Have the Libs dropped(proclaimed dead) their pro-Nuclear Power/Waste position yet, or are they still busy blaming serfchoices for the embarrasment of the Prime-Minister losing his own seat?

No, yes. End.

Great thread.

Aussie wrote on Dec 25^th, 2007 at 3:40pm:

No, yes. End. Great thread.

:D

Merry Farken Christmas!!!

 :P

No I believe they still believe in green policies and I have no idea what they are blaimng for Australia's greatest modern PM losing his seat.

Something in the water?

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Dec 25^th, 2007 at 6:25pm:

Aussie wrote on Dec 25th, 2007 at 3:40pm: No, yes. End. Great thread. :D Merry Farken Christmas!!!  :P

How  many Threads do you need on the one issue?  You have already started one, weeks ago, on the same topic!

Aussie wrote on Dec 25^th, 2007 at 10:15pm:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Dec 25th, 2007 at 6:25pm: Aussie wrote on Dec 25th, 2007 at 3:40pm: No, yes. End. Great thread. :D Merry Farken Christmas!!!  :P How  many Threads do you need on the one issue?  You have already started one, weeks ago, on the same topic!

Naaahhhhh, leave Horse alone, he loves to flog dead ones.

deepthought wrote on Dec 25^th, 2007 at 11:34pm:

Aussie wrote on Dec 25th, 2007 at 10:15pm: BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Dec 25th, 2007 at 6:25pm: Aussie wrote on Dec 25th, 2007 at 3:40pm: No, yes. End. Great thread. :D Merry Farken Christmas!!!  :P How  many Threads do you need on the one issue?  You have already started one, weeks ago, on the same topic! Naaahhhhh, leave Horse alone, he loves to flog dead ones.

Yet, you cannot tell me if the Libs have dropped it or not...hmmmmmmmmnn!?!

 :-? :P :-[ :-/ :D ;D ;) :o 8-) :P

Good point!

Well DT, have they?

deepthought wrote on Dec 25^th, 2007 at 8:13pm:

No I believe they still believe in green policies and I have no idea what they are blaimng for Australia's greatest modern PM losing his seat. Something in the water?

deepthought wrote on Dec 29^th, 2007 at 10:55pm:

deepthought wrote on Dec 25th, 2007 at 8:13pm: No I believe they still believe in green policies and I have no idea what they are blaimng for Australia's greatest modern PM losing his seat. Something in the water?

"...Australias greatest modern P.M...."

Mate, did you know rust is a weakpoint?!?

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Dec 30^th, 2007 at 12:16am:

deepthought wrote on Dec 29th, 2007 at 10:55pm: deepthought wrote on Dec 25th, 2007 at 8:13pm: No I believe they still believe in green policies and I have no idea what they are blaimng for Australia's greatest modern PM losing his seat. Something in the water? "...Australias greatest modern P.M...." Mate, did you know rust is a weakpoint?!?

Have you had it treated?

Incidentally, perhaps you could give me your opinion.  Who then would be Australia's greatest modern PM if you don't happen to agree with my opinion that Johnny did more for this country than any other PM of the last, say, 30 years.

deepthought wrote on Dec 30^th, 2007 at 6:19am:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Dec 30th, 2007 at 12:16am: deepthought wrote on Dec 29th, 2007 at 10:55pm: deepthought wrote on Dec 25th, 2007 at 8:13pm: No I believe they still believe in green policies and I have no idea what they are blaimng for Australia's greatest modern PM losing his seat. Something in the water? "...Australias greatest modern P.M...." Mate, did you know rust is a weakpoint?!? Have you had it treated? Incidentally, perhaps you could give me your opinion.  Who then would be Australia's greatest modern PM if you don't happen to agree with my opinion that Johnny did more for this country than any other PM of the last, say, 30 years.

 

What a shock for Australia........................duh.

Australia just turfed hayseed out, not only from Government.  His own threw him out of his own seat in favour of an ABC media tart backed up by a Union hack!!!!!

Time for a reality check, DT.

Aussie wrote on Jan 1^st, 2008 at 9:09pm:

deepthought wrote on Dec 30th, 2007 at 6:19am: BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Dec 30th, 2007 at 12:16am: deepthought wrote on Dec 29th, 2007 at 10:55pm: deepthought wrote on Dec 25th, 2007 at 8:13pm: No I believe they still believe in green policies and I have no idea what they are blaimng for Australia's greatest modern PM losing his seat. Something in the water? "...Australias greatest modern P.M...." Mate, did you know rust is a weakpoint?!? Have you had it treated? Incidentally, perhaps you could give me your opinion.  Who then would be Australia's greatest modern PM if you don't happen to agree with my opinion that Johnny did more for this country than any other PM of the last, say, 30 years.   What a shock for Australia........................duh. Australia just turfed hayseed out, not only from Government.  His own threw him out of his own seat in favour of an ABC media tart backed up by a Union hack!!!!! Time for a reality check, DT.

And Australia's greatest modern PM Aussie?

Probaby Hawke.....with a tad of Whitlam attached........because of China........[oh, yeah.....he did win the America's Cup.....personally, with his bare hands!!!.  Yeah, he did, I heard it on the radio, so it must be true.]

Aussie wrote on Jan 2^nd, 2008 at 9:09pm:

Probaby Hawke.....with a tad of Whitlam attached........because of China........[oh, yeah.....he did win the America's Cup.....personally, with his bare hands!!!.  Yeah, he did, I heard it on the radio, so it must be true.]

