Stu, you have a lot to learn. Firstly, you take criticism far too personally to be in politics. Secondly, you are too tightly wound up to think logically about what you are doing. Thirdly, name calling indicates you have no substance, just a lot of hot air (whether it be directed at me, or the major parties which have really got your goat).

It seems you have already written a stack of 'policy' without even having a formal party structure or registered members. That makes you an independent. Policy should be written in consultation with the party, so that it appeals to a wider audience (i.e. so you can have candidates in multiple seats). You don't have a party, therefore you can't put it forward as its policy.

Do I talk to people? Sure, all the time.

Have you asked a copper what they think of the law? Most of them have no arguments with it. Then try justifying the action of a magistrate who just released a repeat offender with a slap on the wrist, even though there was a mountain of evidence to justify a lengthy jail term. You might be lucky to walk out of the room. How do I know this? My brother is a uniformed copper, who now spends 2/3 of his day shuffling paperwork. Get uniform away from their desks and onto the streets. Didn't see that in your policing policy.

Re your comments on Tax Avoidance and Fraud. You obviously know nothing about the ATO, ACCC or ASIC. They already have the powers you are asking for. How do I know? I have studied business law, and occasionally consult to business on corporate governance.

Health you say? My partner is a doctor. I work with doctors. I have frequent contact with health administrators. There is more than enough funding to deal with health issues. The problem is with duplication of service delivery, which gobbles up vast sums of money, and lack of qualified staff. Solve those issues and you will be the messiah of health.

At the moment you are an immature political hack, and will be eaten alive if you are fortunate to ever make your way into parliament. I doubt you will even get close.

When the people stop following their masters and stand up forthemselves then they will understand.

As the 2 majors are already talking to independants there goes the voice.

I am passionate and if i am a hack what makes that of the labor party no policy, corruption,same with liberal party this is what you get for your obedience.

Well i'll tell you what Stu and Bettsyboopy if this brave new political party cant get its poo together to build a website that is "under consruction" and has been for a while,what hope for the real party

My hat goes off to you for your passion mate, but things are never idealistic in reality. In fact many bold idealisms have given birth to some of the greatest evils we have known: Nazism, Stalinism etc, these things began with a kernel of thought that was essential good and pure. For instance if you really read some Marx you will see that the intention was never what came in the end, many have said that if Marx lived to see what became of his teachings he would be quite disappointed (in fact he did to a degree and to a degree he was). I have absolute faith in the good of people, but I have absolute faith in the selfishness and evils of people too.

Largely I agree - the two parties are rotting from the core and this is an issue, especially when you end up in the situation we are (arguably) in, whereby two minority representations (in real terms, I'm talking membership and activity) are majority power brokers simply because of traditional voting habits. But the answer is not in simply creating another party! The answer is really in involvement. Good politics does not happen in parliment, it begins on the street. The attitudes of the people around you have more effect on public policy than the personal opinions of the leaders. Take the David Hicks affair - 5 years it took for public opinion to sway and if it hadn't, Howard would still be sitting on it.

Really I'd love to see the abolishment of political parties altogether in favour of independent representatives, but accretion would simply occur anyway and along more subtle and insidious lines... nothing would change - besides the managerial issues would be tremendous, for instance: who gets to be minister of what? This is what it boils down to, the game is theirs, join it and you join THEIR game. Real progress is changing the game, taking it and making it different!

Really if you want to make a difference then make a difference. If you want decision making power and to be in the public spotlight then get into politics. And there's another point (oh it is quite acceptable to start a sentence with 'and' by the way, somebody said not to - but it is fine in the correct context) the 'public spotlight' part generally comes first, unknowns don't really pull votes. Unfortunately it IS a popularity contest and without being a known personality in your community then good luck.

Look there are loads of things that can be done from the ground up that WILL make more positive difference to our country than political parties ever will. A good friend of mine for instance is starting a community garden here, may not seem like much, now this community garden is going to be staffed by 'work for the dole' folk, and in turn they will be trained by the local TAFE. This is the first work for the dole project in the country that will get TAFE certificates for the dole workers (as I understand it - this is what they have been told). Now, you do this on a local level in enough places around the country and soon enough it becomes public policy. Not only that but decentralisation of food distribution is a HUUUUGE hurdle to be overcome in terms of environmental degradation. Get a community garden and market in every neighbourhood in the country and you will do more than any green tax shift could hope for, seriously.

This is how democracies really do work, and this is how they really should work! Take the power from the leaders, and put it in the hands of the people. You want green power? don't go for the policy, just MAKE IT WORK! I swear the first person who makes green power a truly economical alternative will make it happen. There is no conspiracy to destroy the environment, market forces just mean renewables are off the table. I am very interested in politics, social policy, human society and behaviour myself, but you know what I'm doing about it? I'm studying mechanical engineering because I want to be a part of the things that really make a difference. If more people... PEOPLE, had this attitude then we wouldn't even need to be bitching about our politicians, they would be our slaves the way they are supposed to be!

Maybe chem eng, chemistry or biochem would be better. That appears to be where the new energy technologies are appearing. The mech stuff is just glorified windmills.

freediver wrote on Mar 9^th, 2007 at 5:59pm:


Also, don't knock windmills - there are some amazing designs coming out that can work from 'dirty' wind at low speeds without any need for rotation to meet wind direction. Don't forget it's us mechanical engineers that study fluid mechanics - not the others! Power plants still need mechanical engineers. A small discrete windmill on the top of every building would be a good step in the right direction, even if wind isn't good for base load.

Quote:


Stu says he wants to change politics, to be a point of differentiation in a political sense. His policies are populist, and I really cannot see the difference between what he is posting, and the existing conservative parties (eg. Family First, National Party). Except their position is far more prescribed. I use the term populist for party policy that is popular, but without substance. One Nation is a classic example of a party that came up with policy that struck a chord with voters. Got them a long way, didn't it?

As much as I dislike the Howard government, I do give it credit for making some tough and unpopular decisions. Governing a country is not about pandering to the people, it is about doing the right thing for the interests of the nation.

Quote:


I have no problem with having a go. There are numerous posts by me supporting Stu and his party's right to form and participate. It doesn't mean that I forego my right to disagree with the policy, which I have also pointed out is flimsy and poorly thought out. Do you really think the public is going to take anyone seriously if they don't even bother using grammar and spelling correctly?

Read Zoso's contributions, I think he puts forward a good argument about the dangers of ill thought policy.