https://www.9news.com.au/2018/11/24/18/44/jim-molan-senate-ticket-nsw-election-career-over

So.....who will you vote for Matty?

Aussie wrote on Nov 25^th, 2018 at 8:52pm:

So.....who will you vote for Matty?

Lower House - informal.
Upper House - One Nation, Australian Conservatives, LDP and other minor and micro right-wing parties.

matty wrote on Nov 25^th, 2018 at 9:00pm:

Aussie wrote on Nov 25th, 2018 at 8:52pm: So.....who will you vote for Matty? Lower House - informal. Upper House - One Nation, Australian Conservatives, LDP and other minor and micro right-wing parties.

So you're going to draw a penis on your ballot paper again? That's going to get Karnal excited.

Make sure you get a picture,  seems like the last of the rats have deserted the ship

There is no want,  they're going to absolutely annihilated and I could not be happier  :)

matty wrote on Nov 25^th, 2018 at 9:00pm:

Aussie wrote on Nov 25th, 2018 at 8:52pm: So.....who will you vote for Matty? Lower House - informal. Upper House - One Nation, Australian Conservatives, LDP and other minor and micro right-wing parties.

yeah   I can see that working for the better good....

sheeze matty      grow up!

Bam wrote on Nov 25^th, 2018 at 9:23pm:

matty wrote on Nov 25th, 2018 at 9:00pm: Aussie wrote on Nov 25th, 2018 at 8:52pm: So.....who will you vote for Matty? Lower House - informal. Upper House - One Nation, Australian Conservatives, LDP and other minor and micro right-wing parties. So you're going to draw a penis on your ballot paper again? That's going to get Karnal excited.

I’ll leave the crass and snide asides to you.

cods wrote on Nov 25^th, 2018 at 10:33pm:

matty wrote on Nov 25th, 2018 at 9:00pm: Aussie wrote on Nov 25th, 2018 at 8:52pm: So.....who will you vote for Matty? Lower House - informal. Upper House - One Nation, Australian Conservatives, LDP and other minor and micro right-wing parties. yeah   I can see that working for the better good.... sheeze matty      grow up!

Well cods, if the Coalition continues to be overrun and corrupted by a bunch of lefties, who else is there? How can you expect actual right-of-centre voters to vote for them?

matty wrote on Nov 25^th, 2018 at 10:59pm:

cods wrote on Nov 25th, 2018 at 10:33pm: matty wrote on Nov 25th, 2018 at 9:00pm: Aussie wrote on Nov 25th, 2018 at 8:52pm: So.....who will you vote for Matty? Lower House - informal. Upper House - One Nation, Australian Conservatives, LDP and other minor and micro right-wing parties. yeah   I can see that working for the better good.... sheeze matty      grow up! Well cods, if the Coalition continues to be overrun and corrupted by a bunch of lefties, who else is there? How can you expect actual right-of-centre voters to vote for them?

If your politics have drifted too far to the right, that's your problem, not theirs.

matty wrote on Nov 25^th, 2018 at 9:00pm:

Aussie wrote on Nov 25th, 2018 at 8:52pm: So.....who will you vote for Matty? Lower House - informal. Upper House - One Nation, Australian Conservatives, LDP and other minor and micro right-wing parties.

Oh, Matty, I think that's a marvellous idea, just you make sure you vote Green, okay? They'll run right-wing candidates next time, you'll see. All animal welfare enthusiasts, not a watermelon in the bunch.

No informals thanks, Matty, that simply won't do. A vote for Pauline or a vote for the Greens, no half measures, thank you.

the country faces huge questions.

morrison and shorten do not have the answers.

when there are big problems , we need authority figures who dont pander to the people and can deliver the stern warnings about where we have gone wrong.

morrison and shorten (and indeed, everyone since howard ) have been panderers.

if you were a kid and your daddy lost his job, would you want him to just keep pandering to you and selling off assets to bribe you with cakes and candy?
or would you rather he acted like a man and said
"you no what kid, we are going to have to work our asses off to get out of this pickle, if we dont we are screwed".

you could tell a 12 yo that and they would accept it.
the fact you cant tell the electorate that, is proof to me that the electorate are functioining at the level of a 3 or 4 yo. always ready to throw a tantrum, refusing to clean up their room, entitled little snots.
with an education system and a government which never tells people to take responsibility, is it any wonder most people are perpetual children.
and when toddlers deal with the forces of global economics they get destroyed.

welcome to a world of more pain and more butt hurt complaining.
i dont vibe with that, buit clearly the electorate do.

the counrty will fall into low vibration energy...complaining, whining, crying, self pity, anger, confusion, apathy , durr state, mob mentality.....look to paris for what happens when the toddlers are not socialised correctly

aquascoot wrote on Nov 26^th, 2018 at 6:11am:

the country faces huge questions. morrison and shorten do not have the answers. when there are big problems , we need authority figures who dont pander to the people and can deliver the stern warnings about where we have gone wrong. morrison and shorten (and indeed, everyone since howard ) have been panderers. if you were a kid and your daddy lost his job, would you want him to just keep pandering to you and selling off assets to bribe you with cakes and candy? or would you rather he acted like a man and said "you no what kid, we are going to have to work our asses off to get out of this pickle, if we dont we are screwed". you could tell a 12 yo that and they would accept it. the fact you cant tell the electorate that, is proof to me that the electorate are functioining at the level of a 3 or 4 yo. always ready to throw a tantrum, refusing to clean up their room, entitled little snots. with an education system and a government which never tells people to take responsibility, is it any wonder most people are perpetual children. and when toddlers deal with the forces of global economics they get destroyed. welcome to a world of more pain and more butt hurt complaining. i dont vibe with that, buit clearly the electorate do. the counrty will fall into low vibration energy...complaining, whining, crying, self pity, anger, confusion, apathy , durr state, mob mentality.....look to paris for what happens when the toddlers are not socialised correctly

I agree with this assessment generally. The problem of leadership is critical. We do not have leaders or statesmen, we have politicians (literally). That leaves me to vote by reviewing the issues and putting them in priority, and voting on the least bad policy. Or, just tear up the ballot.

Bam wrote on Nov 25^th, 2018 at 11:00pm:

matty wrote on Nov 25th, 2018 at 10:59pm: cods wrote on Nov 25th, 2018 at 10:33pm: matty wrote on Nov 25th, 2018 at 9:00pm: Aussie wrote on Nov 25th, 2018 at 8:52pm: So.....who will you vote for Matty? Lower House - informal. Upper House - One Nation, Australian Conservatives, LDP and other minor and micro right-wing parties. yeah   I can see that working for the better good.... sheeze matty      grow up! Well cods, if the Coalition continues to be overrun and corrupted by a bunch of lefties, who else is there? How can you expect actual right-of-centre voters to vote for them? If your politics have drifted too far to the right, that's your problem, not theirs.

What about the current Coalition is exactly right wing?

