They won't change horses now, it would look desperate. That's why the lefties are shrilling out about it now - oooh, Abbott is our best chance to get in. They desperately want the guy replaced so they can say the libs are scared and confused.
The libs will keep Abbott for sure. The libs have a job to do though in terms of their own reinvention. they haven't done that yet, they're still operating on the old fashioned parameter that the majority of the Australian public are extremely sharp-eyed, pragmatic, no-nonsense voters who can analyse and go beyond image. Times have changed, the Australian public is increasingly unable to do that. The pity is that when the libs realise this and change, and change they will you can bet on it, they will do a much better job at selling image not substance than labor could ever do, and they will have a much wider range of images to put forward than the cardigans can come up with.
Gillard might get in, but she'll be shafted by the boys, bet on it.

Quote:

So FreeDiver (Yes I love to Dive too), you are saying a 'majority' of the Australian Population ...the voting population, rocked up to their local MP's and said "Drop Rudd, put in Gillard"

No.


Quote:

A Political Leader who was a promotion of the Linguistics rather than the Spin Doctoring or Salesmanship of Politics that we have seen for many, many decades.

Who are you talking about?

and when the liberals change to that modus operandi, Australia will definitely change forever and be the land of b*sht on every side of politics, and the public will get even more shafted than they've ever been before.
Congratulations.

Of course the Westminster system is good. Hey, there are 8 different races upon this planet and that means there are 8 right answers to a problem...but the thing is - which one is the most suitable. I mean, the USA political System is good also. Castro may have had Communism in Cuba, but it served well for a nation whose priority wasn't Politics. I'm sure in a pro-military nation like Fiji, the Westminster System would be a hinderance. So what I am saying is that I think neither the Westminster or anything the USA can offer is suitable to Australia and especially an Australia that needs a population growth. (That is, not having women work 24/7 so the Liberals can claim a profit from a low unemployment rate or keep a low population so Australia can look better off in a Recession than what a 900 million USA can as Labor put it).

I am FORCED to vote for fear of reprisal in fines up to $500 and a cancellation of my Licence. I expect then that my vote is to be respected and honoured. My vote stands with the majority of my fellow Australian's vote and I honour that 'system'.
To then have my vote corrupted by the MP's up is just pure 'mental abuse'.

...well, gotta call it a night, I'm starting to 'rant'. But I won't let this rest.

Who you gonna vote for then?

What do people think of this systemn as an alternative?

http://www.ozpolitic.com/electoral-reform/electoral-reform.html#direct-democracy

need a referendum to bring in something like that, and it is so difficult a concept for most people to get their heads around, they would simply vote no.
Anyway, it is a system that favours the educated and politically aware so there would be skewing of government activity and policy towards interest groups, not individuals.
Good idea, not workable, wouldn't get up. Yet.

It_is_the_Darkness wrote on Jun 26^th, 2010 at 11:41pm:

Of course the Westminster system is good. Hey, there are 8 different races upon this planet and that means there are 8 right answers to a problem...but the thing is - which one is the most suitable. I mean, the USA political System is good also. Castro may have had Communism in Cuba, but it served well for a nation whose priority wasn't Politics. I'm sure in a pro-military nation like Fiji, the Westminster System would be a hinderance. So what I am saying is that I think neither the Westminster or anything the USA can offer is suitable to Australia and especially an Australia that needs a population growth. (That is, not having women work 24/7 so the Liberals can claim a profit from a low unemployment rate or keep a low population so Australia can look better off in a Recession than what a 900 million USA can as Labor put it). I am FORCED to vote for fear of reprisal in fines up to $500 and a cancellation of my Licence. I expect then that my vote is to be respected and honoured. My vote stands with the majority of my fellow Australian's vote and I honour that 'system'. To then have my vote corrupted by the MP's up is just pure 'mental abuse'. ...well, gotta call it a night, I'm starting to 'rant'. But I won't let this rest.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2bMXVA9qj5I

freediver wrote on Jun 26^th, 2010 at 11:48pm:

What do people think of this systemn as an alternative? http://www.ozpolitic.com/electoral-reform/electoral-reform.html#direct-democracy

Too busy for it. Good idea for political entities with up to, say, 10,000 people. Beyond that, it is just way too much involvement. Who's going to clean and bake and work?

