Liberal vs Labor

googled · #11 20th November 2006, 03:34 AM

Originally Posted by Neenie1

Whats the octopus card? Never heard of that one.

It's an electronic card, much like an "E-Tag" but for humans and doesn't require batteries.

I don't like the labour party much. I dislike both Kim Beazley, and Kevin Rudd.

I can understand Kim Beazley, I'm sure a lot of people think he's a slob.

Why Kevin Rudd?

He wrote to SMH about social Justice that Christians should follow Christ's example of helping others needs that is in Society, rather than concentrating on individualism , thus as a Christian it's "Not whats best for us" but rather "What's Best for others".

He's Given seminars about why Church and State should never mix, and how to be a Christian and enter politics with those two distinctions.

Neenie, if you've ever heard him give a seminar, you will think, based on his intellect and truthful tone, that he will be the next Prime Minister...

I don't much like any alternatives for a new Prime Minister, and as far as I'm concerned, if John Howard is running again (lol, I wouldn't be surprised if he does) he has my vote.

I vouch for Kevin Rudd.

Not because he's a Christian... it's because he understands the economy, finance and has a great Moral Ethic that governs him as a person.

Exonoesis · #12 20th November 2006, 05:11 AM

Originally Posted by The Bad Templar

Right they're 'socialists' and supporters of a capitalist superpower at the same time.

America is also socialist.

You've said on previous threads....

The Liberals have been the most multicultural government of all... many would disagree.

Who disagrees and on what basis?

You advocate kicking Muslims out of Australia and boast gleefully that the ALP began the White Australia Policy.

Is that supposed to be an insult?

Originally Posted by ScMay

Next you'll start calling them Nazis or Communists or some other discredited and disliked group.

I'll call them what they are.

Care to tell us all why you think these things so we can better understand your point of view? You can't expect people to believe you unless you give them a reason why.

Sure. When I become Prime Minister I will make lots of changes for smaller government, less laws, rules and regulations, more freedom and responsibility for the people, including the following:

I will cut all special racist Aboriginal funding.

I will pull out of all free trade agreements.

I will cut all foreign aid.

I will sell ABC and SBS (government broadcasters).

I will sell Telstra (government telecommunications company).

I will get rid of all government welfare.

I will get rid of stupid things like the feminist Sex Discrimination Commission.

I will ged rid of Medicare.

I will get rid of the income tax.

I will get rid of GST (goods and services tax).

I will sell off government regulation bodies and make government owned departments and agencies fund themselves.

People talk about IR laws... I will get rid of all of them.

Athene · #13 20th November 2006, 09:55 AM

Closed for staff review

Athene · #14 21st November 2006, 07:47 AM

This thread has been re-opened after a clean-up. Posts which were in violation of the following rules have been removed.

2.1 No Flaming

You will not "flame" other members or groups of members. Flaming includes, but is not limited to:
- Ridiculing, insulting, or demeaning another member or group of members;
- Ridiculing another member's beliefs;
- Ridiculing public figures important to another's religious beliefs;
- Stating or implying that another member or group of members who have identified themselves as Christian are not Christian;
- Calling or describing other people, groups, belief-systems, or ideas as heresy or a cult (or derivatives of these words). Instead of using these emotionally charged words, please state "X is wrong because of Y" rather than using these words in polemical discussion;
- Asking loaded questions that directly cause flames in response;
- Using sarcasm to attempt any of the above; and
- Threats of any sort, including advocating or supporting physical or mental harm against another living creature (this creature clause does not apply to political discussions of military action, hunting/fishing discussions nor ethical discussions of capital punishment).

2.8 No Off-Topic

You will not 'de-rail' or 'hijack' threads by making posts unrelated to the original post or other posts in the thread. You will not create threads unrelated to the topic of a forum or subforum.

ScMay · #15 21st November 2006, 08:48 AM

Originally Posted by Exonoesis

America is also socialist.

What definition are you using? America is about the least socialist country in the world, they are (or seem to be) obsessed with lowering taxes, deregulating, privatising etc. One example of this is their healthcare system, unless you are rich it is hopelessly innadequate.

I'll call them what they are.