For the record, my politics have not drifted at all. I have had the same ideals and values since I was 8.And actually to the contrary, quite clearly it is their problem. People have been leaving them in droves, and they are struggling to get people to volunteer. Their polls are also horrendous, so how can you say that it is not their problem that many former rusted-on voters have left under Turnbull, and not returned after Morrison?

aquascoot wrote on Nov 26^th, 2018 at 6:11am:

the country faces huge questions. morrison and shorten do not have the answers. when there are big problems , we need authority figures who dont pander to the people and can deliver the stern warnings about where we have gone wrong. morrison and shorten (and indeed, everyone since howard ) have been panderers. if you were a kid and your daddy lost his job, would you want him to just keep pandering to you and selling off assets to bribe you with cakes and candy? or would you rather he acted like a man and said "you no what kid, we are going to have to work our asses off to get out of this pickle, if we dont we are screwed". you could tell a 12 yo that and they would accept it. the fact you cant tell the electorate that, is proof to me that the electorate are functioining at the level of a 3 or 4 yo. always ready to throw a tantrum, refusing to clean up their room, entitled little snots. with an education system and a government which never tells people to take responsibility, is it any wonder most people are perpetual children. and when toddlers deal with the forces of global economics they get destroyed. welcome to a world of more pain and more butt hurt complaining. i dont vibe with that, buit clearly the electorate do. the counrty will fall into low vibration energy...complaining, whining, crying, self pity, anger, confusion, apathy , durr state, mob mentality.....look to paris for what happens when the toddlers are not socialised correctly

If they hadnt got greedy and sold our assets at all this wouldnt be how it is but they are all corrupt criminals and its what they do. they spent the pensions then sold our assets then blamed muslims

Spot

aquascoot wrote on Nov 26^th, 2018 at 6:11am:

the country faces huge questions. morrison and shorten do not have the answers. when there are big problems , we need authority figures who dont pander to the people and can deliver the stern warnings about where we have gone wrong. morrison and shorten (and indeed, everyone since howard ) have been panderers. if you were a kid and your daddy lost his job, would you want him to just keep pandering to you and selling off assets to bribe you with cakes and candy? or would you rather he acted like a man and said "you no what kid, we are going to have to work our asses off to get out of this pickle, if we dont we are screwed". you could tell a 12 yo that and they would accept it. the fact you cant tell the electorate that, is proof to me that the electorate are functioining at the level of a 3 or 4 yo. always ready to throw a tantrum, refusing to clean up their room, entitled little snots. with an education system and a government which never tells people to take responsibility, is it any wonder most people are perpetual children. and when toddlers deal with the forces of global economics they get destroyed. welcome to a world of more pain and more butt hurt complaining. i dont vibe with that, buit clearly the electorate do. the counrty will fall into low vibration energy...complaining, whining, crying, self pity, anger, confusion, apathy , durr state, mob mentality.....look to paris for what happens when the toddlers are not socialised correctly

Very true, and good analogy. The most pertinent example of this, IMO, is Morrison not pulling out of Paris. A lot of former Coalition voters would take heart if he simply said that climate change is false and pulled out of Paris. But no, he knows best, and that is why his poll numbers are so good. There are other examples of course, where he could be stronger, this is just one.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ds1SEw6VAAAZlbD.jpg

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Nov 26^th, 2018 at 7:39am:

aquascoot wrote on Nov 26th, 2018 at 6:11am: the country faces huge questions. morrison and shorten do not have the answers. when there are big problems , we need authority figures who dont pander to the people and can deliver the stern warnings about where we have gone wrong. morrison and shorten (and indeed, everyone since howard ) have been panderers. if you were a kid and your daddy lost his job, would you want him to just keep pandering to you and selling off assets to bribe you with cakes and candy? or would you rather he acted like a man and said "you no what kid, we are going to have to work our asses off to get out of this pickle, if we dont we are screwed". you could tell a 12 yo that and they would accept it. the fact you cant tell the electorate that, is proof to me that the electorate are functioining at the level of a 3 or 4 yo. always ready to throw a tantrum, refusing to clean up their room, entitled little snots. with an education system and a government which never tells people to take responsibility, is it any wonder most people are perpetual children. and when toddlers deal with the forces of global economics they get destroyed. welcome to a world of more pain and more butt hurt complaining. i dont vibe with that, buit clearly the electorate do. the counrty will fall into low vibration energy...complaining, whining, crying, self pity, anger, confusion, apathy , durr state, mob mentality.....look to paris for what happens when the toddlers are not socialised correctly If they hadnt got greedy and sold our assets at all this wouldnt be how it is but they are all corrupt criminals and its what they do. they spent the pensions then sold our assets then blamed muslims Spot

I agree with you that they are all corrupt, but who blamed Muslims for what do you mean?

matty wrote on Nov 25^th, 2018 at 8:22pm:

https://www.9news.com.au/2018/11/24/18/44/jim-molan-senate-ticket-nsw-election-career-over

You do realise that bar Sec 44 he would not have made the senate anyway.

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Nov 26^th, 2018 at 7:39am:

aquascoot wrote on Nov 26th, 2018 at 6:11am: the country faces huge questions. morrison and shorten do not have the answers. when there are big problems , we need authority figures who dont pander to the people and can deliver the stern warnings about where we have gone wrong. morrison and shorten (and indeed, everyone since howard ) have been panderers. if you were a kid and your daddy lost his job, would you want him to just keep pandering to you and selling off assets to bribe you with cakes and candy? or would you rather he acted like a man and said "you no what kid, we are going to have to work our asses off to get out of this pickle, if we dont we are screwed". you could tell a 12 yo that and they would accept it. the fact you cant tell the electorate that, is proof to me that the electorate are functioining at the level of a 3 or 4 yo. always ready to throw a tantrum, refusing to clean up their room, entitled little snots. with an education system and a government which never tells people to take responsibility, is it any wonder most people are perpetual children. and when toddlers deal with the forces of global economics they get destroyed. welcome to a world of more pain and more butt hurt complaining. i dont vibe with that, buit clearly the electorate do. the counrty will fall into low vibration energy...complaining, whining, crying, self pity, anger, confusion, apathy , durr state, mob mentality.....look to paris for what happens when the toddlers are not socialised correctly If they hadnt got greedy and sold our assets at all this wouldnt be how it is but they are all corrupt criminals and its what they do. they spent the pensions then sold our assets then blamed muslims Spot

ah , but they sold those assets because the voters , like whining toddlers , wanted to get more $$$ .
the voters (also known as the whining entitled toddlers) whined and bitched and said "gimme, gimme, gimme".  and the weak pandering politicians did exactly that.

if a fat toddler  was sooking because you wont give him candy and soft drink, is it an act of love to give it to him.  just so he'll think you are a "nice guy".

i say "hay you little fat puke, get outside and go for a jog"...hence he has a chance to move up in the world.
the "compassionate politician"  says "oh poor baby, let me soothe you with some goodies, do you like me now, will you vote for me?"

politicians are just vibing with the voters and the voters are in a "taker " mentality.
they just want to take.

take , take , take......when you are a taker you are what the buddhists call a "hungry ghost".
your life becomes a living hell of scarcity.
no matter how much you get, you always see it as not being enough.
your life is garbage.

you need to give to break out of that cycle.

if the country doesnt start to become a country of givers and contributors, its screwed

Re Matty

You will find that the current Labor and Liberal party are quiet centre wing already.  Australia had always been a socialist democracy, and thats how the people expect it.   We are heading towards an ageing population.  A trickle down economy may work in a society post world wars development era, but less so in a ageing / services heavy era.   As people age, not everyone is cashed up or self funded, even those who does, the longevity of life span in Australia means that they will become dependent on social welfare especially later in their lives when they are older and more frail.  This is the reality we are facing.   So expect more socialistic policies to come online. 

