Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

The historic reason for govt aid to poorer countries is to persuade them to our way of thinking. Many crocodile tears about the "Chinese" giving aid to sth Pacific countries. One of the first acts of the Abbott mob was to cancel the contract to build a new parliament building for a Sth Pacific country (I forget which one). In Fiji storms wash away river bridges and the govt has no ability to repair/replace them. China buys much influence for bargain prices. Australia can afford to fund these giving jobs to locals and using our construction firms. The selfish attitude of well off Aussies blows back when we need allies. So we tug the forelock to US and become wedged into sending our men(and women) to fight in worthless combat. They come home damaged and we are poorer in most respects.

 

 

  • Replies 52
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted

They (government)

 

Want to aid poorer countries, Let the pensioners spend their pittance oversea's.

 

instead of cutting their pension after three weeks, less Give-away aid, more trade, even if it means building more hotels, training staff, the welfare of both countries will benefit .

 

spacesailor

 

 

Posted

Barnaby isn't doing too badly according to the latest news. There is talk about him not being allowed to stand again for parliament. Several people are discussing wether or mot he should stand. I would have thought that the people of New England National Party would be able to make a decision. If they nominate him, it shows what they think of him and if they don't he can stand as an independent. Either way it will be a bitter debate.

 

 

Posted

HE says he will. The National Party decides if they will preselect him as a candidate. His judgement hasn't been too good so far and the damage has to be limited at some stage. The LNP wants desperately to win the next Election. They also went to a lot of trouble to keep information from the New England electorate last time, that would have damaged his chances.. Not many watched the "must watch, reveal all, that revealed nothing" Channel 7 loss making show. This is all bad stuff for them that they don't want /need. . Nev

 

 

Posted

so you dont need morals to lead this country, only money. Says a lot for the tone that society, and our politicians are developing.

 

 

Posted

Nev, all very well, but exactly what can I do (from the bottom of the food chain) to stop or even mildly inhibit, corruption at the top of the food chain?

 

 

Posted

Remember John Howard. the Libs hung on to him for a long while past his use by date. The Nats are short of people who have demonstrated any sort of political skills, so I reckon they will stick with Barnaby.

 

Really he is no worse than the rest of the crop.

 

I notice that the TV has a warning that " the following program contains adult themes" That is to differentiate them from recordings of what goes on in parliament, which is juvenile themes.

 

 

Posted
I notice that the TV has a warning that " the following program contains adult themes" That is to differentiate them from recordings of what goes on in parliament, which is juvenile themes.

Yes - outside of Barnaby Joyce's office, there's no sex or nudity in Parliament.

 

 

Posted

Nev, I didn't suggest I had an answer. Just expressed my frustration. Like most voters, I feel powerless to influence what I see to be a poor government that's lacking integrity.

 

 

Posted
RobinsmSee post 24

 

I certainly did Not vote for M Turnbul

 

spacesailor

Didn't say you did, just that someone did and we are getting what they voted for. That being said, not sure who to vote for, opportunistic me too labour, brain dead greens, immoral Nats or greedy libs....not much choice really..

 

 

Posted

It's LABOR (sp). in Australia.. Some say there's NO difference between LNP and Labor but there IS really. A lot of wedging goes on where they prompt Labor to be different and then to jump on them as a great risk to the whole thing with a bit of creative misrepresentation. and hype.. Nev

 

 

Posted
D...not much choice really..

You can look at it that way, or you can look into what it takes to

 

a) Form a political party

 

b) Get the numbers you need to get on the ballot

 

c) Form a coherent set of policies that make sense

 

d) If you actually do get some seats, keep the party together

 

e) Handle media without looking like an idiot

 

f) Actually be able to negotiate with the other parties without compromising your own principles TOO much

 

g) Do all this for 20 hours a day while still having a family life.

 

As an object lesson, look at Clive Palmer and Pauline Hanson. Clive bought his way in, had a bunch of members who ended up deserting him, now he's out again.

 

Hanson's in on pure dog-whistle politics, had a bunch of members deserting her or being found ineligible, now she's down to... 2 is it? Plus deserting her own principles by supporting the big business tax cuts.

 

The problem with both of these people is they failed c), d), e) and f) above. The lack of logical policies meant that whoever they manage to attract to run on their ticket will either be as scatterbrained as they themselves are, or purely opportunistic, which means they'll either be proven totally useless or will jump ship at the earliest opportunity.

 

Both Labor and LNP are a group of people with widely different stances on a range of subjects. The right wing of Labor is more similar to LNP in lots of ways, while the progressive members of the LNP are more similar to Labor. The left wing of Labor is more similar to the Greens and the right wing of the LNP are more like Corey Bernardi's "conservatives" than anyone else.

 

The best we can hope for is to get somewhere in the middle. My personal preference is slightly left of centre, socially progressive and with a large focus on the environment. Other people will prefer right of centre and more conservative. But as long as we're in the middle somewhere and avoid the extremes to the edges, the country will be all right.

 

 

Posted

Australia has it's own "special" social mix and there are some variations dependent on the local attitude which often reflects the local radio or news paper outlets. If you listen to some of it ALL day your brain would certainly suffer.. Barnaby isn't really reflecting a lot of "smaller farmers" wants The BIG money is where the action is (and the unrepaired damage and exploitation). BIG money gets the VOTE in a different way than by the ballot box directly. Look at the power of the Gambling Interests. as an example. Australia sets all the records for poker machines/head of population.. Nev

 

 

Posted

Unfortunately, Australia tends to follow whatever dumb trend comes out of the US.

 

America is now beset by an ever-widening divide between the major parties; anyone hinting at listening to and compromising with the other side is labelled heretical. Australian is not nearly so divided; despite the rhetoric, there is still considerable dialogue between the parties. Long may it continue.

 

 

Posted
It's LABOR (sp). in Australia.. Some say there's NO difference between LNP and Labor but there IS really. A lot of wedging goes on where they prompt Labor to be different and then to jump on them as a great risk to the whole thing with a bit of creative misrepresentation. and hype.. Nev

eh...potato...potahto

 

 

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...