It actually allows people to vote less often and be less involved, if that is what they want. Read on a bit.


shampain socialist wrote on Jun 26^th, 2010 at 11:58pm:

need a referendum to bring in something like that, and it is so difficult a concept for most people to get their heads around, they would simply vote no. Anyway, it is a system that favours the educated and politically aware so there would be skewing of government activity and policy towards interest groups, not individuals. Good idea, not workable, wouldn't get up. Yet.

That's OK, I'm not planning on overthrowing the government soon.

I think it needs to be tried somewhere first. I don't mean a country but a place where people can organise themselves along these lines. A success there could give it momentum.

not planning to overthrow the government?
see how you feel after a while if gillard gets in.
Wait for it.

Good morning.
I think that it is a very good System FreeDiver and a system that would work better here than anywhere else. It wouldn't be too hard for a population of a paltry 22 million to achieve.
With the use of the Internet, it might even work better and more efficiently?
The 'power' is then placed in the hands of the People and the Polititians are no longer making choices of their own FreeWill (like the USA Polititians do ...but hey, they go out and EARN their votes) , instead, we put them to work. Funny how things can turn, now they will be 'imprisoned' by the new System and put to hard labour!  ;D
Before you know it, there will be more Citizen Arrests than what all the Police can do.  ;D
I like it  ;)
It would fit a Republican model very well. A Republic that is based upon Provincials like Eden-Monaro, Gippsland, Capricornia, St Vincent, Centralia, Stirling, Pilbara, Pitjantjatjara, Arnhem, Cape York, Avalon, Orara, Orana, Riverina, Wimmera, Ngarkat, Goulburn Valley ...and of course, our favourite: the former ACT come 'The Shire' with its former Capital Hill come 'Bag End'  ;)
Install a 'Chairman' to head the Republic as an International Representative only, in other words - he holds no Domestic Power. (Rudd was a good example "Don't poo me China...I know exactly what you're saying! You buy our Resources - then its Top Dollar!") All Domestic Power is held by the people. We already 'mandatorily vote' so making a weekly effort to the computer and clicking in the yes/no or making a percentage vote wouldn't be too hard....no different than paying a Bill. Eventually, you would have a quite politically aware people using the fundamental KISS philosophy.
Culturally, Australian Politics should be simple, just as USA Politics is complicated ...as USA Art is simple, just as Australian Art is complicated (its one of our highest earning Industries and growing ...won't be long before the best Computers are made here to accompany the Computer Art which always does better than the USA efforts in quality).

Anyway, I'm refusing to vote any more and if they threaten me with a fine then I go to my solicitor and claim FINANCIAL ASSAULT  along with MENTAL ABUSE when they try to cancel my Licence. I don't care, I need to make some money some-how and for an un-educated/un-skilled, bad-back, 40'ish, Farm hand ...basically all things 'simple' kind of guy. Going to the High Court again for a School Excursion might just be the thing I need in life.

STORY: "...and so it was that Bilbo Baggins stepped out of his front door and along the Road to face the UK Dragon 'St Smaug', while in another story, Frodo Baggins took on the might of the USA with its 'Eye upon the Pyramid upon its $1 Bill' and threw back the Democracy Ring"  :D

Australian Republic ...proudly sponsored by www.COMmunist
for all Austr-Aliens (www.COMmunion)  ;)

Am sorry if this sounds a bit ranty but I am really peeved by it all.
>:(

Quote:

I think it needs to be tried somewhere first. I don't mean a country but a place where people can organise themselves along these lines. A success there could give it momentum.

Like QLD? Either a state upper house, or one of the regional councils.


Quote:

We already 'mandatorily vote' so making a weekly effort to the computer and clicking in the yes/no or making a percentage vote wouldn't be too hard....no different than paying a Bill.

No-one seems to be getting it. Admittedly I have been meaning to re-write it for clarity. The idea is not to force people to vote on every issue. That would be asking for trouble. The idea is to give them the option of voting on every issue, or leaving their vote in the hands of a trusted proxy or representative.

Personally, I would prefer enough of us (swinging voters), to step up and deprive as many Politicians as possible, of there major motivation and keep doing it, until they finally get the message that it is us & our long term best interests that really counts, not their personal interests.

What is their major, some would say only motivation?

It is, in order -
1) Election, particularly if their party also wins power!
2) Re-election, particularly if their party also wins power!