Take for example, tax cuts for big business.   Perhaps, middle aged skilled contractors would love this, as this may mean more work.  For the typical age pensioners this means absolutely nothing when they are on waiting list for hip replacement for two years, or have their medicare rebates to doctors frozen for years. 

matty wrote on Nov 26^th, 2018 at 7:44am:

Very true, and good analogy. The most pertinent example of this, IMO, is Morrison not pulling out of Paris. A lot of former Coalition voters would take heart if he simply said that climate change is false and pulled out of Paris. But no, he knows best, and that is why his poll numbers are so good. There are other examples of course, where he could be stronger, this is just one.

Yes, but you do realise thats the current problem the Libs have. Australian elections have always been decided by capturing the centre. Howard flogged Latham essentially because the right Labor voters hated Latham being that far left and drifted to Howard. If Morrison goes any further right then he risks losing the small l Liberals, and he'll get flogged.

matty wrote on Nov 25^th, 2018 at 9:00pm:

Aussie wrote on Nov 25th, 2018 at 8:52pm: So.....who will you vote for Matty? Lower House - informal. Upper House - One Nation, Australian Conservatives, LDP and other minor and micro right-wing parties.

What about the animal justice party or the aussie battler party :D LOL That's what I put first on the Vic ballot paper ;) Don't want to give any of these born to rule dickheads anymore oxygen than is necessary.

tickleandrose wrote on Nov 26^th, 2018 at 10:09am:

Re Matty You will find that the current Labor and Liberal party are quiet centre wing already.  Australia had always been a socialist democracy, and thats how the people expect it.   We are heading towards an ageing population.  A trickle down economy may work in a society post world wars development era, but less so in a ageing / services heavy era.   As people age, not everyone is cashed up or self funded, even those who does, the longevity of life span in Australia means that they will become dependent on social welfare especially later in their lives when they are older and more frail.  This is the reality we are facing.   So expect more socialistic policies to come online.  Take for example, tax cuts for big business.   Perhaps, middle aged skilled contractors would love this, as this may mean more work.  For the typical age pensioners this means absolutely nothing when they are on waiting list for hip transplant for two years, or have their medicare rebates to doctors frozen for years.

for sure,
when you have 70 % takers and 30 % contributors, then the takers will demand to remain in perpetual low vibration whining and ingratitude and live in scarcity.
thats life for most of the population,  jealous of the guy who is successful and unable to comprehend that you have to give and give and give before you recieve.

i totally get it.

why would you be a sucker and give
why not be a taker

trouble is , it doesnt work

it doesnt work on a personal level and it doesnt work for society.

all socialist societies crumble and decay and end up in mayhem
seriously look at the french currently trashing paris becuase they are being asked to give to the government.
socialism is a catastrophe.
telling people its ok to be a taker is a catastrophe.
the life of a taker is one of pure suffering and garbage.

they will never have enough, they will never he happy.

until they embrace that life is hard and you have to find joy in pushing thru that, then they are screwed.
and the country is screwed if it starts to pander to the takers.
its a step backwards in evolutionary progress and turns people into selfish animals .

You're doing the right thing Matty, vote for minor parties and independents. The Libs and Labs are past their use-by date. I could see that very early and it's still fairly early but if the major parties don't change and totally reform themselves, they won't last past 2050. I think everybody knows it, but not fully convinced of it yet. As aquascoot points out, we can't just keep "taking", that's not how debt is paid, and the major parties keep borrowing and borrowing more to pay for everything

That Integrity Commission judges are calling for is being resisted by the major parties and that resistance should be a warning to all of us   

aquascoot wrote on Nov 26^th, 2018 at 11:05am:

tickleandrose wrote on Nov 26th, 2018 at 10:09am: Re Matty You will find that the current Labor and Liberal party are quiet centre wing already.  Australia had always been a socialist democracy, and thats how the people expect it.   We are heading towards an ageing population.  A trickle down economy may work in a society post world wars development era, but less so in a ageing / services heavy era.   As people age, not everyone is cashed up or self funded, even those who does, the longevity of life span in Australia means that they will become dependent on social welfare especially later in their lives when they are older and more frail.  This is the reality we are facing.   So expect more socialistic policies to come online.  Take for example, tax cuts for big business.   Perhaps, middle aged skilled contractors would love this, as this may mean more work.  For the typical age pensioners this means absolutely nothing when they are on waiting list for hip transplant for two years, or have their medicare rebates to doctors frozen for years.  for sure, when you have 70 % takers and 30 % contributors, then the takers will demand to remain in perpetual low vibration whining and ingratitude and live in scarcity. thats life for most of the population,  jealous of the guy who is successful and unable to comprehend that you have to give and give and give before you recieve. i totally get it. why would you be a sucker and give why not be a taker trouble is , it doesnt work it doesnt work on a personal level and it doesnt work for society. all socialist societies crumble and decay and end up in mayhem seriously look at the french currently trashing paris becuase they are being asked to give to the government. socialism is a catastrophe. telling people its ok to be a taker is a catastrophe. the life of a taker is one of pure suffering and garbage. they will never have enough, they will never he happy. until they embrace that life is hard and you have to find joy in pushing thru that, then they are screwed. and the country is screwed if it starts to pander to the takers. its a step backwards in evolutionary progress and turns people into selfish animals .

But Aqua, when you talk about takers.  Those takers, are not your traditional red shirt labor - so called, generational welfare grabbers.  Most of them have worked and paid tax for all of their lives, and they are just come to the point of their life that they need help.  And there are alot of them, because we are having an ageing population.  For all we know, YOU aqua could well be one of those 'takers' later in life.  Yes... perhaps you have planned well for your life, you are well off.  All it takes is one accident, one episode of chest pain, one drink driver, to turn anyone's life upside down.   Not to mention, if you lucky enough to live longer than what you have planned for. 

You mentioned: why would you be a sucker and give why not be a taker. 

Well, the answer you would get is that, most people work now, and be a sucker, because they see that in the future, in case they need help, then, the government will help them.  If you have a society where there is nothing to give back for hard work, then, whats the point of hard work?  The society will break down to every man for himself environment.  Is that a type of society that you wanted?  Is that the type of society Australia is, or ever was? 

Think about it.

tickleandrose wrote on Nov 26^th, 2018 at 1:18pm:

The society will break down to every man for himself environment.

It's breaking down as we speak, all the domestic violence, all the financial fraud and scams, all the carnage on the roads, traffic jams, terrorist attacks, child abuse, high taxes when buying a home, abuse of the elderly in care facilities, high debt, crooked banks, high electricity costs, suicides, more money being spent for treatment of mental illness, pet dogs tearing children apart. How much more do you want?