There's no doubt he screwed the workers and made a lot of rich people wealthy beyond imagining (who can forget Bond, Skase, Packer et al) but I don't agree that screwing ordinary Australians is all that noble.

Hawke did very little for Australia and its people in general.   Many traditional Lieborites detested his policies too.

deepthought wrote on Jan 2^nd, 2008 at 9:27pm:

Aussie wrote on Jan 2nd, 2008 at 9:09pm: Probaby Hawke.....with a tad of Whitlam attached........because of China........[oh, yeah.....he did win the America's Cup.....personally, with his bare hands!!!.  Yeah, he did, I heard it on the radio, so it must be true.] There's no doubt he screwed the workers and made a lot of rich people wealthy beyond imagining (who can forget Bond, Skase, Packer et al) but I don't agree that screwing ordinary Australians is all that noble. Hawke did very little for Australia and its people in general.   Many traditional Lieborites detested his policies too.

What......no mention of China???

The singular, most important thaing that exists for us, and probably the rest of the planet for the next 40 years or so.  Hawke took us there, fact.

Having a buggerer PM who speaks the lingo can't hurt too much, methinks.

Aussie wrote on Jan 2^nd, 2008 at 9:54pm:

deepthought wrote on Jan 2nd, 2008 at 9:27pm: Aussie wrote on Jan 2nd, 2008 at 9:09pm: Probaby Hawke.....with a tad of Whitlam attached........because of China........[oh, yeah.....he did win the America's Cup.....personally, with his bare hands!!!.  Yeah, he did, I heard it on the radio, so it must be true.] There's no doubt he screwed the workers and made a lot of rich people wealthy beyond imagining (who can forget Bond, Skase, Packer et al) but I don't agree that screwing ordinary Australians is all that noble. Hawke did very little for Australia and its people in general.   Many traditional Lieborites detested his policies too. What......no mention of China??? The singular, most important thaing that exists for us, and probably the rest of the planet for the next 40 years or so.  Hawke took us there, fact. Having a buggerer PM who speaks the lingo can't hurt too much, methinks.

Hawke wasn't particularly special with regards to China.  Before him Fraser had already visited China twice and China established its consulate in Sydney in 1979 - during the Fraser years.

John Howard visited China more often than Hawke.

deepthought wrote on Jan 2^nd, 2008 at 10:19pm:

Aussie wrote on Jan 2nd, 2008 at 9:54pm: deepthought wrote on Jan 2nd, 2008 at 9:27pm: Aussie wrote on Jan 2nd, 2008 at 9:09pm: Probaby Hawke.....with a tad of Whitlam attached........because of China........[oh, yeah.....he did win the America's Cup.....personally, with his bare hands!!!.  Yeah, he did, I heard it on the radio, so it must be true.] There's no doubt he screwed the workers and made a lot of rich people wealthy beyond imagining (who can forget Bond, Skase, Packer et al) but I don't agree that screwing ordinary Australians is all that noble. Hawke did very little for Australia and its people in general.   Many traditional Lieborites detested his policies too. What......no mention of China??? The singular, most important thaing that exists for us, and probably the rest of the planet for the next 40 years or so.  Hawke took us there, fact. Having a buggerer PM who speaks the lingo can't hurt too much, methinks. Hawke wasn't particularly special with regards to China.  Before him Fraser had already visited China twice and China established its consulate in Sydney in 1979 - during the Fraser years. John Howard visited China more often than Hawke.

You really are a low life.  bugger, I hope you get through Law and that some of my mates come up against you.....or better still, and more probable, in front of you, on the Bench.

Who was the first person to officially visit China as the current PM of Australia?

That'd be Whitlam.  

Hawke built upon it.

hayseed and Fraser might just as well stayed at home.

Was it Hawke who  first hosted the Chinese big cahuna in Australia?

Dunno.

.....but, at least Hawke had a tear to shed.

Aussie wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2008 at 9:05pm:

deepthought wrote on Jan 2nd, 2008 at 10:19pm: Aussie wrote on Jan 2nd, 2008 at 9:54pm: deepthought wrote on Jan 2nd, 2008 at 9:27pm: Aussie wrote on Jan 2nd, 2008 at 9:09pm: Probaby Hawke.....with a tad of Whitlam attached........because of China........[oh, yeah.....he did win the America's Cup.....personally, with his bare hands!!!.  Yeah, he did, I heard it on the radio, so it must be true.] There's no doubt he screwed the workers and made a lot of rich people wealthy beyond imagining (who can forget Bond, Skase, Packer et al) but I don't agree that screwing ordinary Australians is all that noble. Hawke did very little for Australia and its people in general.   Many traditional Lieborites detested his policies too. What......no mention of China??? The singular, most important thaing that exists for us, and probably the rest of the planet for the next 40 years or so.  Hawke took us there, fact. Having a buggerer PM who speaks the lingo can't hurt too much, methinks. Hawke wasn't particularly special with regards to China.  Before him Fraser had already visited China twice and China established its consulate in Sydney in 1979 - during the Fraser years. John Howard visited China more often than Hawke. You really are a low life.  bugger, I hope you get through Law and that some of my mates come up against you.....or better still, and more probable, in front of you, on the Bench. Who was the first person to officially visit China as the current PM of Australia? That'd be Whitlam.   Hawke built upon it. hayseed and Fraser might just as well stayed at home. Was it Hawke who  first hosted the Chinese big cahuna in Australia? Dunno. .....but, at least Hawke had a tear to shed.

