The election

[Dante 2,704]

37 minutes ago, nutbean said:

I'm not sure you understand the political process  - The co-payment wasn't just "suggested" - if it could have got through the Parliament it would have been law - just because a policy gets rejected by the Parliament ( or it is made clear that it will not pass through Parliament)  doesn't mean it wasn't policy in the first place !

There was rejection of so much Abbott's budget measures, medicare Co-payment, Childcare and family tax benefits, university fees deregulation,  stripping of funding/closure to various Enviromental funds/organisation ( which turnbull has now reversed)  to name but a few. 

Make no mistake  - if Abbott had a majority in the Senate lots of "suggestions" would now be law.

I understand the political process and as I said the Medicare co payment didn't get through,if that isn't clear enough for you then I'm not sure what else I can say.

Policy or not it didn't get through, simple as that.

Some of the things proposed by Abbott were simply stupid and that's the reason he no longer heads the party, Turnbull hasn't got a political brain or any political savvy so he won't last long, not sure who will take his place. Shorten should have won that election in a canter after the stupidity of Abbott but he didn't and he has failed in his job.

Bit like the losing side in a Grand Final running a lap of the ground, he lost and there;s no other way to cut it. Who will make the better negotiator will never be known as there is only one winner and it wasn't Shorten.

Anyway you can go round and round in circles arguing about this but in the end, until Turnbull's time is up you won't know, personally I can't stand either Turnbull or Shorten.

[Dante 2,704]

30 minutes ago, Grapeviney said:

OMG! A politician told a lie during an election!

The Mediscare lie only worked because of a lie told during the 2013 election - the one about there being 'no cuts to Medicare, no changes to pensions' etc.

Abbott's broken promise / lie made Labor's claim plausible.

And yes - Abbott came to power on the back of Gillard's 2010 lie that 'there will be no carbon tax under the government I lead'. 

etc and etc 

You miss the point, no one believes Abbott or Gillard anymore because their credibility is shot and now Shorten's is as well. Mind you negotiating deals that stitched up his union members to benefit the Union and himself should have done that anyway.

 

[nutbean 8,838]

2 hours ago, Dante said:

I understand the political process and as I said the Medicare co payment didn't get through,if that isn't clear enough for you then I'm not sure what else I can say.

Policy or not it didn't get through, simple as that.

Some of the things proposed by Abbott were simply stupid and that's the reason he no longer heads the party, Turnbull hasn't got a political brain or any political savvy so he won't last long, not sure who will take his place. Shorten should have won that election in a canter after the stupidity of Abbott but he didn't and he has failed in his job.

Bit like the losing side in a Grand Final running a lap of the ground, he lost and there;s no other way to cut it. Who will make the better negotiator will never be known as there is only one winner and it wasn't Shorten.

Anyway you can go round and round in circles arguing about this but in the end, until Turnbull's time is up you won't know, personally I can't stand either Turnbull or Shorten.

If we were talking two different opinions then I'd let it go but I keep replying because your logic is so flawed.

You were trying to make the point that the Liberals didn't touch medicare because the co-payment never passed the Senate. If you try to murder someone but don't succeed you get had up for attempted murder. You may say policy or not, it didn't get through - nope - the reality is - get through or not, it's their policy.

If you can't understand why the election outcome tightened after Turnbull ousted Abbott then you have no understanding of politics. Why on earth do you think that Abbott was ousted ? Because he was heading for a crushing defeat and the Libs becoming a one term Government. The Libs opted for someone who they rightly assumed was more appealing to the electorate. 

Again, there is another to cut the loss. But let's wait a year and revisit and then you will understand that leading a Government with a slim or no majority with a hostile Senate is not winning. And as to who will make the better negotiator - read the article again - We do know because most of the same senators were re-elected who have been negotiating with Shorten and Turnbull in the last Parliament.

For the record - I don't like Shorten or Turnbull either.

[Dante 2,704]

4 hours ago, nutbean said:

If we were talking two different opinions then I'd let it go but I keep replying because your logic is so flawed.

