Australian Politics Forum

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47369
At my desk.

Howard tax cuts benefited rich: OECD
Reply #840 - Mar 12^th, 2008 at 11:10am

Howard tax cuts benefited rich: OECD

http://news.smh.com.au/howard-tax-cuts-benefited-rich-oecd/20080312-1yt2.html

Australia's high income earners have benefited most from the former Howard government's tax cuts, an OECD report shows.

The annual OECD survey found that unlike other countries that used tax changes to favour low income earners, in Australia the opposite had occurred, News Ltd reported on Wednesday.

I find the last two quotes very revealing:

Abbott mounts defence of Howard years

http://news.smh.com.au/abbott-mounts-defence-of-howard-years/20080312-1yvm.html

Federal opposition frontbencher Tony Abbott has staunchly defended the record of former prime minister John Howard.

"I think that John Howard is perfectly entitled to defend the record of what was an outstandingly good government," Mr Abbott told reporters in Canberra on Wednesday.

"I think history will be very kind to the Howard government."

"But what was appropriate for the coalition in government is not necessarily suitable for the coalition in opposition," Mr Abbott said.

"If John Howard was still in the parliament his view would be a little bit different than the view that he took under very different circumstances."

Back to top

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!

IP Logged

deepthought

Gold Member

Offline

In Defence Of Liberty

Posts: 2869

Re: JOHN HOWARD
Reply #841 - Mar 12^th, 2008 at 8:30pm

Quote:

Hey nothought you're the one using the word resolution not me, you are a silly sausage, and as far as the forum seeing my cred, you crack me up seeing as though you have zilch. Anyone with half a brain would understand I dont need to make compensation for halfwits.

Call the declaration what you want then. It just so happens that the UN's declarations are called 'resolutions'. You said that the UN had declared the 'invasion' of Iraq illegal. Produce the evidence.

Back to top

IP Logged

Aussie

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 37678
Gender: male

Re: JOHN HOWARD
Reply #842 - Mar 12^th, 2008 at 9:31pm

Bugger off with this pedantry.

DT said:

Quote:

Did the UN move a resolution declaring the 'invasion' of Iraq illegal? If they did your link to it will prove your claim to be right.

I am of the opinion there is no such resolution. I strongly doubt you will post a link because you know, as do I, that no such resolution exists.

Let the forum see your credibility and integrity.

With the USA holding a veto vote, of course not. Why bother?

Kofi Annan said what he tellingly said, and he is far more qualified, supported and resourced than anyone on this Forum.

Back to top

IP Logged

deepthought

Gold Member

Offline

In Defence Of Liberty

Posts: 2869

Re: JOHN HOWARD
Reply #843 - Mar 12^th, 2008 at 9:46pm

Aussie wrote on Mar 12^th, 2008 at 9:31pm:

Bugger off with this pedantry.

DT said:

Quote:

Did the UN move a resolution declaring the 'invasion' of Iraq illegal? If they did your link to it will prove your claim to be right.

I am of the opinion there is no such resolution. I strongly doubt you will post a link because you know, as do I, that no such resolution exists.

Let the forum see your credibility and integrity.

With the USA holding a veto vote, of course not. Why bother?

Kofi Annan said what he tellingly said, and he is far more qualified, supported and resourced than anyone on this Forum.

So the resolution was moved but vetoed by the US? I don't think so. In fact you are speculating aren't you.

Kofi Annan's words are telling - he makes it perfectly clear he is offering a personal opinion. And he is not well supported by legal opinion.

Back to top

IP Logged

Aussie

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 37678
Gender: male

Re: JOHN HOWARD
Reply #844 - Mar 12^th, 2008 at 10:02pm

Quote:

So the resolution was moved but vetoed by the US? I don't think so. In fact you are speculating aren't you.

Of course not DT. Why would Kofi sponsor a resolution he knew would be vetoed by the USA.

There was never any resolution proposed, as you well know.

And the reason is.........the USA could/would veto it.

But, that did not prevent Kofi expressing his informed opinion, one I would value well over and above yours, DT.

Back to top

IP Logged

deepthought

Gold Member

Offline

In Defence Of Liberty

Posts: 2869

Re: JOHN HOWARD
Reply #845 - Mar 12^th, 2008 at 10:16pm

Aussie wrote on Mar 12^th, 2008 at 10:02pm:

Quote:

So the resolution was moved but vetoed by the US? I don't think so. In fact you are speculating aren't you.

Of course not DT. Why would Kofi sponsor a resolution he knew would be vetoed by the USA.

There was never any resolution proposed, as you well know.

And the reason is.........the USA could/would veto it.

But, that did not prevent Kofi expressing his informed opinion, one I would value well over and above yours, DT.

No worries. What law was broken?

