 |
|
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Wokko 
Come and take it.
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
|
| Post subject: |  |
|
Hawke was a unionist then a politician.
Keating was a high school dropout then a politician.
Both still deserve the respect of the office and credit for the job they did in parliament. Their lack of real world experience, achievements or job titles is completely irrelevant, as it is for Abbott, Hockey, Bishop, whoever. I disagree with your premise as well as its flawed application.
I think your hatred and angst is as funny as those clowns. Enjoy the next 6 years at least of Liberal government. While I'm not a Liberal voter the gnashing of teeth and wailing from the left makes it all worth while.
Despite all that I still agree with you on Pyne, he's a nasty little mincing poodle.  |
|
|
|
 |
HAL
Please don't shout at me - I can't help it.
Joined: 17 Mar 2003
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Oops. Too much data. |
|
|
|
|
pietillidie
Joined: 07 Jan 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Wokko wrote: | Hawke was a unionist then a politician.
Keating was a high school dropout then a politician.
Both still deserve the respect of the office and credit for the job they did in parliament. Their lack of real world experience, achievements or job titles is completely irrelevant, as it is for Abbott, Hockey, Bishop, whoever. I disagree with your premise as well as its flawed application.
I think your hatred and angst is as funny as those clowns. Enjoy the next 6 years at least of Liberal government. While I'm not a Liberal voter the gnashing of teeth and wailing from the left makes it all worth while.
Despite all that I still agree with you on Pyne, he's a nasty little mincing poodle. |
You sound like you're pining for good old feudal Europe. People only deserve credit for things done well, diligently and honestly. Crapping on about "respect for office" and "job titles" seriously betrays your conservative psychiatry, and, most ironically, is one of the core markers of real actual fundamentalism.
And please, don't mention Keating in the same breath as the present lowlifes. Keating, despite his humble background, is my benchmark precisely because of what he did; that should tell you I don't give a rats clacker about titles or office; obsessing over such perfunctory trivia is a load of authoritarian nonsense. Show me some moral fibre and serious effort to do the right thing to the benefit of the nation and I will grant them respect.
And that should also tell you the ALP as a party, and most of the present crop of ALP politicians, don't mean a damn thing to me unless they do the same.
_________________
In the end the rain comes down, washes clean the streets of a blue sky town.
Help Nick's: http://www.magpies.net/nick/bb/fundraising.htm |
|
|
|
|
Wokko
Come and take it.
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| pietillidie wrote: | You sound like you're pining for good old feudal Europe. People only deserve credit for things done well, diligently and honestly. Crapping on about "respect for office" and "job titles" seriously betrays your conservative psychiatry, and, most ironically, is one of the core markers of real actual fundamentalism.
And please, don't mention Keating in the same breath as the present lowlifes. Keating, despite his humble background, is my benchmark precisely because of what he did; that should tell you I don't give a rats clacker about titles or office; obsessing over such perfunctory trivia is a load of authoritarian nonsense. Show me some moral fibre and serious effort to do the right thing to the benefit of the nation and I will grant them respect.
And that should also tell you the ALP as a party, and most of the present crop of ALP politicians, don't mean a damn thing to me unless they do the same. |
Conservative? Feudalist? Authoritarian? I sit firmly in the libertarian camp which is about as far from those labels as you can get. A government that stops poking its nose into peoples business and using coercion and force to make people do what they want or stealing through exorbitant taxation would gain my respect. The liberals USED to far more about that than they are now, I mean the middle class welfare brought in under Howard was just crazy.
As for the rest, you brought up:
| Quote: | | To go along with their lack of commercial achievement, lack of professional repute, lack of social contribution |
So I responded with the other side's lack of the same. You can't have your cake and eat it too. Looking at Abbott's past minus his job titles he's frequently acted for the benefit of others without seeking reward or recognition. Doesn't take too much digging to find him saving kids, starting charity events and volunteering and before I hear "LOL STUNTS" it was mostly before he was high profile (firefighting aside). The man obviously has a vision and wants to improve the nation, he just doesn't have the same vision as you do. That doesn't make him wrong, or evil it just means that your vision of what is good and right might not be the same as someone else.
Even National Socialists (pretty much the antithesis of libertarianism) have a vision for bettering the societies they live in. Collective, nationalist economics coupled with a socially interventionist State (see: China) to me is completely wrong on almost every level and yet those who espouse it genuinely want to help and improve their societies. |
|
|
|
|
Tannin 
Can't remember
Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Location: Huon Valley Tasmania
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Despite his inexplicable admiration for a wholly despicable man, Wokko nevertheless makes a good point when he says "Even National Socialists ... have a vision for bettering the societies they live in." Just so.