Bias_2012 wrote on Nov 26^th, 2018 at 2:24pm:

tickleandrose wrote on Nov 26th, 2018 at 1:18pm: The society will break down to every man for himself environment. It's breaking down as we speak, all the domestic violence, all the financial fraud and scams, all the carnage on the roads, traffic jams, terrorist attacks, child abuse, high taxes when buying a home, abuse of the elderly in care facilities, high debt, crooked banks, high electricity costs, suicides, more money being spent for treatment of mental illness, pet dogs tearing children apart. How much more do you want?

This is the problem of all societies.  I challenge you to find one country in the world that ever existed who did not have these issues.   Whilst people like Aqua sees this problem, and attribute it to socialism, and blame those who takes.  I attribute these to a society where greed and monetary success is valued above humanity.   

You talk about financial fraud / scams / banking dishonesty:  they were done by profit driven public companies who thinks that they are above the law, because they are too big to fail.  They are not afraid to do whatever they like, because when they failed, they would put their greed hands into pockets of tax payers to bail them out.   Sort of socializing their losses. 

High energy bills and energy security due to privatization of our energy supply.  So much so that many of them are foreign owned, and their priority is profit driven.   At the same time, it slaughtered our apprenticeship programs that provide valuable experience for our next generation, at the same time, the private companies is welcome to import cheaper skilled migrants or worse, 'outsource' it over seas to cut cost.

And in each right wing / small government, mental health services are always the ones that gets butchered left right and centre.  It is now upto a state, that unless, you are putting a knife on your throat (or someone elses) in emergency department, you get a call back only, and usually in the form of telling you to go to see your GP and get a care plan. 

So all these problems Bias.  It is as clear as day and night that you cant solve it without collective effort of everyone.  And that means more funding.   In Australia, a small government that right winger's want will not work.  There HAS to be a balance between right and left wing.  Regulation and free market.   Running a government is not like running a household budget. 

So you agree then that our society is breaking down as we speak

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Nov 26^th, 2018 at 8:40am:

matty wrote on Nov 25th, 2018 at 8:22pm: https://www.9news.com.au/2018/11/24/18/44/jim-molan-senate-ticket-nsw-election-career-over You do realise that bar Sec 44 he would not have made the senate anyway.

Yes, and that only emphasises my point, doesn’t it?

tickleandrose wrote on Nov 26^th, 2018 at 10:09am:

Re Matty You will find that the current Labor and Liberal party are quiet centre wing already.  Australia had always been a socialist democracy, and thats how the people expect it.   We are heading towards an ageing population.  A trickle down economy may work in a society post world wars development era, but less so in a ageing / services heavy era.   As people age, not everyone is cashed up or self funded, even those who does, the longevity of life span in Australia means that they will become dependent on social welfare especially later in their lives when they are older and more frail.  This is the reality we are facing.   So expect more socialistic policies to come online.  Take for example, tax cuts for big business.   Perhaps, middle aged skilled contractors would love this, as this may mean more work.  For the typical age pensioners this means absolutely nothing when they are on waiting list for hip replacement for two years, or have their medicare rebates to doctors frozen for years.

And yet every time that the Liberal party has won from Ooposition, it has been by a leader from the right. And many battlers/blue collar voters (from areas like Penrith) preferred the Libs because of their social conservatism. I am an ATB right-wing conservative, but to me the social part is more important than fiscal. When you have a Coalition government committed to this ridiculous Paris agreement, when we emit well less than 1% of total emissions, especially when hardly any other countries still are, is it any wonder that social conservatives; those who actually comprise the Liberal party’s base, and do not believe in climate change, and are much more concerned with issues like immigration, have left and refuse to volunteer before and on Election Day?

aquascoot wrote on Nov 26^th, 2018 at 11:05am:

tickleandrose wrote on Nov 26th, 2018 at 10:09am: Re Matty You will find that the current Labor and Liberal party are quiet centre wing already.  Australia had always been a socialist democracy, and thats how the people expect it.   We are heading towards an ageing population.  A trickle down economy may work in a society post world wars development era, but less so in a ageing / services heavy era.   As people age, not everyone is cashed up or self funded, even those who does, the longevity of life span in Australia means that they will become dependent on social welfare especially later in their lives when they are older and more frail.  This is the reality we are facing.   So expect more socialistic policies to come online.  Take for example, tax cuts for big business.   Perhaps, middle aged skilled contractors would love this, as this may mean more work.  For the typical age pensioners this means absolutely nothing when they are on waiting list for hip transplant for two years, or have their medicare rebates to doctors frozen for years.  for sure, when you have 70 % takers and 30 % contributors, then the takers will demand to remain in perpetual low vibration whining and ingratitude and live in scarcity. thats life for most of the population,  jealous of the guy who is successful and unable to comprehend that you have to give and give and give before you recieve. i totally get it. why would you be a sucker and give why not be a taker trouble is , it doesnt work it doesnt work on a personal level and it doesnt work for society. all socialist societies crumble and decay and end up in mayhem seriously look at the french currently trashing paris becuase they are being asked to give to the government. socialism is a catastrophe. telling people its ok to be a taker is a catastrophe. the life of a taker is one of pure suffering and garbage. they will never have enough, they will never he happy. until they embrace that life is hard and you have to find joy in pushing thru that, then they are screwed. and the country is screwed if it starts to pander to the takers. its a step backwards in evolutionary progress and turns people into selfish animals .

Socialism by definition can never last, let alone prosper. You can’t expect people to work hard and just give it to those who don’t contribute a thing.

Bias_2012 wrote on Nov 26^th, 2018 at 1:13pm:

You're doing the right thing Matty, vote for minor parties and independents. The Libs and Labs are past their use-by date. I could see that very early and it's still fairly early but if the major parties don't change and totally reform themselves, they won't last past 2050. I think everybody knows it, but not fully convinced of it yet. As aquascoot points out, we can't just keep "taking", that's not how debt is paid, and the major parties keep borrowing and borrowing more to pay for everything That Integrity Commission judges are calling for is being resisted by the major parties and that resistance should be a warning to all of us

Exactly right, bias. We continue to see a slow but steady decrease in both the Coalition and Labor’s primary vote. People are just fed up with both. I doubt that we will ever again see either party have anywhere near a majority in the Upper House, that’s for sure. The only hope any right-of-centre voter has is voting for a minor conservative.

In terms of Jim Molan, my hope is that a truckload of people give him first preference below the line to back in. It worked with Lisa Singh with Labor in Tasmania. Even last election, despite being seventh on the ticket, he had over 10,000 first preferences. I always vote below the line. I will put him first, and then everyone else, then the Coalition and Labor second last, and the Greens dead last.