Hawke certainly did pave the way for banning ministerial contact with China.  I don't believe Fraser or Johnny did that dude.  Yep, you can thank Hawke for that as he blubbered crocodile tears.  But he was the Kleenex Kid, he was always sobbing about something or other.

Oh, and it was Johnny who hosted the first Chinese Head Of State.  Relations with China were distinctly frosty after Hawke told his ministers they couldn't think for themselves and made China stand in the corner until it could behave.

Johnny normalised things.

When it comes to amazing PMs Johnny was the man.

deepthought wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2008 at 9:18pm:

Oh, and it was Johnny who hosted the first Chinese Head Of State.  Relations with China were distinctly frosty after Hawke told his ministers they couldn't think for themselves and made China stand in the corner until it could behave. Johnny normalised things. When it comes to amazing PMs Johnny was the man.

I'm sure that's how they will talk about the man who rammed serfchoices thru the first opportunity he got.

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Jan 4^th, 2008 at 3:47am:

deepthought wrote on Jan 3rd, 2008 at 9:18pm: Oh, and it was Johnny who hosted the first Chinese Head Of State.  Relations with China were distinctly frosty after Hawke told his ministers they couldn't think for themselves and made China stand in the corner until it could behave. Johnny normalised things. When it comes to amazing PMs Johnny was the man. I'm sure that's how they will talk about the man who rammed serfchoices thru the first opportunity he got.

I'm sure they (and you) will.  

History will judge Johnny as the greatest modern PM when the economy has crashed, unemployment has risen (it already is higher than the start of last year), interest rates continue to rise (today some banks announced a rise without any action from the central bank - the first time for over a decade), availability of full time jobs drop below part time ones (this already happened - it coincided with the election of a Liebor government) and so on and so forth.

With Johnny thrown away by the electorate the rot soon sets in and all Australians pay the penalty because some chose a Liebor Government over sensibility.

The wise ones knew interest rates rise under Liebor - today the reality struck home to the delusional ones who did not know what truth is.

deepthought wrote on Jan 4^th, 2008 at 5:34pm:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Jan 4th, 2008 at 3:47am: deepthought wrote on Jan 3rd, 2008 at 9:18pm: Oh, and it was Johnny who hosted the first Chinese Head Of State.  Relations with China were distinctly frosty after Hawke told his ministers they couldn't think for themselves and made China stand in the corner until it could behave. Johnny normalised things. When it comes to amazing PMs Johnny was the man. I'm sure that's how they will talk about the man who rammed serfchoices thru the first opportunity he got. I'm sure they (and you) will.   History will judge Johnny as the greatest modern PM when the economy has crashed, unemployment has risen (it already is higher than the start of last year), interest rates continue to rise (today some banks announced a rise without any action from the central bank - the first time for over a decade), availability of full time jobs drop below part time ones (this already happened - it coincided with the election of a Liebor government) and so on and so forth. With Johnny thrown away by the electorate the rot soon sets in and all Australians pay the penalty because some chose a Liebor Government over sensibility. The wise ones knew interest rates rise under Liebor - today the reality struck home to the delusional ones who did not know what truth is.

Let me get this straight: Are you seriously blaming Labor for unemployment figures already because they happen to be negative?

Same with Interest Rates?

Same with Full-time/Part-time jobs?

 :-? :o ;D :D ;) :P ::) 8-)

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Jan 4^th, 2008 at 5:42pm:

deepthought wrote on Jan 4th, 2008 at 5:34pm: BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Jan 4th, 2008 at 3:47am: deepthought wrote on Jan 3rd, 2008 at 9:18pm: Oh, and it was Johnny who hosted the first Chinese Head Of State.  Relations with China were distinctly frosty after Hawke told his ministers they couldn't think for themselves and made China stand in the corner until it could behave. Johnny normalised things. When it comes to amazing PMs Johnny was the man. I'm sure that's how they will talk about the man who rammed serfchoices thru the first opportunity he got. I'm sure they (and you) will.   History will judge Johnny as the greatest modern PM when the economy has crashed, unemployment has risen (it already is higher than the start of last year), interest rates continue to rise (today some banks announced a rise without any action from the central bank - the first time for over a decade), availability of full time jobs drop below part time ones (this already happened - it coincided with the election of a Liebor government) and so on and so forth. With Johnny thrown away by the electorate the rot soon sets in and all Australians pay the penalty because some chose a Liebor Government over sensibility. The wise ones knew interest rates rise under Liebor - today the reality struck home to the delusional ones who did not know what truth is. Let me get this straight: Are you seriously blaming Labor for unemployment figures already because they happen to be negative? Same with Interest Rates? Same with Full-time/Part-time jobs?  :-? :o ;D :D ;) :P ::) 8-)

Who is responsible if not the current government?  Unemployment hit extraordinary highs under the last Liebor government but the coalition righted the wrongs.  Now Liebor is back expect the same conditions as we suffered before under Liebor.  

