November 24th.....

[norbie]

And don't forget Sunday night to watch the ABC dialoge!

 

[GrannieAnnie]

And don't forget Sunday night to watch the ABC dialoge!

No darlin, anything political is the last thing I want to watch. I know exactly who I'm going to vote for, so I don't want to hear from any of them....lol

 

[Neenie1]

Yes I heard about the debate.

I am strongly leaning toward one side, but well... It's anyone's guess who I will vote for on the day, although I am pretty sure I know who I will pick.

 

[SemperFidelis]

I pressume all the people who are complaining that ther would rather more money spent on services then getting tax cuts are going to be donating any money saved on taxes straight to those services.

Sure, I'd love to see more money spent on services, but I'm not going to pretend I would say no to some extra money in the bank each week.

And say what you like, but Howard's tax policy is sure better the Rudd's non existent policy.

Blessings to you all

Steve

 

[Neenie1]

I pressume all the people who are complaining that ther would rather more money spent on services then getting tax cuts are going to be donating any money saved on taxes straight to those services.

Sure, I'd love to see more money spent on services, but I'm not going to pretend I would say no to some extra money in the bank each week.

And say what you like, but Howard's tax policy is sure better the Rudd's non existent policy.

Blessings to you all

Steve

No, I can't afford to really.

But the thing is that I think a lot of the prices on the cost of living tend to go up when there is a tax cut. I have no proof of this, I just have a suspicion that they do.

 

[sparassidae]

I pressume all the people who are complaining that ther would rather more money spent on services then getting tax cuts are going to be donating any money saved on taxes straight to those services.

Sure, I'd love to see more money spent on services, but I'm not going to pretend I would say no to some extra money in the bank each week.

And say what you like, but Howard's tax policy is sure better the Rudd's non existent policy.

Blessings to you all

Steve

Well, since it means we will be spending more on healthcare, school expenses, transport etc than if the gov't spent more, then yes we will.

And yes I know what the state gov't is responsible for vs federal gov't, but the states are supposed to get funding from the federal gov't, so ultimately these tax cuts mean everything ends up costing more.

 

[Neenie1]

Anyone heard of Kevin Rudds plan to only have 3 tax brackets (15%, 30% 40%) and to spend more money on giving low income families money so they can buy computers for their kids. I don't know if that will work for us, we already have computers (my husband is an IT guy) and we aren't low income.

 

[TheDag]

I pressume all the people who are complaining that ther would rather more money spent on services then getting tax cuts are going to be donating any money saved on taxes straight to those services.

Sure, I'd love to see more money spent on services, but I'm not going to pretend I would say no to some extra money in the bank each week.

And say what you like, but Howard's tax policy is sure better the Rudd's non existent policy.

Blessings to you all

Steve

Of course I would like more money in the bank each week. The point people are making is that if given the choice between tax cuts and money being spent on services they (just like I would) would chose the latter.

 

[TheDag]

now just wait to see money poured into endless and useless campaigning.

If people didn't fall for it every election then they wouldn't do it. The fact they do it every election surely says about the intelligence of the average Aussie.

 

[GodsoldierClintus]

http://www.themonthly.com.au/tm/?q=node/300

I won't comment on the tax policy, but reading this has at least made me feel this guy has actually read the bible and know what it says. (or has someone writing for him that does)

Granted, he doesn't make a strong statement for Jesus, and some of his views are a bit off, and also he uses it to attack John a bit, but it gives me a little more confidence in his "Christianity" then John's.

 

[lmnop9876]

http://www.themonthly.com.au/tm/?q=node/300

http://www.themonthly.com.au/tm/?q=node/300

I won't comment on the tax policy, but reading this has at least made me feel this guy has actually read the bible and know what it says. (or has someone writing for him that does)

Granted, he doesn't make a strong statement for Jesus, and some of his views are a bit off, and also he uses it to attack John a bit, but it gives me a little more confidence in his "Christianity" then John's.

http://www.themonthly.com.au/tm/?q=node/300http://www.themonthly.com.au/tm/?q=node/300
that was an enthralling read. thanks for posting that link.

 

[norbie]

I watched the ABC debate - couldn't find much difference in the two main parties at all.
The only think I notice was when Kevin said 'it's quite now about the Nuclear Powerstations', so it proofs that Politicen are all crooks!