It's OK  Matty im going to put Liberals dead last as well

Its time wrote on Nov 26^th, 2018 at 10:39pm:

It's OK  Matty im going to put Liberals dead last as well

I said the Greens, not Liberals.

matty wrote on Nov 26^th, 2018 at 7:45am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Nov 26th, 2018 at 7:39am: aquascoot wrote on Nov 26th, 2018 at 6:11am: the country faces huge questions. morrison and shorten do not have the answers. when there are big problems , we need authority figures who dont pander to the people and can deliver the stern warnings about where we have gone wrong. morrison and shorten (and indeed, everyone since howard ) have been panderers. if you were a kid and your daddy lost his job, would you want him to just keep pandering to you and selling off assets to bribe you with cakes and candy? or would you rather he acted like a man and said "you no what kid, we are going to have to work our asses off to get out of this pickle, if we dont we are screwed". you could tell a 12 yo that and they would accept it. the fact you cant tell the electorate that, is proof to me that the electorate are functioining at the level of a 3 or 4 yo. always ready to throw a tantrum, refusing to clean up their room, entitled little snots. with an education system and a government which never tells people to take responsibility, is it any wonder most people are perpetual children. and when toddlers deal with the forces of global economics they get destroyed. welcome to a world of more pain and more butt hurt complaining. i dont vibe with that, buit clearly the electorate do. the counrty will fall into low vibration energy...complaining, whining, crying, self pity, anger, confusion, apathy , durr state, mob mentality.....look to paris for what happens when the toddlers are not socialised correctly If they hadnt got greedy and sold our assets at all this wouldnt be how it is but they are all corrupt criminals and its what they do. they spent the pensions then sold our assets then blamed muslims Spot I agree with you that they are all corrupt, but who blamed Muslims for what do you mean?

They didnt blame the muslims i just put that in there as a bit of a joke. who they blame is us - the electorate.

Spot

aquascoot wrote on Nov 26^th, 2018 at 9:05am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Nov 26th, 2018 at 7:39am: aquascoot wrote on Nov 26th, 2018 at 6:11am: the country faces huge questions. morrison and shorten do not have the answers. when there are big problems , we need authority figures who dont pander to the people and can deliver the stern warnings about where we have gone wrong. morrison and shorten (and indeed, everyone since howard ) have been panderers. if you were a kid and your daddy lost his job, would you want him to just keep pandering to you and selling off assets to bribe you with cakes and candy? or would you rather he acted like a man and said "you no what kid, we are going to have to work our asses off to get out of this pickle, if we dont we are screwed". you could tell a 12 yo that and they would accept it. the fact you cant tell the electorate that, is proof to me that the electorate are functioining at the level of a 3 or 4 yo. always ready to throw a tantrum, refusing to clean up their room, entitled little snots. with an education system and a government which never tells people to take responsibility, is it any wonder most people are perpetual children. and when toddlers deal with the forces of global economics they get destroyed. welcome to a world of more pain and more butt hurt complaining. i dont vibe with that, buit clearly the electorate do. the counrty will fall into low vibration energy...complaining, whining, crying, self pity, anger, confusion, apathy , durr state, mob mentality.....look to paris for what happens when the toddlers are not socialised correctly If they hadnt got greedy and sold our assets at all this wouldnt be how it is but they are all corrupt criminals and its what they do. they spent the pensions then sold our assets then blamed muslims Spot ah , but they sold those assets because the voters , like whining toddlers , wanted to get more $$$ . the voters (also known as the whining entitled toddlers) whined and bitched and said "gimme, gimme, gimme".  and the weak pandering politicians did exactly that. if a fat toddler  was sooking because you wont give him candy and soft drink, is it an act of love to give it to him.  just so he'll think you are a "nice guy". i say "hay you little fat puke, get outside and go for a jog"...hence he has a chance to move up in the world. the "compassionate politician"  says "oh poor baby, let me soothe you with some goodies, do you like me now, will you vote for me?" politicians are just vibing with the voters and the voters are in a "taker " mentality. they just want to take. take , take , take......when you are a taker you are what the buddhists call a "hungry ghost". your life becomes a living hell of scarcity. no matter how much you get, you always see it as not being enough. your life is garbage. you need to give to break out of that cycle. if the country doesnt start to become a country of givers and contributors, its screwed

Where your argument falls down is where you say the govt (any of them) are vibing with the voters. Nope they do what benefits themselves. Voters are an inconvenience. The only time they seemingly vibe with the voters is election time but they just lie and dont do anything.

Spot

tickleandrose wrote on Nov 26^th, 2018 at 10:09am:

Re Matty You will find that the current Labor and Liberal party are quiet centre wing already.  Australia had always been a socialist democracy, and thats how the people expect it.   We are heading towards an ageing population.  A trickle down economy may work in a society post world wars development era, but less so in a ageing / services heavy era.   As people age, not everyone is cashed up or self funded, even those who does, the longevity of life span in Australia means that they will become dependent on social welfare especially later in their lives when they are older and more frail.  This is the reality we are facing.   So expect more socialistic policies to come online.  Take for example, tax cuts for big business.   Perhaps, middle aged skilled contractors would love this, as this may mean more work.  For the typical age pensioners this means absolutely nothing when they are on waiting list for hip replacement for two years, or have their medicare rebates to doctors frozen for years.

I dont think it will happen. Not the way things are going. The greedy politicians see the end in sight and so are taking what they can now. the aging population will be homeless.

Spot

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Nov 27^th, 2018 at 5:18am:

tickleandrose wrote on Nov 26th, 2018 at 10:09am: Re Matty You will find that the current Labor and Liberal party are quiet centre wing already.  Australia had always been a socialist democracy, and thats how the people expect it.   We are heading towards an ageing population.  A trickle down economy may work in a society post world wars development era, but less so in a ageing / services heavy era.   As people age, not everyone is cashed up or self funded, even those who does, the longevity of life span in Australia means that they will become dependent on social welfare especially later in their lives when they are older and more frail.  This is the reality we are facing.   So expect more socialistic policies to come online.  Take for example, tax cuts for big business.   Perhaps, middle aged skilled contractors would love this, as this may mean more work.  For the typical age pensioners this means absolutely nothing when they are on waiting list for hip replacement for two years, or have their medicare rebates to doctors frozen for years.  I dont think it will happen. Not the way things are going. The greedy politicians see the end in sight and so are taking what they can now. the aging population will be homeless. Spot

both of you have the problem identified but are not coming up with a solution.

yes, if we are to look after the frail and sick elderly, then we will need a lot more spending on things like hospitals and services for the elderly.

thats fine.

but thats as expensive as hell.

i think a knee replacement costs about 30 k .

and that money doesnt come out of thin air.

that comes out of government revenue.

now, spot says "greedy politicians" but the truth is that the politicians are just selling the farms, selling the real estate , selling the ports , selling the shopping centres and mines to overseas interests, this isnt because they are greedy. they just are desperate for cash to pay for the services that the voters now demand.

is this a game that can be played forever.

absolutely not.

eventually, the foreign debt and the sale of our income producing assets will lead to an inevitable drop in available cash and all government spending will be reduced.
this is what happened in greece.
no cash for cancer drugs, no cash for public housing, increased costs on fuel and electricity.
this is what is happening with the riots in paris because the government raised the fuel tax.

it is the consequence of people just wanting to take and people being reluctant to contribute.

functional societies dont think that way.
they are proud to give and limit taking.

when the financial crisis hit korea and hyundai and samsung looked vulnerable, people worked extra hours for free, people gave up their wedding rings to be melted down for gold to keep their companies afloat.

we could have done that with our car industry.
and that would have created an upward spiral of contribution, wealth, legacy, pride and patriotism.