Like Abbott, Hitler genuinely wanted to make a better society (according to his own vision of "better", of course. Like Abbott, Hitler was dedicated, hard-working, and so committed to his goals that he was always prepared to lie and cheat and mislead and hurt people whenever those things were likely to lead him to power. No tactic he used was truly ever evil because, no matter what he did, it was always with the pure and noble overriding aim of making the world better. (According to his view of what "better" was, of course.) Abbott's path to power has been remarkably similar, and (thus far) his ability to differentiate between "expedient" and "moral" is similarly weak.
Beware of fanatics in power. Fanatics are very, very dangerous.
_________________
�Let's eat Grandma.� Commas save lives! |
|
|
|
|
pietillidie
Joined: 07 Jan 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Wokko wrote: | | pietillidie wrote: | You sound like you're pining for good old feudal Europe. People only deserve credit for things done well, diligently and honestly. Crapping on about "respect for office" and "job titles" seriously betrays your conservative psychiatry, and, most ironically, is one of the core markers of real actual fundamentalism.
And please, don't mention Keating in the same breath as the present lowlifes. Keating, despite his humble background, is my benchmark precisely because of what he did; that should tell you I don't give a rats clacker about titles or office; obsessing over such perfunctory trivia is a load of authoritarian nonsense. Show me some moral fibre and serious effort to do the right thing to the benefit of the nation and I will grant them respect.
And that should also tell you the ALP as a party, and most of the present crop of ALP politicians, don't mean a damn thing to me unless they do the same. |
Conservative? Feudalist? Authoritarian? I sit firmly in the libertarian camp which is about as far from those labels as you can get. A government that stops poking its nose into peoples business and using coercion and force to make people do what they want or stealing through exorbitant taxation would gain my respect. The liberals USED to far more about that than they are now, I mean the middle class welfare brought in under Howard was just crazy.
As for the rest, you brought up:
| Quote: | | To go along with their lack of commercial achievement, lack of professional repute, lack of social contribution |
So I responded with the other side's lack of the same. You can't have your cake and eat it too. Looking at Abbott's past minus his job titles he's frequently acted for the benefit of others without seeking reward or recognition. Doesn't take too much digging to find him saving kids, starting charity events and volunteering and before I hear "LOL STUNTS" it was mostly before he was high profile (firefighting aside). The man obviously has a vision and wants to improve the nation, he just doesn't have the same vision as you do. That doesn't make him wrong, or evil it just means that your vision of what is good and right might not be the same as someone else.
Even National Socialists (pretty much the antithesis of libertarianism) have a vision for bettering the societies they live in. Collective, nationalist economics coupled with a socially interventionist State (see: China) to me is completely wrong on almost every level and yet those who espouse it genuinely want to help and improve their societies. |
You're all over the shop on so many things you're posting these days it's not funny.
You seem to have a hopelessly trivial understanding of what politicians have the capacity to do when elected. Just take a few prominent despicable policies Abbott has been involved in that were all voluntary, conscious, planned and ideologically consistent, not arbitrary "good intention" cards falling where they may as you have somehow fooled yourself into thinking.
Abbott and his mentor, Howard, avidly and vocally supported two disgracefully shambolic imperialistic wars that led to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people and the displacement of millions more. He and his mentor stomped on the naive and hopeless fingers of boat people by rousing up fear and hatred against them just to get elected to officein at least two elections and much of the time in between. He and his mentor sold poisoned Telstra shares to middle class families, locking in a decaying and anti-competitive monopoly and conning families into investments they didn't comprehendand then had the front to follow it up with a kick in the teeth to young people by gutting the NBN. That's just three disgraceful policies, not even mentioning the fact that he and his mentor fought like men possessed to white ant Australian wages and national revenue on the one hand, while increasing unneeded handouts to private schools and the middle-upper class on the other, all the while refusing to extend basic dignity to all Australians by supporting Mabo, the Apology and gay marriage.
And that's just a 30 second peek into the Abbott's "highlights" reel. Since then we've had billions of dollars in aid slashed to keep the top tax brackets down, shonky policy pirouettes, and reckless international games played with Australia's good will and national security.
And all you can come up with are some laughable charity handshake events. Just what rubbish are you smoking these days?
Keating hated handshake photo ops, but he did float the dollar, he did break inflation, he did open the economy by cutting unproductive tarrifs, he did introduce world-leading superannuation, he did help create an Accord with the unions, he did strengthen Australia's commitment to a social safety net, he did promote multiculturalism, he did rightly align Australia's economy with Asia, he did help push Mabo through, he did give the Redfern speech, and on and on with many of these things not having a single vote in them or clearly being vote losers.
Surely the fact that you ignore the monumentally destructive menaces Abbott has supported, and you can't think of a single serious contribution to the nation he has made outside something we've all done in our spare time, volunteer work, ought to make you think twice. And even if you insist that "good old Mrs. Smith means well", that doesn't make good old Mrs. Smith intellectually, morally and emotionally fit to lead a nation.