You were trying to make the point that the Liberals didn't touch medicare because the co-payment never passed the Senate. If you try to murder someone but don't succeed you get had up for attempted murder. You may say policy or not, it didn't get through - nope - the reality is - get through or not, it's their policy.

If you can't understand why the election outcome tightened after Turnbull ousted Abbott then you have no understanding of politics. Why on earth do you think that Abbott was ousted ? Because he was heading for a crushing defeat and the Libs becoming a one term Government. The Libs opted for someone who they rightly assumed was more appealing to the electorate. 

Again, there is another to cut the loss. But let's wait a year and revisit and then you will understand that leading a Government with a slim or no majority with a hostile Senate is not winning. And as to who will make the better negotiator - read the article again - We do know because most of the same senators were re-elected who have been negotiating with Shorten and Turnbull in the last Parliament.

For the record - I don't like Shorten or Turnbull either.

Sorry, what?

The Liberals had a policy of introducing a medicare co payment, they didn't get it through and now it's no longer part of their platform and no longer one of their policies, where's the problem.  They didn't attempt to do something illegal, like murder someone, they introduced a policy which is, last time i heard completely legal, unlike attempted murder. What are you on? That policy went with Abbott, if he is reinstated then come back to me.

i've got a bit of a grasp on politics and I can understand why Abbott got the flick, why they reinstalled Turnbull and why Turnbull was more popular, the point I made was that the electorate was happy with Turnbull, initially and turned off Shorten in their droves, because they didn't like him, that is until they realised that Turnbull is an idiot. Abbott was unelectable and only won the previous election because Rudd was even more unelectable, once Rudd was replaced they changed in favour of Shorten, particularly after Abbott introduced legislation he said he wouldn't in his election campaign.

Turnbull has bubble thoughts and thinks they will make good policy but after he floats them and realises that won't he drops them, that's why he started to decline in popularity, he's not a very good politician. Once the electorate realised this they started to drift back to Shorten, not because he was liked but because he frightened the electorate and looked like he had more of a clue that Turnbull.

Let's see what the Liberals can do over the next 3 years and see if they can negotiate a  hostile senate, if there isn't a great deal of controversial legislation it shouldn't be a problem, if the opposition block legislation for the sake of it, they will lose the next election by a lot more.

This will be a do nothing government because they will be too frightened to introduce decent legislation, Malcolm likes being Prime Minister so he'll do what he can to remain in the Lodge.

Unless you have some earth shattering news, shall we call it a day, I'm much more interested in talking about football than talking about people I don't like.

Edited July 8, 2016 by Dante

[hardtack 10,423]

8 hours ago, Dante said:

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/cfmeu-pay-demands-to-send-victorian-construction-costs-soaring/news-story/948f588bbc3b08b46cc2f26e211e25ea

http://www.afr.com/news/cfmeu-locks-in-18-per-cent-pay-deal-before-the-election-20160525-gp3e0z

Can't view either link.

[Earl Hood 6,061]

3 minutes ago, hardtack said:

Can't view either link.

Yes neither can I and I certainly would not pay a cent to read the Hun on line. But I gather the problem is the pay deal the CFMEU thugs have negotiated with Construction companies and that has been ratified by Fairwork Australia. Yes it is generous by recent standards but much less than deals done during the mining boom era up to 2007. Of course the good deal is possible because Melbourne in particular is experiencing a CBD apartment tower building boom that has been underway for the last 5 years. It is usually called supply and demand forces effecting outcomes, that is market forces at work. That is OK for companies to price gouge when there is a boom in the market place , but for workers to exercise their market power is Union thuggery? 

And for the record if construction costs go up that is a good thing if it discourages the construction of yet more Residential towers in the CBD because this glut of construction is going to end in tears for many private, largely overseas Asian investors and for the State economy. We went through this in the late 80's and ended in recession. 

[Earl Hood 6,061]

9 hours ago, Wrecker45 said:

Your kidding right? 

Comparing a scare campaign on a Carbon Tax which was Labor policy and  Labor Implemented against a scare campaign on something that was clearly not on the Liberal agenda. Completely different. As for $100 lamb roast I guess it depends how big your family is ?