deepthought wrote on Jan 4^th, 2008 at 6:10pm:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Jan 4th, 2008 at 5:42pm: deepthought wrote on Jan 4th, 2008 at 5:34pm: BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Jan 4th, 2008 at 3:47am: deepthought wrote on Jan 3rd, 2008 at 9:18pm: Oh, and it was Johnny who hosted the first Chinese Head Of State.  Relations with China were distinctly frosty after Hawke told his ministers they couldn't think for themselves and made China stand in the corner until it could behave. Johnny normalised things. When it comes to amazing PMs Johnny was the man. I'm sure that's how they will talk about the man who rammed serfchoices thru the first opportunity he got. I'm sure they (and you) will.   History will judge Johnny as the greatest modern PM when the economy has crashed, unemployment has risen (it already is higher than the start of last year), interest rates continue to rise (today some banks announced a rise without any action from the central bank - the first time for over a decade), availability of full time jobs drop below part time ones (this already happened - it coincided with the election of a Liebor government) and so on and so forth. With Johnny thrown away by the electorate the rot soon sets in and all Australians pay the penalty because some chose a Liebor Government over sensibility. The wise ones knew interest rates rise under Liebor - today the reality struck home to the delusional ones who did not know what truth is. Let me get this straight: Are you seriously blaming Labor for unemployment figures already because they happen to be negative? Same with Interest Rates? Same with Full-time/Part-time jobs?  :-? :o ;D :D ;) :P ::) 8-) Who is responsible if not the current government?  Unemployment hit extraordinary highs under the last Liebor government but the coalition righted the wrongs.  Now Liebor is back expect the same conditions as we suffered before under Liebor.

You're a freak, mate!

You're a freak, mate

No, freaks are the ones that want to ban fossil fuels because they have no understanding on how the world actually works...that would be you. DT is actually a realist. You would do good to pay heed to what he says instead of the blind rhetorical idiocy that you are so fond of spewing forth without a second thought

IQSRLOW wrote on Jan 5^th, 2008 at 2:03am:

You're a freak, mate No, freaks are the ones that want to ban fossil fuels because they have no understanding on how the world actually works...that would be you. DT is actually a realist. You would do good to pay heed to what he says instead of the blind rhetorical idiocy that you are so fond of spewing forth without a second thought

Well, they should be.

Give them a grace period and ban them from most applications where replacements can be reasonably made.

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Jan 5^th, 2008 at 1:05am:

You're a freak, mate!

Am I a freak because I care about my fellow Australians welfare?  Because I tried to stop some misguided souls falling for Little Kevvy's rambling lies?   Alright then, I am one.

I voted Liberal.

deepthought wrote on Jan 5^th, 2008 at 7:24am:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Jan 5th, 2008 at 1:05am:   You're a freak, mate!   Alright then, I am one. I voted Liberal.

Yes you did and YOU lost. lol

wrote on Jan 5^th, 2008 at 8:25am:

deepthought wrote on Jan 5th, 2008 at 7:24am: BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Jan 5th, 2008 at 1:05am:   You're a freak, mate!   Alright then, I am one. I voted Liberal. Yes you did and YOU lost. lol

Lost the battle perhaps but I was always right to fight it.  

I was right about rising prices and interest rates, rising unemployment, rising industrial action and falling confidence.  And while there is little consolation in being right in a world of pain I at least prepared for it by minimising debt, investing heavily and whacking away reserves.  I suspect many are on  the brink and will soon go under.

I can survive in a well stocked fortress until the battle is to be fought and won.  And I can chuckle, as people like you oceans see that I was right.

deepthought wrote on Jan 5^th, 2008 at 10:24am:

wrote on Jan 5th, 2008 at 8:25am: deepthought wrote on Jan 5th, 2008 at 7:24am: BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Jan 5th, 2008 at 1:05am:   You're a freak, mate!   Alright then, I am one. I voted Liberal. Yes you did and YOU lost. lol Lost the battle perhaps but I was always right to fight it.   I was right about rising prices and interest rates, rising unemployment, rising industrial action and falling confidence.  And while there is little consolation in being right in a world of pain I at least prepared for it by minimising debt, investing heavily and whacking away reserves.  I suspect many are on  the brink and will soon go under. I can survive in a well stocked fortress until the battle is to be fought and won.  And I can chuckle, as people like you oceans see that I was right.

Many many people cannot afford a house.

But that could never be Johnnys fault because you just want to $@#$@!*#%^!$@^$%#&@!!!

 :-? :o ::) :D ;D ;) :-[ :-/ :'( :-X

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Jan 5^th, 2008 at 12:44pm:

deepthought wrote on Jan 5th, 2008 at 10:24am: wrote on Jan 5th, 2008 at 8:25am: deepthought wrote on Jan 5th, 2008 at 7:24am: BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Jan 5th, 2008 at 1:05am:   You're a freak, mate!   Alright then, I am one. I voted Liberal. Yes you did and YOU lost. lol Lost the battle perhaps but I was always right to fight it.   I was right about rising prices and interest rates, rising unemployment, rising industrial action and falling confidence.  And while there is little consolation in being right in a world of pain I at least prepared for it by minimising debt, investing heavily and whacking away reserves.  I suspect many are on  the brink and will soon go under. I can survive in a well stocked fortress until the battle is to be fought and won.  And I can chuckle, as people like you oceans see that I was right. Many many people cannot afford a house. But that could never be Johnnys fault because you just want to $@#$@!*#%^!$@^$%#&@!!!  :-? :o ::) :D ;D ;) :-[ :-/ :'( :-X

Then they never will be able to.  Interest rates hit a 30 year record low under Johnny.  If people can not afford finance at record interest rate lows then they will never be able to borrow.  Johnny made it possible for anyone with the capacity to make the payments easy with such astonishingly low interest rates, and what's more he made it possible for more people to have jobs than had had them in 40 years.