but instead we just put the workers on welfare and told them to become takers.
is that good for them...absolutley not
is it good for the economy...absolutely not.
is it the fault of greedy politicians ... absolutley not.

it is the consequence of people thinking that you move up by grabbing, grasping and taking and not understanding that all success requires sacrifice and giving before you recieve.

matty wrote on Nov 26^th, 2018 at 10:09pm:

tickleandrose wrote on Nov 26th, 2018 at 10:09am: Re Matty You will find that the current Labor and Liberal party are quiet centre wing already.  Australia had always been a socialist democracy, and thats how the people expect it.   We are heading towards an ageing population.  A trickle down economy may work in a society post world wars development era, but less so in a ageing / services heavy era.   As people age, not everyone is cashed up or self funded, even those who does, the longevity of life span in Australia means that they will become dependent on social welfare especially later in their lives when they are older and more frail.  This is the reality we are facing.   So expect more socialistic policies to come online.  Take for example, tax cuts for big business.   Perhaps, middle aged skilled contractors would love this, as this may mean more work.  For the typical age pensioners this means absolutely nothing when they are on waiting list for hip replacement for two years, or have their medicare rebates to doctors frozen for years.  And yet every time that the Liberal party has won from Ooposition, it has been by a leader from the right. And many battlers/blue collar voters (from areas like Penrith) preferred the Libs because of their social conservatism. I am an ATB right-wing conservative, but to me the social part is more important than fiscal. When you have a Coalition government committed to this ridiculous Paris agreement, when we emit well less than 1% of total emissions, especially when hardly any other countries still are, is it any wonder that social conservatives; those who actually comprise the Liberal party’s base, and do not believe in climate change, and are much more concerned with issues like immigration, have left and refuse to volunteer before and on Election Day?

But Matty the same argument can be had, that every time the labor patry has won from Opposition, it has been a leader from the left, and the many battler/blue collar voters (from areas like Penrith) preferred the labor because their social progressiveness, and 'faireness" (granted this is subjective).  No, what it really is, its about election cycles.  Labor was facing similar when Tony Abbott got elected.  But it is far from because people's desire for social conservatism.  When Abbott tried to shovel his right wing inspired first budget down people's throat, his popularity evaporated.  There are still measures from that particular budget sitting in limbo.   

What the middle class of Australia desires now, is not ultra right wing social conservatism.  Rather its sensible, slight right of centre with sensible but not discriminatory immigration policies.   People want more regulations to control the big bussiness and the banks as evidenced by the royal commisisions, at the same time, they want more flexiblity when it comes to small business. 

As to the issue of climate change.  Most middle class of Australia are highly educated and informed.  And more and more people would want to do something about it, even if they are sketipcal about the science behind it.  Even as a bussiness person, with no real background in science can tell, that burning animal remains for energy is the least efficient, least available form of energy in the entire universe.  In order for humanity to progress, we need to turn to the renewables.   And those with the foresight would recognize, that which ever global power is able to perfect this, that global power would become the dominant power on Earth for hundreds of years to come.   It would be as civilization changing as the steam engines of industrial revolution, the driving force behind the Angolo sphere Empire of the 19th to 20th century.    So its far from just about 'climate'. 

I reckon Molan was "a bit of a dill" ... but I do see how frustrated he would be ...

https://i.imgur.com/FbJlhrL.jpg


;)

THE SHAME OF COPPER INTERNET : YEH, WE ALL KNOW LOL  ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::)  ;D

...THE SHAME OF COPPER INTERNET : YEH, WE ALL KNOW LOL  ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::)  ;D



...........................THE SHAME OF COPPER INTERNET : YEH, WE ALL KNOW LOL  ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::)  ;Di

...............................................................THE SHAME OF COPPER INTERNET : YEH, WE ALL KNOW LOL  ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::)  ;D

matty wrote on Nov 26^th, 2018 at 10:09pm:

When you have a Coalition government committed to this ridiculous Paris agreement, when we emit well less than 1% of total emissions...

A ridiculous argument. Basically, we shouldn't do our share of lifting because we only do a small amount of lifting.

Someone surviving on the Newstart payment requires about 0.00001% of the Federal Budget. Using the exact same argument, we should abolish all obligations for the unemployed. The obligations cost $10 billion a year to administer so why keep them?

One vehicle is only about 0.00001% of all vehicles on Australian roads. Speed limits on roads are costly to administer, and what difference does it make if a particular driver keeps under 60 or drives at 65?

Or does everyone do their bit because it's the right thing to do?

matty wrote on Nov 26^th, 2018 at 10:11pm:

Socialism by definition can never last, let alone prosper. You can’t expect people to work hard and just give it to those who don’t contribute a thing.

You're confusing socialism with capitalism. Tell me how the banks work again?

Bam wrote on Nov 27^th, 2018 at 8:42pm:

matty wrote on Nov 26th, 2018 at 10:11pm: Socialism by definition can never last, let alone prosper. You can’t expect people to work hard and just give it to those who don’t contribute a thing. You're confusing socialism with capitalism. Tell me how the banks work again?

socialism only works within the family. you want to share the food and resources equally amongst the kids.
it doesnt scale.

big banks, big governments, centralised power also does not work.

the american banks were said to be "too big to fail". it should have been 'so big they must fail".

we see this all the time.
anything that is too big loses touch with the people on the ground.

a big hospital becomes run by bean counters.
big banks become corrupt and serve the people at the top.
the NBN is probably too big.
centrelink is probably too big.
there comes a disconnect because the middle management arent getting the feedback from the customers.
brexit is probably a sign the EU is too big, the people of birmingham didnt feel connected to the men in suits in brussels
its why small business is the way to go.
instant feedback and course correction.
the customer must be served or the business is screwed.
you must offer value or you perish.

we should always aim to have small business people operating with as little regulation as possible and with encouragement for innovation.

ebay is like that.....it is based on small businesses , little interference , trust in a stranger and instant feedback.
hence it generates wealth from nothing.
wikipedia is like that....multiple small people in contribution, trust and instant feedback .


imagine if you had kevin rudd design ebay or wikipedia....how cumbersome and expensive they would be  :D :D :D

Re aqua.

Your are contradicting yourself. 

Our big banks are private enterprises, however, over the years, they have grew to such a state that they are 'too big' to fail.  And hence, most of them thinks they are above the law, and asks for tax payer payouts when the going gets tough.   Now, if you tried to regulate to restrict this growth, then you are not walkig the lines of captitalism or smaller government.  Then you end up with a government that restricts evulotion from small business to big cooporates.  How would you manage that without limiting the individual freedom?   

What you are proposing is not democracy, or free market capitalism. 