I despise Turnbull and would happily say he deserved it if it was legitimate but it was a complete lie and an enditement on Shorten and Labor.

No I am not kidding. Gee if we are talking lies and over blown, exaggerated claims on a party's policies I think you are splitting hairs. I lie for 3 years about the effects of the Carbon tax versus I lie about what the LNP might do to Medicare, based on their recent behaviour of requiring co payments, freezes to hospital grants etc. give me a break. The Private health insurance rebate brought in by Howard is designed to undermine Medicare in the long run. 

[Dante 2,704]

7 minutes ago, Earl Hood said:

Yes neither can I and I certainly would not pay a cent to read the Hun on line. But I gather the problem is the pay deal the CFMEU thugs have negotiated with Construction companies and that has been ratified by Fairwork Australia. Yes it is generous by recent standards but much less than deals done during the mining boom era up to 2007. Of course the good deal is possible because Melbourne in particular is experiencing a CBD apartment tower building boom that has been underway for the last 5 years. It is usually called supply and demand forces effecting outcomes, that is market forces at work. That is OK for companies to price gouge when there is a boom in the market place , but for workers to exercise their market power is Union thuggery? 

And for the record if construction costs go up that is a good thing if it discourages the construction of yet more Residential towers in the CBD because this glut of construction is going to end in tears for many private, largely overseas Asian investors and for the State economy. We went through this in the late 80's and ended in recession. 

 

So when it hits the public purse, is it ok then? As I said, it's nice of Andrews to give his mates a kick along at our expense.

CFMEU pay demands to send Victorian construction costs soaring ...

"THE CFMEU is demanding a 6 per cent-a-year wage rise and double-time-and-a-half on “lockdown” weekends for city building workers, in a deal that would send construction costs of schools, hospitals and roads soaring.

The union also wants an extra paid day off for workers in weeks when public holidays, such as Anzac Day, fall on a weekend.

The Herald Sun has obtained a copy of the union’s list of 27 demands, which was sent to builders across Melbourne last week.

The demands were included in a letter signed off by the militant union’s secretary, John Setka.

Such a deal would have significant impacts on government spending, including on the proposed Western Distributor.

According to a Deloitte Access Economics report, a 5 per cent annual pay rise would add $737 million to the cost of public construction over the next four years, or the equivalent cost of building 40 new schools."

 

CFMEU locks in 18 per cent pay deal before the election | afr.com

"Master Builders Association of Victoria opposed the decision by some of its members to agree to the deal. Chief executive Radley de Silva said the agreement was unsustainable because it would impose high costs on the state's economy, which is in the middle of a construction boom.

"This isn't just a windfall gain being received by union EBA employees, it is a cost borne by the community as a whole," he said. 

"The combined impact of these wage increases means an increased cost of $806 million to deliver government infrastructure over the next four years – this is a lost opportunity to Victorians of 10 schools and three hospitals."

Read more: http://www.afr.com/news/cfmeu-locks-in-18-per-cent-pay-deal-before-the-election-20160525-gp3e0z#ixzz4DoaJv7vQ 
Follow us: @FinancialReview on Twitter | financialreview on Facebook

 

 

[Earl Hood 6,061]

4 minutes ago, Dante said:

 

So when it hits the public purse, is it ok then? As I said, it's nice of Andrews to give his mates a kick along at our expense.

CFMEU pay demands to send Victorian construction costs soaring ...

"THE CFMEU is demanding a 6 per cent-a-year wage rise and double-time-and-a-half on “lockdown” weekends for city building workers, in a deal that would send construction costs of schools, hospitals and roads soaring.

The union also wants an extra paid day off for workers in weeks when public holidays, such as Anzac Day, fall on a weekend.

The Herald Sun has obtained a copy of the union’s list of 27 demands, which was sent to builders across Melbourne last week.

The demands were included in a letter signed off by the militant union’s secretary, John Setka.

Such a deal would have significant impacts on government spending, including on the proposed Western Distributor.