Then explain why they are that, otherwise it just sounds like you are spraying rhetoric and loaded hate filled words without meaning (some people view socialism as positive but you obviously weren't)

Sure. When I become Prime Minister

Well based on your following views I suggest you start a new party s neither Labor (I notice you state yourself as Labor) nor Liberal seem to follow these policies (some of them yes but neither comes close to all)

I will make lots of changes for smaller government, less laws, rules and regulations, more freedom and responsibility for the people, including the following:

I will cut all special racist Aboriginal funding.

There are arguments for and against special treatment in this regard (i.e. some like me would say ideally the qualifier of aboriginal should not be necessary for legitimately needed assistance, rather the system should be able to identify it regardless of ethnicity), though your language indicates you are against more due to emotion rather than the structure of how aid is determined

I will pull out of all free trade agreements.

Why engage in protectionism? This does not seem to follow your later policy that imply absolute privatisation and free market. Which party do you agrees with your views most?

I will cut all foreign aid.

Why? I do not think this is a policy any current political party.

I will sell ABC and SBS (government broadcasters).

Why? This seems to be a policy the Liberals might advocate if they thought that the public wouldn't backlash. I don't think it is that necessary.

I will sell Telstra (government telecommunications company).

lol. Bit late the Liberals beat you to it!

I will get rid of all government welfare.

Why? I think this is a bad idea, it especially disadvantages children born into poor families. They will suffer health and employment difficulties relative to the children born in rich families at no fault of their own (I hope you aren't advocating a form of social darwinism in this case, if you are your ideals don't match with any party policies i am aware of)

I will get rid of stupid things like the feminist Sex Discrimination Commission.

[SARCASM] Yes that is quite stupid because we all know that unfair discrimination based purely on sex and not competence is not still a problem in the 21st century [/SARCASM]

I will ged rid of Medicare.

Why? Though Liberals have sold a lot already they still have the safety net (lucky for them or else I'd consider dumping my support)

I will get rid of the income tax.

I will get rid of GST (goods and services tax).

So how do you plan on paying for everything? These are rather large sources of income and scale themselves with the economy and inflation I am led to believe or do you think that governments shouldn't really do much at all? (And again I don't think any political party hares your views)

I will sell off government regulation bodies and make government owned departments and agencies fund themselves.

How will they fund themselves? Some may have the abilities through hefty fines but that does not strike me as efficient, fair or wise.

People talk about IR laws... I will get rid of all of them.

So no protection against corruption etc in employment? I don't think that is wise and I don't think even the Liberals agree with you (they want to change the rules to mke us more competitive, not remove them entirely) - Labor (who you supposedly support and I assume want to lead one day) will NEVER support this and if you did end up leading them they would lose most of their voter base (unions would NOT be happy)

googled · #16 21st November 2006, 08:56 AM

I agree with you ScMay...

If this man ever becomes primeminister, I'll be shipping myself to another country all together...

In the federal system, I'd much rather see Liberal as it now stands, but if Kevin Rudd comes along, I'll be voting for him.

But as for NSW... I've yet to see Debnams proposals...

Exonoesis · #17 21st November 2006, 09:36 PM

Originally Posted by ScMay

What definition are you using?

Take your pick.

Then explain why they are that, otherwise it just sounds like you are spraying rhetoric and loaded hate filled words without meaning (some people view socialism as positive but you obviously weren't)

Because the government doesn't want freedom.

Well based on your following views I suggest you start a new party s neither Labor (I notice you state yourself as Labor) nor Liberal seem to follow these policies (some of them yes but neither comes close to all)

I think I'll stick with Labor and change their policies.

[/quote]There are arguments for and against special treatment in this regard (i.e. some like me would say ideally the qualifier of aboriginal should not be necessary for legitimately needed assistance, rather the system should be able to identify it regardless of ethnicity), though your language indicates you are against more due to emotion rather than the structure of how aid is determined[/quote]There are no good arguments for special treatment.

Why engage in protectionism? This does not seem to follow your later policy that imply absolute privatisation and free market. Which party do you agrees with your views most?

It's about what's best for Australia. These FTAs are part of the globalist agenda. It follows my other policies just fine. I do not know which party agrees with my view most, maybe One Nation if they are still around, but I don't really care.

Why? I do not think this is a policy any current political party.

The people can better decide how to spend THEIR money on aid. An Australian who is really struggling should not be forced to pay to help someone in another country.