Back to top

IP Logged

IQSRLOW Gold Member Offline OzPolitic Posts: 1618	Re: JOHN HOWARD Reply #846 - Mar 12^th, 2008 at 10:19pm Why would Kofi sponsor a resolution he knew would be vetoed by the USA. Why wouldn't he? He could have gone down as the Leftard hero who challenge the 'big bad US' and their 'lapdogs' Kofi is either 1. Not a man of principle 2. Only offered an opinion that is worth no more than joe bloggs or Aussie Strange that...
Back to top	Political Animal has little moderation. It is the forum for free speech and free thinkers to converse passionately without the threat of being banned. It is a forum for adults. IP Logged

Aussie Gold Member Offline OzPolitic Posts: 37678 Gender:	Re: JOHN HOWARD Reply #847 - Mar 12^th, 2008 at 10:25pm Quote: What law was broken? None that I know of. But, given how political climates change, if I were hayseed, just occasionally, the sphincter would twitch at night when I was trying to sleep.
Back to top	IP Logged

deepthought Gold Member Offline In Defence Of Liberty Posts: 2869	Re: JOHN HOWARD Reply #848 - Mar 12^th, 2008 at 10:29pm Duplicate post
Back to top	IP Logged

deepthought

Gold Member

Offline

In Defence Of Liberty

Posts: 2869

Re: JOHN HOWARD
Reply #849 - Mar 12^th, 2008 at 10:31pm

Aussie wrote on Mar 12^th, 2008 at 10:25pm:

Quote:

What law was broken?

None that I know of.

But, given how political climates change, if I were hayseed, just occasionally, the sphincter would twitch at night when I was trying to sleep.

So let me get this straight.

You accept Kofi's opinion that the 'invasion' of Iraq was illegal. Yet no law was broken.

I see now.

But are you sure you know the definition of the term 'illegal'?

Back to top

IP Logged

Sprintcyclist Gold Member Offline OzPolitic Posts: 39515 Gender:	Re: JOHN HOWARD Reply #850 - Mar 14^th, 2008 at 1:10pm John Howards final farewell to the Aussies may come to pass. Yet another tax cut. Unless rudd stops it, that is.
Back to top	Modern Classic Right Wing IP Logged

deepthought

Gold Member

Offline

In Defence Of Liberty

Posts: 2869

Re: JOHN HOWARD
Reply #851 - Mar 14^th, 2008 at 6:07pm

deepthought wrote on Mar 12^th, 2008 at 8:30pm:

Quote:

Hey nothought you're the one using the word resolution not me, you are a silly sausage, and as far as the forum seeing my cred, you crack me up seeing as though you have zilch. Anyone with half a brain would understand I dont need to make compensation for halfwits.

Call the declaration what you want then. It just so happens that the UN's declarations are called 'resolutions'. You said that the UN had declared the 'invasion' of Iraq illegal. Produce the evidence.

Wonder what happened to athiest? Found religion you reckon?

Back to top

IP Logged

deepthought

Gold Member

Offline

In Defence Of Liberty

Posts: 2869

Re: JOHN HOWARD
Reply #852 - Mar 14^th, 2008 at 6:11pm

Sprintcyclist wrote on Mar 14^th, 2008 at 1:10pm:

John Howards final farewell to the Aussies may come to pass.

Yet another tax cut. Unless rudd stops it, that is.

We had one a year for the last several years. And what's more 'me too' Cardboard Kevvy actually mimicked Johnny's tax cuts so guess what? He will have to deliver these tax cuts progressively as he promised. Tax cuts will be paid this year, next year and the year after.

Ha ha ha ha ha ha, he will be sweating each year as he turns the economy into recession and is still glued to a tax cut he had no idea he could ever afford to pay.

Back to top

IP Logged

athiest

Ex Member

Re: JOHN HOWARD
Reply #853 - Mar 15^th, 2008 at 8:40am

deepthought wrote on Mar 14^th, 2008 at 6:07pm:

deepthought wrote on Mar 12^th, 2008 at 8:30pm:

Quote:

Hey nothought you're the one using the word resolution not me, you are a silly sausage, and as far as the forum seeing my cred, you crack me up seeing as though you have zilch. Anyone with half a brain would understand I dont need to make compensation for halfwits.

Call the declaration what you want then. It just so happens that the UN's declarations are called 'resolutions'. You said that the UN had declared the 'invasion' of Iraq illegal. Produce the evidence.

Wonder what happened to athiest? Found religion you reckon?

So is that a flame nothought, or do ya just miss me? I thought I'd give you a break it seems fd thinks I pick on you to much.

Back to top

IP Logged

deepthought

Gold Member

Offline

In Defence Of Liberty

Posts: 2869

Re: JOHN HOWARD
Reply #854 - Mar 15^th, 2008 at 3:30pm

Quote:

deepthought wrote on Mar 14^th, 2008 at 6:07pm:

deepthought wrote on Mar 12^th, 2008 at 8:30pm:

Quote:

Hey nothought you're the one using the word resolution not me, you are a silly sausage, and as far as the forum seeing my cred, you crack me up seeing as though you have zilch. Anyone with half a brain would understand I dont need to make compensation for halfwits.

Call the declaration what you want then. It just so happens that the UN's declarations are called 'resolutions'. You said that the UN had declared the 'invasion' of Iraq illegal. Produce the evidence.

Wonder what happened to athiest? Found religion you reckon?

So is that a flame nothought, or do ya just miss me? I thought I'd give you a break it seems fd thinks I pick on you to much.

No it's not a flame dude, it's an expression of concern that you appear to have disappeared and a pun on your username. I'm both a caring and a humourous poster.

But as you had not produced the evidence I was wondering if you are still looking or you have decided there is none and I was right all along. Aussie confessed no law was broken as far as he was aware - you may now feel the same as you have fallen silent.

Back to top

IP Logged