According to a Deloitte Access Economics report, a 5 per cent annual pay rise would add $737 million to the cost of public construction over the next four years, or the equivalent cost of building 40 new schools."

 

CFMEU locks in 18 per cent pay deal before the election | afr.com

"Master Builders Association of Victoria opposed the decision by some of its members to agree to the deal. Chief executive Radley de Silva said the agreement was unsustainable because it would impose high costs on the state's economy, which is in the middle of a construction boom.

"This isn't just a windfall gain being received by union EBA employees, it is a cost borne by the community as a whole," he said. 

"The combined impact of these wage increases means an increased cost of $806 million to deliver government infrastructure over the next four years – this is a lost opportunity to Victorians of 10 schools and three hospitals."

Read more: http://www.afr.com/news/cfmeu-locks-in-18-per-cent-pay-deal-before-the-election-20160525-gp3e0z#ixzz4DoaJv7vQ 
Follow us: @FinancialReview on Twitter | financialreview on Facebook

 

 

Dante 

what is your point? Do you want to abide by the Fairwork umpire  decision or do you have some other system you work to? 

But obviously you have an issue with workers getting ahead! 

My point is the Union at this point in time has market power and is exercising it to get pay increases for their members above the norm that the rest of us endure. 

But to you that is a big problem because it will increase the cost of future community works. Well let's face it we taxpayers will be playing top dollar for construction projects like the Western Distributor because they have a large private sector input for finance and construction and they take their profit. 

[Chris 2,892]

On Thursday, July 07, 2016 at 9:07 PM, Trisul said:

I didn't have one major/minor party below the line and even had Hanson down at the end of the list.  Count me as one of the idiots - just like the LNP did.  I'd much rather Hanson asking questions that get slammed than having the LNP ram through anything they please.  Mediscare?  "Never, ever, GST".  "No changes to medicare".

 

 

They went to an election with the GST. It was hardly a secret!

[Dante 2,704]

19 minutes ago, Earl Hood said:

Dante 

what is your point? Do you want to abide by the Fairwork umpire  decision or do you have some other system you work to? 

But obviously you have an issue with workers getting ahead! 

My point is the Union at this point in time has market power and is exercising it to get pay increases for their members above the norm that the rest of us endure. 

But to you that is a big problem because it will increase the cost of future community works. Well let's face it we taxpayers will be playing top dollar for construction projects like the Western Distributor because they have a large private sector input for finance and construction and they take their profit. 

My point is obviously lost on you.

They also have the Andrews Government in their pocket and he will give them what they want, they control this state and they will rape and pillage while they can.

Transurban went to the Government after the election and suggested a new $5b freeway without any business plan just the promise they would build it as long as Andrews lets them toll it, no business plan no tenders just an ok go ahead from Andrews.

If you can't see that then I'm wasting my time talking to you.

[Chris 2,892]

27 minutes ago, Dante said:

My point is obviously lost on you.

They also have the Andrews Government in their pocket and he will give them what they want, they control this state and they will rape and pillage while they can.

Transurban went to the Government after the election and suggested a new $5b freeway without any business plan just the promise they would build it as long as Andrews lets them toll it, no business plan no tenders just an ok go ahead from Andrews.

If you can't see that then I'm wasting my time talking to you.

Not to mention that the only really scraped the east west link because the CFMEU couldn't get their mits on it as the Libs had set it up that way. There was 1 billion dollars down the drain just so we can build the other end of the same road!

[Wrecker45 3,378]

2 hours ago, Earl Hood said:

It is usually called supply and demand forces effecting outcomes, that is market forces at work. That is OK for companies to price gouge when there is a boom in the market place , but for workers to exercise their market power is Union thuggery? 

 

EH - I'm glad you understand market forces. Welcome to capitalism. But you don't seem to understand the full picture. The companies hold the risk.

If a company makes a loss I dare say you don't advocate them reducing payment to employees? So it would be hypocritical to expect them to increase their pay in a boom.

Luckily the way capitalism works for workers on individual contracts is the better you work and the more that contributes to company profits the more you earn.