Why? This seems to be a policy the Liberals might advocate if they thought that the public wouldn't backlash. I don't think it is that necessary.

Because they are not needed, they are just wasting the money of the Australian people, they provide unfair competition to the other broadcasters, and someone who does not use those services should not be forced to pay for them.

Why? I think this is a bad idea, it especially disadvantages children born into poor families. They will suffer health and employment difficulties relative to the children born in rich families at no fault of their own (I hope you aren't advocating a form of social darwinism in this case, if you are your ideals don't match with any party policies i am aware of)

Because it is good for Australia. My policies will create much employment. Someone who is really struggling should not be forced to pay for dole bludgers. I do not like the idea of the welfare state. Charity is much better than social security. The government is not your parent.

[SARCASM] Yes that is quite stupid because we all know that unfair discrimination based purely on sex and not competence is not still a problem in the 21st century [/SARCASM]

It should be none of the government's business who is employed by private individuals. If I want to hire a woman, I'll hire a woman. If I want to hire a black, I'll hire a black, etc. This is a waste of money.

Why? Though Liberals have sold a lot already they still have the safety net (lucky for them or else I'd consider dumping my support)

The only healthcare that will be government funded is in relation to infectious diseases. The free market can handle this much better. An Australian who is really struggling should not have to pay for a rich man's health care.

So how do you plan on paying for everything? These are rather large sources of income and scale themselves with the economy and inflation I am led to believe or do you think that governments shouldn't really do much at all? (And again I don't think any political party hares your views)

I have just been telling you how everything will be payed for. The government will also get money from tariffs.

How will they fund themselves? Some may have the abilities through hefty fines but that does not strike me as efficient, fair or wise.

Give me an example. It sounds pretty efficient, fair and wise to me.

So no protection against corruption etc in employment?

Corruption? What do you mean? Give us an example. People should be free to employ or fire whoever they want under whatever circumstances they want.

I don't think that is wise and I don't think even the Liberals agree with you (they want to change the rules to mke us more competitive, not remove them entirely) - Labor (who you supposedly support and I assume want to lead one day) will NEVER support this and if you did end up leading them they would lose most of their voter base (unions would NOT be happy)

[/quote]They will come around. I don't care about the unions. Under my leadership there will be now laws relating to unions.

I will also get rid of all funding for education; I would like to see the schools sold. While they are being sold I will introduce the teaching of creation science in place of the lie of evolution that destroys kids' faith.

ScMay · #18 22nd November 2006, 12:48 AM

Originally Posted by googled

I agree with you ScMay...

If this man ever becomes primeminister, I'll be shipping myself to another country all together...

My thoughts exactly, Exogenesis' vision of Australia is not a place Id like to call home proudly (fortunately it's not likely to happen). What country do you think would have a good government to move to? (I'd consider Europe but honestly I haven't looked into their politics much to compare to us currently)

In the federal system, I'd much rather see Liberal as it now stands, but if Kevin Rudd comes along, I'll be voting for him.

How about that, same for me too except for the voting for Kevin Rudd, instead I'd start to consider voting for Labor under him though which is a big leap from how I currently view them. Rudd SOOOO should have taken leadership after Mark 'hot head' Latham left rather than let Beazley return)

Directed to Exogenesis:
I think you completely over estimate your charisma, you not only expect to be elected based on policies which currently would have any party utterly crushed in polls but plan to do so by completely re-writing the policy of an existing party and abandoning their entire current voter base (plus you think you can woo the unions with your policy). I don't think ANYONE could hope to achieve this short of some major political events (of the same scale as 9/11 as far as political affect) events and some really sly campaign techniques, its simply not going to happen. Even if you start your own party, which I think is your best hope, I still don't think you'll come anywhere close to being PM - I certainly wont vote for you or your policies.

Exonoesis · #19 22nd November 2006, 03:53 AM

Okay you Godless socialist.

googled · #20 22nd November 2006, 04:29 AM

Originally Posted by Exonoesis

Okay you Godless socialist.

You can call us Socialist, just like Americans call those whom they don't like "Commies"

But it does nothing but show the weakness of the person calling it.

Did you expect me to revile back at you?

If anything, I'm sick of the political slanders, you might fit into politics now, but the future of politics may be more engineering than saliva spitting.