Small businesses are good, but only to an extend.  For example, in capital cities, you will find its more viable to have smaller internet providers, who can do their own fiber to the premise.   However, those business would be completely non viable in the rural settings, where there are less customers per meter of cable layed or serviced.   And this goes on for many other services.  How do you keep up with the services in the rural regions?  Let them wither?  Remember they are the heart land of conservative social politics, but not really conservative economic policies -  think about that.

the ACCC has power over this.

our banks are not as bad as american banks and we did well in the GFC thanks to peter costellos sensible regulation of the banks (some thanks to paul keating as well)

still , the ACCC could restrict the size of big business.

coles and woolies should not have been allowed into petrol retailing and hotel ownership.
smaller banks and credit unions could be given the same gaurantees as the big banks .

aquascoot wrote on Nov 28^th, 2018 at 7:08am:

the ACCC has power over this. our banks are not as bad as american banks and we did well in the GFC thanks to peter costellos sensible regulation of the banks (some thanks to paul keating as well) still , the ACCC could restrict the size of big business. coles and woolies should not have been allowed into petrol retailing and hotel ownership. smaller banks and credit unions could be given the same gaurantees as the big banks .

In this case, then at your core, you are not really a right wing conservative.  You are more of centre right wing.  Whilst you believe in free enterprise, but its not free for all.  Without regulation to limit the powers of big business, small business would never be able to compete with large internationals.  But with good regulation they can. 

Socialism does not always means to take from x to benefit y.  It can also be about working together to benefit all.  For example, by individuals, we will never be able to have a world class medical systems that backs everyone regardless of their wealth when they are sick.   however, together we can.   And no one country, not even the most right wing conservative of all, would think to privatize its own standing army into hands of small businesses. 

Which means, there have to be a balance of the two: socialism vs capitalism in any form of governance.

Did you get those weekend and public holiday penalty rates, fixed yet Mr Morrison?.   :(

aquascoot wrote on Nov 28^th, 2018 at 6:20am:

Bam wrote on Nov 27th, 2018 at 8:42pm: matty wrote on Nov 26th, 2018 at 10:11pm: Socialism by definition can never last, let alone prosper. You can’t expect people to work hard and just give it to those who don’t contribute a thing. You're confusing socialism with capitalism. Tell me how the banks work again? socialism only works within the family. you want to share the food and resources equally amongst the kids. it doesnt scale.

Do you think capitalism scales? It doesn't. It just creates wealthier billionaires, hoarding the wealth generated by others for no benefit to anyone but themselves.

The wealthiest 20 people on the planet have as much wealth as the poorest 3,500,000,000 people. These wealthy don't work any harder. Capitalism just allows them to extort wealth from other people more efficiently.

Socialism is sustainable if it's implemented properly. Capitalism is not. All that hoarded wealth cannot accumulate forever. Unless it is recirculated by peaceful means such as high taxes or philanthropy, it will reach a point where it's recirculated by violence. There are no examples of capitalist societies that have ever lasted indefinitely. They always end by police state or violent revolution. Greed has a price and sooner or later that price must be paid.

tickleandrose wrote on Nov 28^th, 2018 at 7:19am:

aquascoot wrote on Nov 28th, 2018 at 7:08am: the ACCC has power over this. our banks are not as bad as american banks and we did well in the GFC thanks to peter costellos sensible regulation of the banks (some thanks to paul keating as well) still , the ACCC could restrict the size of big business. coles and woolies should not have been allowed into petrol retailing and hotel ownership. smaller banks and credit unions could be given the same gaurantees as the big banks . In this case, then at your core, you are not really a right wing conservative.  You are more of centre right wing.  Whilst you believe in free enterprise, but its not free for all.  Without regulation to limit the powers of big business, small business would never be able to compete with large internationals.  But with good regulation they can.  Socialism does not always means to take from x to benefit y.  It can also be about working together to benefit all.  For example, by individuals, we will never be able to have a world class medical systems that backs everyone regardless of their wealth when they are sick.   however, together we can.   And no one country, not even the most right wing conservative of all, would think to privatize its own standing army into hands of small businesses.  Which means, there have to be a balance of the two: socialism vs capitalism in any form of governance.

i support medicare and think the unwell and infirm need to be treated with compassion.
a sick person is like an infant.
and we should all feel compassion for an infant.

i dont support feeling compassion for able bodied people with no health issue who think that they dont have to contribute.
if you are 20 and fit and healthy then you should be wanting to do work for the dole as it keeps you mentally tuned to offering value and giving before you recieve.
when i hear a fit 20 yo saying that they should be cared for by the state, then i see a taker and people need to get out of that mindset, not for the good of the economy but for their own benefit.
they have to embrace contribution and a failure to do so has implications for their future success.

Bam wrote on Nov 28^th, 2018 at 8:46am:

aquascoot wrote on Nov 28th, 2018 at 6:20am: Bam wrote on Nov 27th, 2018 at 8:42pm: matty wrote on Nov 26th, 2018 at 10:11pm: Socialism by definition can never last, let alone prosper. You can’t expect people to work hard and just give it to those who don’t contribute a thing. You're confusing socialism with capitalism. Tell me how the banks work again? socialism only works within the family. you want to share the food and resources equally amongst the kids. it doesnt scale. Do you think capitalism scales? It doesn't. It just creates wealthier billionaires, hoarding the wealth generated by others for no benefit to anyone but themselves. The wealthiest 20 people on the planet have as much wealth as the poorest 3,500,000,000 people. These wealthy don't work any harder. Capitalism just allows them to extort wealth from other people more efficiently. Socialism is sustainable if it's implemented properly. Capitalism is not. All that hoarded wealth cannot accumulate forever. Unless it is recirculated by peaceful means such as high taxes or philanthropy, it will reach a point where it's recirculated by violence. There are no examples of capitalist societies that have ever lasted indefinitely. They always end by police state or violent revolution. Greed has a price and sooner or later that price must be paid.

again thats the paretto effect.  once you start getting rich, money flows to you.
your cup "runneth over".
i dont blame capitalism , it is a natural law.
its like monopoly....eventually one person has all the $$$$.
but monopoly would be boring if, every 10  minutes you just redistributed everything equally. people would get bored and stop playing.


so what to do about it?

we have to help those at the bottom of the heap to get a start and the state can do this.
a guy with an IQ of 70 is not going to make it nowadays.
he can be given responsibility to look after a park or one suburban block and keep it manicured.
now he is contributing.

what about at the top end?

well its hard to tell facebook or microsoft that their success has to be curtailed.

i dont know but we need to find innovative ways to get the big successful companies interested in civic responsibility . i think that is doable. shareholder value is one thing but the guys at the top are very smart and they are status driven.
you start giving them kudos for opening a free university or for doing something for the environment or doing something for the community and i think they would be on board.

see you see rich guys as greedy pigs.
i know rich people...most a re pretty calm, humbled by what they have built and want to contribute.
they just want kudos for it.
they want to contribute,  not be taxed and hated on by the mediocre people .

make it easy for them to contribute and they will be up for it

whiteknight wrote on Nov 28^th, 2018 at 7:20am:

Did you get those weekend and public holiday penalty rates, fixed yet Mr Morrison?.   :(

He's too busy trying to figure out how to fix the next federal election.

Get rid of work for the dole rubbish.   :(

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 28^th, 2018 at 11:31am:

whiteknight wrote on Nov 28th, 2018 at 7:20am: Did you get those weekend and public holiday penalty rates, fixed yet Mr Morrison?.   :( He's too busy trying to figure out how to fix the next federal election.