[Trisul 664]

9 hours ago, Chris said:

They went to an election with the GST. It was hardly a secret!

Did I say it was a secret?  Oh, and which election are you referring to?

Edited July 8, 2016 by Trisul

[Chris 2,892]

6 hours ago, Trisul said:

Did I say it was a secret?  Oh, and which election are you referring to?

You were comparing the never ever GST comment to the not privatising Madicare comments and suggesting that Medicare is not safe because we ended up with a GST. Fact is that the GST was taken to an election, what evidence do you have that it would nit be the same with Medicare and that they do wish to privatise it? Reminds me of the no carbon tax comment and then wow, we have a wealth redistribution tax under the cloke of a carbon tax.

[Trisul 664]

Eh.  Make false claims as to my first post and then ignore the thrust of the second.

Howard made PM in one election of the back of his never, ever, GST commitment only to ... GST. 

Abbott made PM with his commitment to no changes to medicare only to attempt to co-opt the integrity of medicare.

Turnbull, well, he's pretty much made PM but, thankfully, is in no position to knife anything.  I wonder why that could be ...

 

[daisycutter 29,343]

i never understand why laborites make such a big fuss over howard's original no change to gst. a promise which he kept for his term.

he then changed his stance and took this change as a key plank in his next election campaign. he could not have been more upfront about it

but still the laborites scream to the heavens as if it was the worst of political crimes....just sour grapes

[Trisul 664]

It's funny, people assume an alignment that doesn't exist.  I've voted for every major party and most of the minor ones.

But, please, a promise of "never, ever, GST" that was "kept for his term" ... that is truly something I'll never understand.

[Earl Hood 6,061]

On 8 July 2016 at 9:59 PM, Dante said:

My point is obviously lost on you.

They also have the Andrews Government in their pocket and he will give them what they want, they control this state and they will rape and pillage while they can.

Transurban went to the Government after the election and suggested a new $5b freeway without any business plan just the promise they would build it as long as Andrews lets them toll it, no business plan no tenders just an ok go ahead from Andrews.

If you can't see that then I'm wasting my time talking to you.

Yes Dante maybe your point is lost on me. I was talking about the CFMEU, your reply talks about "they" controlling the state then you bring in Transurban? Are the CFMEU and Transurban working together? 

As to your second point I totally agree. State infrastructure planning is a shambles and is largely driven by the latest business opportunity thought up by one the State's infrastructure private sector operators, e.g. Metro Rail, Transurban. 

If we want to reduce the costs of public infrastructure construction we need to ban Public Private Partnerships such as that used for the Desal plant and proposed for East West. Private sector financing at 12% versus government finance available for 4% cannot compete yet Governments keep using them just to keep their balance sheets looking better and the long term costs are greater than any CFMEU wage claim. At least the wage rises given to local workers will get recycled through the State economy as opposed to millions in interest going off shore to international bankers. 

[Dante 2,704]

36 minutes ago, Earl Hood said:

Yes Dante maybe your point is lost on me. I was talking about the CFMEU, your reply talks about "they" controlling the state then you bring in Transurban? Are the CFMEU and Transurban working together? 

As to your second point I totally agree. State infrastructure planning is a shambles and is largely driven by the latest business opportunity thought up by one the State's infrastructure private sector operators, e.g. Metro Rail, Transurban. 

If we want to reduce the costs of public infrastructure construction we need to ban Public Private Partnerships such as that used for the Desal plant and proposed for East West. Private sector financing at 12% versus government finance available for 4% cannot compete yet Governments keep using them just to keep their balance sheets looking better and the long term costs are greater than any CFMEU wage claim. At least the wage rises given to local workers will get recycled through the State economy as opposed to millions in interest going off shore to international bankers. 

Transurban get the contract and CFMEU get the job, that's how it works, CFMEU is Andrew's union of choice and he is run by them.

Surely you know that?

Meanwhile the taxpayers of this State are forced to pay the CFMEU whatever they want.  Fair Work, yeah right, they don't do what they are told.