Btw, I would also prefer fixed 4 year terms, with all arms of government standing for election on the same day, perhaps early October!

However, I would also prefer to get rid of Local councils altogether!

freediver wrote on Jun 26^th, 2010 at 10:40pm:

This is the point of our system - we can get rid of the PM without an election. Putting too much power in the hands of one person is dangerous. Sooner or later you will elect a lunatic and want to get rid of him. It is a good thing.

Agreed - and, personally, I would not wish a 2-year (out of every 4 years) American-style Presidential campaign on Australians...

Sorry, folks, but I am sickened by the very thought, of wasting even more valuable democratic media bandwith dissecting the egos and antics of a select few divisive elitists...

I'd much prefer, that the media be more focused on broad and pressing socio-economic and environmental issues most of the time - and pollies with doG-complexes only when necessary...

That said, I would probably support the appointment of PM's by joint-sitting of BOTH houses of Federal Parliament - rather than just the lower house...

shampain socialist wrote on Jun 26^th, 2010 at 11:27pm:

the liberals will keep Abbott I predict. They won't change horses now, it would look desperate. That's why the lefties are shrilling out about it now - oooh, Abbott is our best chance to get in. They desperately want the guy replaced so they can say the libs are scared and confused. The libs will keep Abbott for sure. The libs have a job to do though in terms of their own reinvention. they haven't done that yet, they're still operating on the old fashioned parameter that the majority of the Australian public are extremely sharp-eyed, pragmatic, no-nonsense voters who can analyse and go beyond image. Times have changed, the Australian public is increasingly unable to do that. The pity is that when the libs realise this and change, and change they will you can bet on it, they will do a much better job at selling image not substance than labor could ever do, and they will have a much wider range of images to put forward than the cardigans can come up with. Gillard might get in, but she'll be shafted by the boys, bet on it.

Personally, I reckon it's a BIG mistake for the Libs to keep Abbott...

Rudd's demise presented a game-changing opportunity for them - which they have blown...

Instead of going into pseudo-empathy and confected outrage over-drive, they should have kept their BIGGER traps shut, saying as little as possible for a day or two - and plotting all weekend, before coming back with a vengeance (including a cohesive strategy and a new leader) on Monday (tomorrow)...

Ironically, if the rabid Abbott bigot had not been at the helm, I doubt that the loose rabble, that is the Coalition, would have blown this opportunity so spectacularly...

As it stands, they have excreted a plethora of vexatious and toxic mixed messages - ergo. another great big piss on everything - and further-tarnished their electoral brand...

perceptions_now wrote on Jun 27^th, 2010 at 3:12pm:

Personally, I would prefer enough of us (swinging voters), to step up and deprive as many Politicians as possible, of there major motivation and keep doing it, until they finally get the message that it is us & our long term best interests that really counts, not their personal interests. What is their major, some would say only motivation? It is, in order - 1) Election, particularly if their party also wins power! 2) Re-election, particularly if their party also wins power! Btw, I would also prefer fixed 4 year terms, with all arms of government standing for election on the same day, perhaps early October! However, I would also prefer to get rid of Local councils altogether!

So you want to remove the major motivation that makes politicians listen to the people they represent?

freediver wrote on Jun 27^th, 2010 at 5:17pm:

perceptions_now wrote on Jun 27th, 2010 at 3:12pm: Personally, I would prefer enough of us (swinging voters), to step up and deprive as many Politicians as possible, of there major motivation and keep doing it, until they finally get the message that it is us & our long term best interests that really counts, not their personal interests. What is their major, some would say only motivation? It is, in order - 1) Election, particularly if their party also wins power! 2) Re-election, particularly if their party also wins power! Btw, I would also prefer fixed 4 year terms, with all arms of government standing for election on the same day, perhaps early October! However, I would also prefer to get rid of Local councils altogether! So you want to remove the major motivation that makes politicians listen to the people they represent?

No, I want to finally make them listen, , they certainly don't now, any of them!

It may be my imagination, but it seems you like my posts, you certainly seem to repsond to them?

Sure they listen. Maybe not to you. You get the politicians you deserve.

freediver wrote on Jun 27^th, 2010 at 5:26pm:

Sure they listen. Maybe not to you. You get the politicians you deserve.