The conditions were right.  But you have missed your chance and you will not get it under Little Kevvy's Tyranny as interest rates rise without central bank action under Kevvy.  We knew that though which is why wise people made sure they were insulated against the horror of Liebor.

I voted Liberal.

Quote:

We knew that though which is why wise people made sure they were insulated against the horror of Liebor.

Strawman shite, DT, which is why you are boring......and you voted Lieberal.  

Please be consistent.

Aussie wrote on Jan 5^th, 2008 at 5:46pm:

Quote: We knew that though which is why wise people made sure they were insulated against the horror of Liebor. Strawman shite, DT, which is why you are boring......and you voted Lieberal.   Please be consistent.

Either you could attempt a rebuttal or you could launch into a personal attack.

Oh that's right, you did the latter.  I expect that means your weapon is not loaded Sir.

deepthought wrote on Jan 5^th, 2008 at 8:46pm:

Aussie wrote on Jan 5th, 2008 at 5:46pm: Quote: We knew that though which is why wise people made sure they were insulated against the horror of Liebor. Strawman shite, DT, which is why you are boring......and you voted Lieberal.   Please be consistent. Either you could attempt a rebuttal or you could launch into a personal attack. Oh that's right, you did the latter.  I expect that means your weapon is not loaded Sir.

That's my point, DT.  You set up the strawman using the phrase "horror of Liebor,"....i.e setting up an argument about what might happen in the future........even though Labor has been there for only six weeks......and expect angagement.  

bugger you DT.

What is happening now has NIL to do with the election result in Australia, and all to do with the mis-management of the economy of the USA.......

It would have happened under hayseed and the Lieberals, obviously.

Cease with the strawman shite, or I will start with the "Thank bugger Labor won.  It would have been much worse had hayseed won"

If I did that, you could never prove me wrong.

8-)

Aussie wrote on Jan 5^th, 2008 at 9:17pm:

That's my point, DT.  You set up the strawman using the phrase "horror of Liebor,"....i.e setting up an argument about what might happen in the future........even though Labor has been there for only six weeks......and expect angagement.   bugger you DT. What is happening now has NIL to do with the election result in Australia, and all to do with the mis-management of the economy of the USA....... It would have happened under hayseed and the Lieberals, obviously. Cease with the strawman shite, or I will start with the "Thank bugger Labor won.  It would have been much worse had hayseed won" If I did that, you could never prove me wrong. 8-)

Everything I have said about the horror of Liebor is happening now - not in the future dude.

And you could bellow "It would have been much worse had hayseed won".  However you would be wrong.  History contains the proof you need.  You only need look over your shoulder.

deepthought wrote on Jan 5^th, 2008 at 11:20pm:

Everything I have said about the horror of Liebor is happening now - not in the future dude. And you could bellow "It would have been much worse had hayseed won".  However you would be wrong.  History contains the proof you need.  You only need look over your shoulder.

I thought history recorded that we had the highest interest rates under JWH's tenure as treasurer. This was later stabilised by Keating when he floated the dollar and deregulated the banking sector. Housing loans interest rates would have been higher under Liberal if they weren't capped at the ceiling which they were at. This cap was removed by Keating.

There is a difference between policy that directly affects interest rates (ie: Keatings actions) and economic environment affecting interest rates (ie: mining boom, US sub-prime mortgage collapse). I can't see how you can claim responsibility for your prediction that this will happen under Rudd's Labor when they did not cause this? Sure, it happened under Rudd's watch but it would've happen under the Liberals (if they had won) as well. Please tell me what policy did Labor enact to have directly caused the banks latest change to their rates? This especially, when the reasons the banks gave was the US sub-prime crisis which is outside any Australian govt's control.

:)

Interest rates had been steadily creeping up long before the election and long before it was obvious the coalition would lose.

freediver wrote on Jan 6^th, 2008 at 12:14pm:

Interest rates had been steadily creeping up long before the election and long before it was obvious the coalition would lose.

Quite.  But only after stabilising rises by the Reserve Bank.  This latest was not prompted by the Reserve Bank, it was action taken completely independently of the central bank - a move not taken for over ten years (which is approximately the duration of the awesome coalition's tenure).   But I only made that point several times so you may have missed it.

Why now?  I have the notion it is that with all the signs of an impending Liebor Party 'recession we had to have' the banks are shoring up their defences as every business with intelligence would.  If the sun looks like disappearing then quickly make some hay.