 

 

[daisycutter 29,343]

16 hours ago, Trisul said:

It's funny, people assume an alignment that doesn't exist.  I've voted for every major party and most of the minor ones.

But, please, a promise of "never, ever, GST" that was "kept for his term" ... that is truly something I'll never understand.

obsess over this all you like trisul. i couldn't give a fig. it's such a meaningless thing to waste too much emotion over. if you are really worried about political goings-on then there are much bigger fish to fry and get yourself upset over.

[Earl Hood 6,061]

7 hours ago, Dante said:

Transurban get the contract and CFMEU get the job, that's how it works, CFMEU is Andrew's union of choice and he is run by them.

Surely you know that?

Meanwhile the taxpayers of this State are forced to pay the CFMEU whatever they want.  Fair Work, yeah right, they don't do what they are told.

 

 

Yep let's ignore the federal, national umpire, Fairwork Australia; it is compromised, it is all a conspiracy. The CFMEU is a dire threat to us all! We'll all be rooned said Hanrahan! 

Edited July 10, 2016 by Earl Hood

[Wrecker45 3,378]

On 7/8/2016 at 11:54 AM, Choke said:

On 7/7/2016 at 11:04 AM, Jaded said:

Of all the stupid [censored] that One Nation and Pauline Hansen stands for, the most concerning thing is her questioning of child vaccination.

There was another party (the health party?), who was campaigning against vaccination.

Honestly, how incredibly dumb can you be? Yes lets stop vaccinating our kids and bring back horrible preventable disease. That's just what the world needs!  

As far as I can see One Nation doesn't question vaccination as part of their platform. Pauline Hanson vaccinated her own children and was commenting on a grand-daughter that wasn't vaccinated that has drawn attention . There have been Green's speak out against vaccination as well but it is not their party policy either.

Let's concentrate on One Nation's actual policies and find fault in them.

[Wrecker45 3,378]

On 7/9/2016 at 11:02 PM, Trisul said:

It's funny, people assume an alignment that doesn't exist.  I've voted for every major party and most of the minor ones.

But, please, a promise of "never, ever, GST" that was "kept for his term" ... that is truly something I'll never understand.

Just look at the Mediscare campaign. In the political environment of the last 15 years you need to completely rule things out or you will get bombarded by mass hysteria. Privatising the way Medicare is transacted (not medicare) would benefit everyone but is now completely ruled out to the detriment of the people.

Howard completely ruled out a GST but had the courage to campaign on it and bet his political life on it at the next election. Politicians are notoriously bad at upholding the truth, are fickle and change their mind based on opinion polls. Howard changed his mind and is a political legend for being transparent about it. 

 

[hardtack 10,423]

Mediscare my arse!  They have been dismantling the whole thing by stealth for some time already!

I have just come from Medicare after making a claim for my son's ongoing treatment for a footballing injury.  So far THIS govt has frozen the scheduled fee (from last Jan 1st if memory serves) meaning the gap will continue to grow and grow unless I want to travel to the planet  Koozbane where I hear there are specialists who charge this mythical scheduled fee for their services. Next, I was just informed by the Medicare staffer who dealt with my claim, that the Govt has withdrawn any tax rebates this year for family claims made during the financial year due to budgetary constraints.  I can only hope he has been misinformed, but somehow I think not.

Couple this with the fact that the Health Act contains a clause stating that insurance companies are forbidden to make payouts in claims for the Medicare gap and I am literally up [censored]-creek sans paddle.

This is more of a moan and a vent than a contribution to the political discussion, but thanks to corporate greed I was considered less important by Oracle Corp than their shareholder's dividends and hence 'set free' last September (at 64, finding gainful employment is NOT easy) and now thanks to govts (I don't know which side was responsible for the Health Act clause), I am out of pocket over $3k for my son's knee injury, with no hope of recovering any of it...of all expenses incurred I've managed to recover just over $300 for the private cover (Bupa) components!!!

So to sum up, Medicare has been moving towards an American model for some time already and govts of all persuasions (left or right) can go and [censored] themselves!!  (I am NOT in a good mood, in case you hadn't noticed)