You are half right, WE get the Pollies that WE deserve.

I don't elect any Politician myself, but WE DO!

Btw, I know We are having fun, but I must be away, until later!

I had a terrible nightmare last night. Julia Gillard was starring as that tall red-head woman in Home and Away, in fact...Australian Politics was falling into a sitcom like state of being much like Home & Away.
Take away
Rudd's "Australia is fairing better than the majority of nations during these tough economic times". Not having a population of 900 million like the USA helps.
and
Howard's "Australia's unemployment is the lowest ever". Having all women working for the high cost of living during 'chick-chick-boom' times and not having babies helps.
Take these away and you will find that Australia will be nothing more than a soap opera.

Well I must say.
I'm not at all surprised that my 'opinion' has finally made it to the front page of the Daily Telegraph today.
I didn't think I was alone on my view upon the disgraceful act of Australian Politics.

I predict a growth in votes for Independents, and a continued growth with each election.
No I don't vote for Liberal or Labor, nor do I vote for Independents.
I won't be voting at all, instead I will be FORCED to pay the $500.
>:(

Well actually, I caved in and voted for the SEX Party ...I couldn't resist
;D

I must say, Australian Politics is becoming steadily, dare I say - Soapy.
I can't wait for the balance of power to shift from the Federal to the Independents (who are in turn ruled by us, the common people) and from States to Provincials.
The Federal is our weakest political expression and anything touching the International front, more or less serves the International whim.
The Prime Minister will always serve the USA's will and the Governor-General will always serve the UK. Kev 07' is running straight to the United Nations ....none of which served this Nation and its people. The fact that South Australia had to rally the other States against the Federal on behalf of our 'Water Crises' (no it hasn't gone away), kinda sums up the lack of focus upon the domestic arena.
No wonder Families made in Australia are just buggered up, for want of being sold overseas like everything else that is considered "Aussie as".

Well I can't wait until we sell the Flag, the PM and anything else that is taking us "Forward" upon some other nation's behalf.
:P

Nope. I ain't gonna vote AGAIN !

It_is_the_Darkness wrote on Jun 26^th, 2010 at 10:35pm:

We are forced to vote for fear of cancelled licence and $500 fine, but apparently it doesn't really matter, as the Polititians themselves vote what person runs Australia as Prime Minister. Its all too common now. I think this act is WRONG, if not ILLEGAL. Where do we draw the line? Before we know it, Labor only serves half a term, before the Liberals move in. I'm sick of being forced to mandatorily vote and all for nothing. So what if Rudd sucks (they all do?), he was the Public choice (no I didn't vote for him) and he should suffer the full term along with the party who put him there for the original contention. This is bordering upon 'mental abuse'. Anyone else open for this discussion? This 'Mutiny on the Bounty' style of Politics has got to stop (the rot)!

Ummm the cancelled licence and $500 fine is only if you don't pay the first fine....it's the maximum penalty..

When I asked the AEC a week before the election (because my mother isn't able to get to the polling booth)...they told it was a $20.00 fine......which goes up to $75.00 if you ignore the first fine..

I imagine if you ignore the second one it'll go up more , then more etc...

Well if one couldn't be bothered to pay the $20 ...why bother with the $500 either?
I was just cutting to the chase.

It_is_the_Darkness wrote on Aug 24^th, 2010 at 3:17pm:

Well if one couldn't be bothered to pay the $20 ...why bother with the $500 either? I was just cutting to the chase.

Yeah that's kinda the point isn't it....

Much easier to just pay the $20 and not worry about the $500....after all, what's $20.00 these days??? the cost of a packet of smokes...

No, I mean the principle or point of the matter pertaining to the fine, any fine.
If I wasn't going to pay the fine because I don't think its right to be FORCED to vote a 2nd time under duress or that fine ...why would I bother with any following fine, wether it be more or less?
Chances are, I would have my Solicitor fine the Government instead.

It_is_the_Darkness wrote on Aug 20^th, 2010 at 10:41am:

... I won't be voting at all, instead I will be FORCED to pay the $500.

Voting is both a privilege and a duty of citizenship. Mandatory voting addresses problems that aren't obvious in secure, peaceful Australia. In the US, for example, generations of African-Americans were disenfranchised by rednecks who lynched any who dared attempt to register to vote. Had voting been compulsory, questions would have been asked. As it was, the rednecks got away with murder.