But, I think I now get the sudden born-again conservative conversion experience you're going through. Equating taxes with "stealing" is a dead giveaway; you've been drinking from quasi-religious well of utopian Libertarian thought. Give us a yell if you need an "intervention" to help escape the cult 
_________________
In the end the rain comes down, washes clean the streets of a blue sky town.
Help Nick's: http://www.magpies.net/nick/bb/fundraising.htm |
|
|
|
|
David 
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Wokko wrote: | | Enjoy the next 6 years at least of Liberal government. |
Really? Abbott will be lucky to make it to three at this rate.
It's impossible to predict these things so far out, but I'd say Labor have at least a 50/50 chance in 2016, even if Bill Bloody Shorten is still in charge. 
_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda
|
| Post subject: | |
|
By the way, lest it be thought that us non-Liberal voters are incapable of giving credit where it's due, good on Hockey and Abbott for making the right call on GrainCorp (or, to be slightly more accurate, the Nationals for forcing their hand). It was a brave decision and, as far as I can tell, we should be breathing a sigh of relief that they were willing to reject conventional neo-liberal wisdom.
_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
Wokko
Come and take it.
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| David wrote: | | Wokko wrote: | | Enjoy the next 6 years at least of Liberal government. |
Really? Abbott will be lucky to make it to three at this rate.
It's impossible to predict these things so far out, but I'd say Labor have at least a 50/50 chance in 2016, even if Bill Bloody Shorten is still in charge. |
Just going by history, very rarely does Australia vote a government out after 1 term, sometimes the cross benchers give even those terrible governments another go. |
|
|
|
|
Culprit 
Joined: 06 Feb 2003
Location: Port Melbourne
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| ^^ Agree Wokko, you can keep blaming the previous Government for a term and get away with it as the public are dumb. Mind you if we have massive job losses and people's wallets are empty it could be a one term Government. |
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Labor were very nearly a one-term government last time, as were Howard's Liberals. It may be historically rare, but it's definitely possible. In our era of immediacy and impatience, I'd say there's far more chance of it happening.
_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda
|
|
|
|
|
Tannin
Can't remember
Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Location: Huon Valley Tasmania
|
| Post subject: | |
|
‘There's a pattern evolving here with the new government. lie - denial of lie - failure to cover up lie - throw money after lie to make it go away.’ - Anon poster commenting on this topic in The Age today.
_________________
�Let's eat Grandma.� Commas save lives! |
|
|
|
|
watt price tully 
Joined: 15 May 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Another f*ck up by the new government. Everyone saw that the emperor had no clothes apart from a few try hards on Nicks.
The thing about the Gonski plan as devised by Labour was that it was:
1.Highly consultative amongst the education stakeholders
2. Would basically put an end to conflict between public & private & independent schools;
3. Guarantees funding certainty over a long period of time'
3. Stops Australia being one of the worst funders of public schools in the developed world especially for those who are poor or from "lower socio-ecenomic status"
Pyne has shown himself to be a very lazy minister & shadow minister.
After 6 years where the f*ck are his education policies?.
He didn't develop any.
After winning power he appointed Kemp to advise & review (why not do this before coming to power? you know isn't that what oppositions do? Reason being he is lazy & spent his time in trying to bring down a government not having a plan in place.
Further, Pyne arrogantly dismissed & chose not to meet with the expert panel on Gonsky who had been working very hard regarding it's scope & implementation.
Now he & the Mad Misogynist Miners Monk have been found lying where Pyne has had 3 different positions this week (thank you Peter Hartcher of Fairfax) & causing so much distress & dismay by their own followers let alone by the education community per se - Pyne's achievement was to bring further unity to a usually disparate group - that is what Gonsky did & remains another feature of Prime Minster Gillards' period of Prime ministership.
One doesn't have to be genius to recognise the Gonski was not going to be implemented in full 9(n fact the cuts to he uni sector were not a good thing by any measure)
For mine I would defund all private schools & put the money into public education.
If people want private education they should pay for it.
IN part what made Australia a great place was the former bilateral approach to an egalitarian society
[/i]
_________________
“I even went as far as becoming a Southern Baptist until I realised they didn’t keep ‘em under long enough” Kinky Friedman |
|
|
|
|
Wokko
Come and take it.
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
It's something that really bothers me about our education system that so called private education is funded by the taxpayer. Now I'm sure there's a better model for delivering universal education than the one we've got, but if you're going to have a public/private model then have one. At the moment we have a public/public advanced model. Either have a universal, tax payer funded system alongside a totally private model or provide some kind of vouchers for parents that provides funding for whatever school they choose and open up a totally privatized system with schools competing for funding by attracting it from prospective students/parents, not lobbying corrupt politicians in Canberra for a slice of the pie they don't deserve.
It seems every model has its up and downsides but something doesn't sit right with me that private schools get more federal funding than public ones. I know it's a state matter to fund education but still, doesn't sit right. As for the Catholic schools, well that's an organization that shouldn't have any trouble funding its schools. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