 

[GodsoldierClintus]

It's just a debate, in the first week. Howard always loses these debates, and its easy to see why. He's a good public speaker, but by gosh, he's a terrible orator. No doubt the worm didn't help him at all, but that's why he's holding a debate in the first week - so everyone forgets about it by the end of the week and in 5 weeks time, it makes no difference.

In terms of actual content, well...it's all a bit of rhetoric, Rudd succeeded in portraying that he has a plan, but did not dwell into details. That doesn't necessarily mean they aren't details he just chose not to go into them. Howard summed up by just using rebuttal - he could have done much better and showed his own plan which he didn't do. It comes down to rhetoric. Howard has long mentioned how we have had a sound economy. But a good was of keeping interest rates down is actually not to give taxes, because that means extra consumption, rising inflation, rising interest rates...It's not responsible of any government to say they can keep interest rates down - they do influence policy, and do impact the rates, but you cannot guarantee it. The thing that keeps me is he's had surplus after surplus - but like any business model, a big surplus is nothing if it's not put back into the company. If a big company has massive surplus, it either distributes it as dividends to its shareholders or it reinvests in the company in expansion or what have you. Yet year after year we've had surplus, but public transport/health care/education/etc have not really improved. Housing is less affordable.

The problem when any Labor government gets in is they will spend on social services and thus the budget will go into deficit. That's not necessarily a bad thing, provided it doesn't become ridiculous. But too much change too soon, does destabilize things and the result is a need for an extended period in government (say 11 yrs) for policy to balance out.

So really even if Rudd gets in...I can't see how he's going to hold onto power unless he does a Johnny and runs a surplus driven economical policy - keeps things stable, but not necessarily the best thing for the country.

 

[lmnop9876]

Interesting to see that 52% of 48,000 people who voted in a current affairs' phone poll believed that John Howard had won the debate.

 

[GodsoldierClintus]

I wonder if the government/opposition actually pays/gets people to vote in those phone polls?

 

[lmnop9876]

mhmm, i doubt it, i think the reason probably has more to do with the fact that such a poll requires people to decide to vote themselves. rudd's supporters may have assumed other people were voting for him and not voted, howard's supporters may have assumed no-one was voting for him and voted.

 

[TheDag]

Interesting to see that 52% of 48,000 people who voted in a current affairs' phone poll believed that John Howard had won the debate.

This probably has alot to do with target audience of the show. The show is more likely to have liberal supporters watching. Not all would vote fairly. I think to get that many votes then supporters may have been asked (or told) to vote. For all these phone polls that it an unusually high numberr of voters.

 

[Anduril]

I watched the debate on Sunday and thought John Howard was the clear winner as his arguments were far more appealing than the usual cheap slogans put forth by Rudd.

He explained clearly why he has always governed in the best interest for the Australian people, and why his policies are the right ones for this country. Why IR reforms were needed to get the balance right, why unions should never run the country, why interest rates will always be lower under Liberal, and why his approach to climate change is more effective.

I particularly liked his closing speech in regards to education, why have people become ashamed of the Australian story and also whats the point in giving kids laptop computers when so many can't even read or do basic math?

On the other hand there was no real substance to any of Kevin Rudd's arguments, which was to be expected seeing as he couldn't even come up with his own tax policy.

I reckon John Howard has been a great leader of this country for the past 11 years and delivered a strong economy that has increased living standards for the vast majority of Australians. There isn't much to gain in changing leadership but there is plenty to lose by letting unions run the country, undoing reforms that take us backwards rather than forwards.

 

[Neenie1]

I honestly think "the worm" was a lot of rubbish. It was based on a studio audience and I don't think they say who can be in the audience, they don't make sure there's equal numbers of liberal and labour voters.

Also I heard that Howard lost the last 2 debates according to "the worm" and then won the last 2 elections anyway lol. It's all a load of rubbish.

 

[lmnop9876]

This probably has alot to do with target audience of the show. The show is more likely to have liberal supporters watching. Not all would vote fairly. I think to get that many votes then supporters may have been asked (or told) to vote. For all these phone polls that it an unusually high numberr of voters.

Liberal supporters are more likely to watch Today Tonight and Channel Seven. ACA & Channel Nine in general if you look at their content, targets people who are likely to be Labor voters. At least that's the impression I get from their news and current affairs coverage, and even from their entertainment shows.