In voluntary systems, voting tends to skew toward the radical - the mainstream think they have better things to do. Mandatory voting at least gets (almost) everyone to the polls, leading to a more representative result.

In voting, we take responsibility for our government. Whether we like it or not, it is our government. The choice is obnoxious, but it's our responsibility. Refusing to vote is the coward's way - and a bit of a bludge.

Refusing to vote will lead to a fine. Refusing to pay the fine will lead to prosecution. Conviction will lead to a court order to pay the fine, plus another penalty - usually a bigger fine. Disobeying the court order constitutes contempt of court. Contempt of court may lead to a custodial sentence (imprisonment).

Stupid.

My only real issue with the current system is its reliance on people registering themselves. Registration should be automatic at the appropriate age, with details pulled from available records. Not difficult, these days, and probably more reliable than self-reporting.

Every dog has its day and the Political Industry just had its (at Federal level at least). Why I should be forced a second time for the same thing is beyond me. (especially at Tax Payer's expense that is just pumped into the Media Industry for Personality points)
Because the Public returned a result that two power-hungry control-freak Parties (ALP/Coalition) didn't like or feel comfortable with the fact that things are a bit harder for them to get what 'they' want, rather than what 'we - the People' want.
USA Polititians have to be self sufficient and earn their way into existence to be voted in via a non-mandatory system. USA Citizens are 'free' to choose wether to vote or not. So USA Political potentials have to go around and 'earn' their votes.
I'm not against the Australian 'Mandatory Vote'.
What I am against is that the ball is placed in 'We - the People's' court, but no matter our choice ...the Australian Political Industry is tending to do its 'own thing' anyway (as if it was like the USA system), like swapping leaders or making Independents choose ALP or Coalition ...or make us vote again (and again, if they don't get what they want, and again if they don't get what they want, and again if they don't get what they want).
I hope by next Election, more Indpendents will be empowered, because they seem a better bet to the empowerment of 'We - the People'.
I voted the Sex Party - because I believe that this Country should have a healthy Population growth without relying heavily upon Immigration (no, I'm not Anti-Immigration - for gene pool reasons for starters). So I voted for the 'Aussie Girl'. So long has this Country been reliant upon nearly full-time immigration (No - I don't approve of 'Illegal' Immigration and false 'Refugee' statuses).
But I hope other Parties were voted for too, because 'variety' is what this nation needs (One Astronaut called Australia "The Great Boring Land Mass" ...in subtle jest as he flew over the Continent) and with a lot of 'views' being represented rather than just two (2) (possibly the whim of just UK & USA??) - we will reap a better future and not just "Going Forward" as Gillard would say ...back into the UK & USA way of life.

PS: I'm married to a Security Guard. I don't think imprisonment is a problem to me ...hence why I have a lot of 'time' on my hands in front of a Computer. ;)

It_is_the_Darkness wrote on Aug 27^th, 2010 at 11:53am:

... Why I should be forced a second time for the same thing is beyond me.

Getting a bit ahead of yourself there. If you didn't vote in the last election, that's where your problem will originate. The only one apparently trying to force a second vote is Abbott. With luck, he'll fail.


It_is_the_Darkness wrote on Aug 27^th, 2010 at 11:53am:

... I'm not against the Australian 'Mandatory Vote'...

So why not vote?


It_is_the_Darkness wrote on Aug 27^th, 2010 at 11:53am:

...the Australian Political Industry is tending to do its 'own thing' anyway (as if it was like the USA system), like swapping leaders or making Independents choose ALP or Coalition ...

Looks like your issues are with representative Democracy, which is fundamental to Australia's constitution. Your only option is emigration to a country with a different form of government.


It_is_the_Darkness wrote on Aug 27^th, 2010 at 11:53am:

... I voted the Sex Party - because I believe that this Country should have a healthy Population growth without relying heavily upon Immigration (no, I'm not Anti-Immigration - for gene pool reasons for starters). So I voted for the 'Aussie Girl'. So long has this Country been reliant upon nearly full-time immigration (No - I don't approve of 'Illegal' Immigration and false 'Refugee' statuses). But I hope other Parties were voted for too, because 'variety' is what this nation needs (One Astronaut called Australia "The Great Boring Land Mass" ...in subtle jest as he flew over the Continent) and with a lot of 'views' being represented rather than just two (2) (possibly the whim of just UK & USA??) - we will reap a better future and not just "Going Forward" as Gillard would say ...back into the UK & USA way of life.