Acid Monkey wrote on Jan 6^th, 2008 at 11:54am:

deepthought wrote on Jan 5th, 2008 at 11:20pm: Everything I have said about the horror of Liebor is happening now - not in the future dude. And you could bellow "It would have been much worse had hayseed won".  However you would be wrong.  History contains the proof you need.  You only need look over your shoulder. I thought history recorded that we had the highest interest rates under JWH's tenure as treasurer. This was later stabilised by Keating when he floated the dollar and deregulated the banking sector. Housing loans interest rates would have been higher under Liberal if they weren't capped at the ceiling which they were at. This cap was removed by Keating. There is a difference between policy that directly affects interest rates (ie: Keatings actions) and economic environment affecting interest rates (ie: mining boom, US sub-prime mortgage collapse). I can't see how you can claim responsibility for your prediction that this will happen under Rudd's Labor when they did not cause this? Sure, it happened under Rudd's watch but it would've happen under the Liberals (if they had won) as well. Please tell me what policy did Labor enact to have directly caused the banks latest change to their rates? This especially, when the reasons the banks gave was the US sub-prime crisis which is outside any Australian govt's control. :)

No history did not record that "we had the highest interest rates under JWH's tenure as treasurer".  Though Fraser certainly did get rates up there Johnny threatened to resign as Treasurer due to Fraser's awful leadership which resulted in disastrous economic conditions.  But Cheating still wins for the highest mortgage rates.  Of that there is no question.

But Cheating's punishing interest rates followed Cheating's clumsy fiscal policy.  After which he was also directly responsible for plunging Australia into an engineered recession to get the rates down.  There are no excuses for the horror of the previous Liebor Government.  This Liebor Government is aiming to repeat it all too.

The 'mining boom' which Kevvy blabs about does not exist in my opinion - but if, according to Kevvy, it does then why is the economy turning if the basis for the prosperity was always the alleged 'mining boom'?  He can't have it both ways.  He lies a lot.

Acid Monkey wrote on Jan 6^th, 2008 at 11:54am:

Please tell me what policy did Labor enact to have directly caused the banks latest change to their rates? This especially, when the reasons the banks gave was the US sub-prime crisis which is outside any Australian govt's control.

Incidentally do you think the banks will tell the truth about the reasons for raising rates?

deepthought wrote on Jan 6^th, 2008 at 2:29pm:

But Cheating still wins for the highest mortgage rates.  Of that there is no question.

I have already said that is because Keating removed the cap which then immediately raised the mortgage rate even higher to its true rate. The true rate which the cap restricted. The highest mortgage rate which you attributed to Keating should in fact be Fraser/Howard's.



deepthought wrote on Jan 6^th, 2008 at 2:29pm:

The 'mining boom' which Kevvy blabs about does not exist in my opinion - but if, according to Kevvy, it does then why is the economy turning if the basis for the prosperity was always the alleged 'mining boom'?  He can't have it both ways.  He lies a lot.

The mining boom doesn't exist? How did you derive this opinion? So what has been happening in WA? Why has prices there risen considerably more than say QLD which has a smaller share in the mining industry? Why do you think that WA miners are paid a lot more than say QLD miners? Why has WA houses risen tenfold than houses elsewhere in the country? Are they an economy all to themselves? Of course not, but they have one thing which the rest of us don't - the largest share in the mining pie. If there is no boom then we should all be having the same inflationary effects as WA.

"He can't have it both ways" doesn't work in economics. You CAN have a mining boom and also an economic downturn. Any highschool economics student can tell you that it is multi-faceted. There are many variables involved, not just mining - primary production, technological innovations, manufacturing, consumer spending (which is higher in WA), credit debt, import debts, skill worker shortages, skill bleeding etc. The economy is not just about mining. Currently it has a lot of influence in our economy but we cannot rely on a mining boom to carry Australia forever. Now, we have other factors coming into play which is offsetting the benefits of the mining sector - US dollar downturn therefore, rising our dollar making it less attractive to overseas currency exchanges, drop in tourism due to the dollar, our exports become more expensive; US ecocnomy is on a verge of a crash due to Sub-Prime which will affact the world. All of these lead to an economic downturn. You are comparing one fact to another fact and then alledging that he is lying because the facts contradite. Yes, they contradite but that is economic chaos - and there is a whole science dedicate to that subject. You forget that even Costello said that an economic downturn is on the way. Is he lying as well?



deepthought wrote on Jan 6^th, 2008 at 2:34pm:

Incidentally do you think the banks will tell the truth about the reasons for raising rates?

You haven't answered my question about Labor policy causing banks to raise interest rates. So, I guess that your only and best answer is that the banks must be lying. But why would the banks lie? Please give me reasons why they would.

And while we are on the subject of lack of proof/answers = lying, what records showed that Howard threatened to quit as treasurer? I don't remember hearing/reading this in the media at the time. As far as I know this revelation came to light only when Howard himself "confessed" years later. Could he be "lying" to save his own economic reputation blaming it instead on Fraser holding him back? Are there proof beyond one man's word about a private conversation that was never recorded? One can play the same game as you.

;)

You play it very well indeed, acid.  I tend to be more direct.  

Nice stuff.