No poo,  have a look at sitting days next year,  what a disgrace

tickleandrose wrote on Nov 27^th, 2018 at 8:13am:

matty wrote on Nov 26th, 2018 at 10:09pm: tickleandrose wrote on Nov 26th, 2018 at 10:09am: Re Matty You will find that the current Labor and Liberal party are quiet centre wing already.  Australia had always been a socialist democracy, and thats how the people expect it.   We are heading towards an ageing population.  A trickle down economy may work in a society post world wars development era, but less so in a ageing / services heavy era.   As people age, not everyone is cashed up or self funded, even those who does, the longevity of life span in Australia means that they will become dependent on social welfare especially later in their lives when they are older and more frail.  This is the reality we are facing.   So expect more socialistic policies to come online.  Take for example, tax cuts for big business.   Perhaps, middle aged skilled contractors would love this, as this may mean more work.  For the typical age pensioners this means absolutely nothing when they are on waiting list for hip replacement for two years, or have their medicare rebates to doctors frozen for years.  And yet every time that the Liberal party has won from Ooposition, it has been by a leader from the right. And many battlers/blue collar voters (from areas like Penrith) preferred the Libs because of their social conservatism. I am an ATB right-wing conservative, but to me the social part is more important than fiscal. When you have a Coalition government committed to this ridiculous Paris agreement, when we emit well less than 1% of total emissions, especially when hardly any other countries still are, is it any wonder that social conservatives; those who actually comprise the Liberal party’s base, and do not believe in climate change, and are much more concerned with issues like immigration, have left and refuse to volunteer before and on Election Day? But Matty the same argument can be had, that every time the labor patry has won from Opposition, it has been a leader from the left, and the many battler/blue collar voters (from areas like Penrith) preferred the labor because their social progressiveness, and 'faireness" (granted this is subjective).  No, what it really is, its about election cycles.  Labor was facing similar when Tony Abbott got elected.  But it is far from because people's desire for social conservatism.  When Abbott tried to shovel his right wing inspired first budget down people's throat, his popularity evaporated.  There are still measures from that particular budget sitting in limbo.    What the middle class of Australia desires now, is not ultra right wing social conservatism.  Rather its sensible, slight right of centre with sensible but not discriminatory immigration policies.   People want more regulations to control the big bussiness and the banks as evidenced by the royal commisisions, at the same time, they want more flexiblity when it comes to small business.  As to the issue of climate change.  Most middle class of Australia are highly educated and informed.  And more and more people would want to do something about it, even if they are sketipcal about the science behind it.  Even as a bussiness person, with no real background in science can tell, that burning animal remains for energy is the least efficient, least available form of energy in the entire universe.  In order for humanity to progress, we need to turn to the renewables.   And those with the foresight would recognize, that which ever global power is able to perfect this, that global power would become the dominant power on Earth for hundreds of years to come.   It would be as civilization changing as the steam engines of industrial revolution, the driving force behind the Angolo sphere Empire of the 19th to 20th century.    So its far from just about 'climate'.

When has Labor ever won from the left though, rose?

I don’t agree at all that people from Penrith are in favour of socially progressive policies. Granted, people have become so used to handouts that many were not in favour of the tough measures put in place in the first budget. Sure, in favour of flexibility for small businesses is a popular view, but I don’t think that many people are into demonising big business the way that Labor, the Greens and many of the moderates in the Liberals. Not sure exactly what you’re getting at with non discriminatory immigration, as you didn’t elaborate, but multiple polls have shown that most voters across-the-board want a halt on Muslim immigration, with a majority of Liberal voters, I think about 50/50 Labor voters and even a substantial minority of Green voters.

I would like to see a recent poll as to the belief in climate change; I believe that belief in it would have dramatically reduced since its ‘peak’ (for lack of a better word) between 2007-2012. However, the underlying point is that a majority of Australians would rather not being hit with an increase in their electricity bill, and not being able to turn on the heater, than they would with Australia trying to cut our emissions when it won’t make a scrap of difference to the atmosphere.

Bam wrote on Nov 27^th, 2018 at 8:40pm:

matty wrote on Nov 26th, 2018 at 10:09pm: When you have a Coalition government committed to this ridiculous Paris agreement, when we emit well less than 1% of total emissions... A ridiculous argument. Basically, we shouldn't do our share of lifting because we only do a small amount of lifting. Someone surviving on the Newstart payment requires about 0.00001% of the Federal Budget. Using the exact same argument, we should abolish all obligations for the unemployed. The obligations cost $10 billion a year to administer so why keep them? One vehicle is only about 0.00001% of all vehicles on Australian roads. Speed limits on roads are costly to administer, and what difference does it make if a particular driver keeps under 60 or drives at 65? Or does everyone do their bit because it's the right thing to do?

Unequal analogy: that all adds up in the end; this doesn’t. Australia reducing its emissions won’t make a scrap of difference when other countries that emit far more than we do, are not doing the same.

Bam wrote on Nov 27^th, 2018 at 8:42pm:

matty wrote on Nov 26th, 2018 at 10:11pm: Socialism by definition can never last, let alone prosper. You can’t expect people to work hard and just give it to those who don’t contribute a thing. You're confusing socialism with capitalism. Tell me how the banks work again?

You mean capitalism, that system of fairness where effort is rewarded and laziness is punished?

Every western society has socialism as a core including the US, it was the people who bailed he banks out not capitalism.

The fundamental problem today is that conservative politicians are too busy talking among themselves and their laissez faire free market ideology to know what the people are actually saying.... such as climate change as an eg: they still think that cliamate change is a hoax yet the Victorian election clearly shows the people don't, when the UN IPCC states that the planet is heading towards climate calamity the people are taking notice.

Also with banks and the electricity sector it was the coalition who took away the regulations and why the banks were gouging and the privatised energy companies were gold plating power poles with a nod from the LNP let her rip with profits until 2020.

Now they are scratching their nuts on how to win the next election when the people are not listening to the Neo-liberal spin anymore.....times up on dinsoaur economics and lack of action on climate change,.... the old lines why should Australia take action when the world isn't is falling on deaf ears...the world is acting, and those that fail to act will left wallowing in their own fossil fueled excrement.

Pedro Curevo wrote on Nov 30^th, 2018 at 6:12am:

Every western society has socialism as a core including the US, it was the people who bailed he banks out not capitalism. The fundamental problem today is that conservative politicians are too busy talking among themselves and their laissez faire free market ideology to know what the people are actually saying.... such as climate change as an eg: they still think that cliamate change is a hoax yet the Victorian election clearly shows the people don't, when the UN IPCC states that the planet is heading towards climate calamity the people are taking notice. Also with banks and the electricity sector it was the coalition who took away the regulations and why the banks were gouging and the privatised energy companies were gold plating power poles with a nod from the LNP let her rip with profits until 2020. Now they are scratching their nuts on how to win the next election when the people are not listening to the Neo-liberal spin anymore.....times up on dinsoaur economics and lack of action on climate change,.... the old lines why should Australia take action when the world isn't is falling on deaf ears...the world is acting, and those that fail to act will left wallowing in their own fossil fueled excrement.

like Qld labor just opening the adani coal mine, one of the biggest coal mines in world history  ;)