So you did vote. Your first post indicated otherwise. The Sex Party also featured high on my ticket: Labor last, Coalition second-last.

I'd like to see political parties banned, but there'd still be a need for an organisation to rally support among members of parliament for whoever is going to lead a government. Any such organisation would inevitably be party-like.


It_is_the_Darkness wrote on Aug 27^th, 2010 at 11:53am:

PS: I'm married to a Security Guard. I don't think imprisonment is a problem to me ...

Because you have a lot of time to spare? Because you don't believe it can happen?

What happens in such cases is: convicted is ordered to pay fine and serve time. If, after serving time, they still haven't paid then another order is issued: pay a larger fine and serve more time. This can go on indefinitely. For small fines, community service orders usually replace imprisonment, but the size of the fine increases with each cycle.

If you get fined and ignore it, it goes up but it that's where it stays.

You only end up with a cancelled license if you reside in a state where fines other than traffic fines are passed onto that state's revenue collection dept (eg NSW).

Life_goes_on wrote on Aug 27^th, 2010 at 2:40pm:

If you get fined and ignore it, it goes up but it that's where it stays. You only end up with a cancelled license if you reside in a state where fines other than traffic fines are passed onto that state's revenue collection dept (eg NSW).

So AEC doesn't pursue the issue? Interesting!

I think the 'in-thing' nowadays is just to burn down the local Council, etc.
Maybe this is why those Hobbits live under Bag-End (Capitol Hill) in the Shire (ACT) - a lot safer.

It_is_the_Darkness wrote on Jun 26^th, 2010 at 11:07pm:

Political Leader who was strong upon an International Front and a United Nations, rather than United States one at that.

The milky bar kid was well known internationally for his tantrums and holier then though approach to everything.  He had little respect amongst international leaders and citizens alike and it's a damn shame the Australian Public had to suffer that moron for as long as we did.

So he placed importance upon the Public and not his fellow Ministers, especially when they stuffed up (sometimes on purpose). If I asked on a plane for Fish and you served me Chicken, reckon I would be kinda pissed too, eh? At least his tirrades weren't based upon 'alcohol' like Hawke's were - pissing our tax dollars against the wall.
Then he was always abroad upon this nation's behalf (just like Faser was strong upon the International scene, Hawke being strong only Domestically) and left the Housework for his Deputy ...but she read too many Germaine Greer books and wanted more POWER, rather than be stuck at home to make sure the kids in this country grow up better for a better future.
So he loved us, but was never here.
And now we are stuck with someone who couldn't do the her own job properly in the first place.

Loved us, but was never here.

One thing Rudd was unique in, was that if he met a ordinary joe-blow in the public, he would listen to that person with respect - like no other PM ever did. He didn't try to be 'one of the boys' or con us with ' just a typical Aussie cliche', he knew he was a PM and that he was different, but he never forgot that he was just as human as the rest of us. The fact that he slapped Joe-Blow on the back and then went behind closed doors and bitch-slapped his fellow ministers around for not doing their jobs properly or for not trying hard enough for WE - THE PEOPLE ...kinda sums up why he was shafted.

Rudd is gaining the same popularity once again.
I remember when I lived with one of the three original Anti-Aparthied Dissidents from South Africa (the other two were shot before they got to safety here) and he always reminded me with a spanner in his hand (while he fixed his bike) "That Kevin Rudd will be your next Prime Minister" and this was in 2003 - when he was just a backbencher.

A lot of employers hire people with a positive, approachable and up-beat personality over someone who is qualified these days.
Why?
Because you can train that person how to do the job that you want them too, but you can't (unless you run a Pyschological Practice or something) teach a person how not to be an arsehole or pleb or bludger ...unless you hire a Psychologist, etc. Even sacking them, they still don't learn.

Rudd was ok by me, I hope he does ok by the World now via the United Nations. The fact that the little blonde Aryan-looking Mr Peabody doesn't follow the Anglo-Saxon Empire path of the USA/UK/etc
like Howard did for Bush, just goes to show who he really is.

And no I didn't vote Rudd in.