Acid Monkey wrote on Jan 6^th, 2008 at 3:47pm:

deepthought wrote on Jan 6th, 2008 at 2:29pm: But Cheating still wins for the highest mortgage rates.  Of that there is no question. I have already said that is because Keating removed the cap which then immediately raised the mortgage rate even higher to its true rate. The true rate which the cap restricted. The highest mortgage rate which you attributed to Keating should in fact be Fraser/Howard's. deepthought wrote on Jan 6th, 2008 at 2:29pm: The 'mining boom' which Kevvy blabs about does not exist in my opinion - but if, according to Kevvy, it does then why is the economy turning if the basis for the prosperity was always the alleged 'mining boom'?  He can't have it both ways.  He lies a lot. The mining boom doesn't exist? How did you derive this opinion? So what has been happening in WA? Why has prices there risen considerably more than say QLD which has a smaller share in the mining industry? Why do you think that WA miners are paid a lot more than say QLD miners? Why has WA houses risen tenfold than houses elsewhere in the country? Are they an economy all to themselves? Of course not, but they have one thing which the rest of us don't - the largest share in the mining pie. If there is no boom then we should all be having the same inflationary effects as WA. "He can't have it both ways" doesn't work in economics. You CAN have a mining boom and also an economic downturn. Any highschool economics student can tell you that it is multi-faceted. There are many variables involved, not just mining - primary production, technological innovations, manufacturing, consumer spending (which is higher in WA), credit debt, import debts, skill worker shortages, skill bleeding etc. The economy is not just about mining. Currently it has a lot of influence in our economy but we cannot rely on a mining boom to carry Australia forever. Now, we have other factors coming into play which is offsetting the benefits of the mining sector - US dollar downturn therefore, rising our dollar making it less attractive to overseas currency exchanges, drop in tourism due to the dollar, our exports become more expensive; US ecocnomy is on a verge of a crash due to Sub-Prime which will affact the world. All of these lead to an economic downturn. You are comparing one fact to another fact and then alledging that he is lying because the facts contradite. Yes, they contradite but that is economic chaos - and there is a whole science dedicate to that subject. You forget that even Costello said that an economic downturn is on the way. Is he lying as well? deepthought wrote on Jan 6th, 2008 at 2:34pm: Incidentally do you think the banks will tell the truth about the reasons for raising rates? You haven't answered my question about Labor policy causing banks to raise interest rates. So, I guess that your only and best answer is that the banks must be lying. But why would the banks lie? Please give me reasons why they would. And while we are on the subject of lack of proof/answers = lying, what records showed that Howard threatened to quit as treasurer? I don't remember hearing/reading this in the media at the time. As far as I know this revelation came to light only when Howard himself "confessed" years later. Could he be "lying" to save his own economic reputation blaming it instead on Fraser holding him back? Are there proof beyond one man's word about a private conversation that was never recorded? One can play the same game as you. ;)

Income from the alleged 'mining boom' is a pretty small part of GDP.  In fact it is about the same as it has been for over two decades - about 5% of GDP.  This has been remarkably consistent since the 80s.  It is way less than it has been though.

In real dollar terms it is growing - but so is every other sector so it keeps pace with all segments of our Australian industry.  A 'mining boom' does not exist.

Banks are not reactive.  They spend a lot of money researching the future.  

Consider this.  Following the introduction of WorkChoices at the start of 2006 employment grew at a remarkable rate and unemployment hit lows not seen since the explosive 60s.  And most jobs created were full time - around 90% from memory.  

In November as Liebor wrested control from the coalition unemployment hit a high not seen since the beginning of 2007.  In November as Liebor wrested control from the coalition 80% of new jobs created were part time (compare this with 90% full time under the coalition).   Industry is not willing to take on full time workers with the threat of industrial action, a new industrial regime and the return of the 'unfair dismissal' penalty.

Banks act accordingly.  They don't wait until it is too late to protect themselves.  If I can see the writing on the wall don't you reckon the banks can too?

And there is ample evidence John Howard threatened to resign as Treasurer.  He and Big Mal disagreed on many things.  Perhaps you did not see it but it happened.  Only when John Howard made it in 1996 could he implement the things he always wanted to.  The results speak for themselves.

Quote:

n November as Liebor wrested control from the coalition unemployment hit a high not seen since the beginning of 2007.  In November as Liebor wrested control from the coalition 80% of new jobs created were part time (compare this with 90% full time under the coalition).   Industry is not willing to take on full time workers with the threat of industrial action, a new industrial regime and the return of the 'unfair dismissal' penalty.

Rubbish.......Labor defeated the Lieberals..........yes?  Australians said bugger off, hayseed.


Quote:

Banks act accordingly.  They don't wait until it is too late to protect themselves.  If I can see the writing on the wall don't you reckon the banks can too?

Are you saying there would have been a different outcome if hayseed had won?  Yes, you are.


Quote:

And there is ample evidence John Howard threatened to resign as Treasurer.  He and Big Mal disagreed on many things.  Perhaps you did not see it but it happened.  Only when John Howard made it in 1996 could he implement the things he always wanted to.  The results speak for themselves.

.....but, he failed to resign....while Australia suffered.

deepthought wrote on Jan 5^th, 2008 at 5:10pm:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Jan 5th, 2008 at 12:44pm: deepthought wrote on Jan 5th, 2008 at 10:24am: wrote on Jan 5th, 2008 at 8:25am: deepthought wrote on Jan 5th, 2008 at 7:24am: BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Jan 5th, 2008 at 1:05am:   You're a freak, mate!   Alright then, I am one. I voted Liberal. Yes you did and YOU lost. lol Lost the battle perhaps but I was always right to fight it.   I was right about rising prices and interest rates, rising unemployment, rising industrial action and falling confidence.  And while there is little consolation in being right in a world of pain I at least prepared for it by minimising debt, investing heavily and whacking away reserves.  I suspect many are on  the brink and will soon go under. I can survive in a well stocked fortress until the battle is to be fought and won.  And I can chuckle, as people like you oceans see that I was right. Many many people cannot afford a house. But that could never be Johnnys fault because you just want to $@#$@!*#%^!$@^$%#&@!!!  :-? :o ::) :D ;D ;) :-[ :-/ :'( :-X Then they never will be able to.  Interest rates hit a 30 year record low under Johnny.  If people can not afford finance at record interest rate lows then they will never be able to borrow.  Johnny made it possible for anyone with the capacity to make the payments easy with such astonishingly low interest rates, and what's more he made it possible for more people to have jobs than had had them in 40 years. The conditions were right.  But you have missed your chance and you will not get it under Little Kevvy's Tyranny as interest rates rise without central bank action under Kevvy.  We knew that though which is why wise people made sure they were insulated against the horror of Liebor. I voted Liberal.

The disposable income spent on the mortagage was higher under Howard.

Aussie wrote on Jan 6^th, 2008 at 7:44pm:

Quote: n November as Liebor wrested control from the coalition unemployment hit a high not seen since the beginning of 2007.  In November as Liebor wrested control from the coalition 80% of new jobs created were part time (compare this with 90% full time under the coalition).   Industry is not willing to take on full time workers with the threat of industrial action, a new industrial regime and the return of the 'unfair dismissal' penalty. Rubbish.......Labor defeated the Lieberals..........yes?  Australians said bugger off, hayseed.

Yes, and now the unions have come calling, unemployment is rising and the banks are taking preventive measures by increasing interest rates.  Why are people so foolish Aussie?


Aussie wrote on Jan 6^th, 2008 at 7:44pm:

Quote: Banks act accordingly.  They don't wait until it is too late to protect themselves.  If I can see the writing on the wall don't you reckon the banks can too? Are you saying there would have been a different outcome if hayseed had won?  Yes, you are.

Indeed there would have been.  No union action, continuing low unemployment and no interest rate rise independent of the Reserve Bank.

But Australia chose to be punished - you keep saying so.


Aussie wrote on Jan 6^th, 2008 at 7:44pm:

Quote: And there is ample evidence John Howard threatened to resign as Treasurer.  He and Big Mal disagreed on many things.  Perhaps you did not see it but it happened.  Only when John Howard made it in 1996 could he implement the things he always wanted to.  The results speak for themselves. .....but, he failed to resign....while Australia suffered.

No, he failed to resign and kept some sense in government.  Had he resigned Fraser would have been as useless as Hawke and Cheating and the pain would have been as great as that which followed Fraser.

Have you listened to Fraser as Johnny has created an amazing Australia?  He is like Cheating - taking a completely negative view.  Fraser would have made an excellent Liebor pollie.  He, Hawke and Cheating have complained loud and long about Johnny - but they have been proven wrong by the lowest interest rates in 30 years, lowest unemployment in 40 years and the lowest industrial action in nigh on 100 years.

All that is about to change.

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Jan 6^th, 2008 at 8:25pm:

The disposable income spent on the mortagage was higher under Howard.

That is because house prices were higher.  But remember this - as house prices grew wealth grew, and as interest rates fell the investment in the capital grew.

Would you prefer it if house prices fell and people's investments were wiped out?  Hawke and Cheating did that to Australians when property crashed as interest rates rose.  Would you like to see it again?  It caused a lot of suffering.  

One record Messrs Hawke & Cheating did manage to achieve was a peak in male suicides.  After 13 years of the horror male suicides hit levels not seen for 30 years.   Now (I believe) this awful statistic has returned to pre-Liebor levels.

DT - bump.

how come the ALPers continually ignore the WHOLE story ??

I'ld hope the male suicides arose from causes other than hawke and keating.
A bad economy does give rise to that, but us guys should communicate better to each other.

deepthought wrote on Jan 6^th, 2008 at 10:07pm:

One record Messrs Hawke & Cheating did manage to achieve was a peak in male suicides.  After 13 years of the horror male suicides hit levels not seen for 30 years.   Now (I believe) this awful statistic has returned to pre-Liebor levels.

So what are you saying, that a horde of Liberal voters are going to off themselves after the lost of their party and party hero JWH?

;D ;D ;)

No, they will kill themselves if they lose a bit of money. That's how Liberal voters think isn't it?  ;D

Sprintcyclist wrote on Jan 7^th, 2008 at 11:03am:

DT - bump. how come the ALPers continually ignore the WHOLE story ?? I'ld hope the male suicides arose from causes other than hawke and keating. A bad economy does give rise to that, but us guys should communicate better to each other.

In 1995 I stood with a mate on the side of the road as the bailiff supervised the emptying of the contents of his house into a removalists van for storage.   His family were evicted, the locks changed and the house was auctioned for far less than he owed.  His family fell apart and have never reconciled - he struggled to see his children as he lived in the back of a borrowed car.

He was wiped out by high interest rates and the collapse of the value of his property.  He has never recovered.

But he did not 'off himself'.  Though one would understand if he had have done so.  I saw the results of Hawke and Cheating's dynastic chaos first hand and it was often the battlers who paid the price.  

Freediver, your comments indicate that you have no idea of the reality of the time - that the wealthy got wealthier with Liebor.  At no other time in Australian history have we seen a deliberate attempt to enrichen corporate Australia to the detriment of Aussie battlers.

And I hope we never see it again - yet all the signs are there for it to happen again with the new Liebor government.

Male suicide peaked at the end of Hawke/Cheating's ruinous grip on the failed economy.  Following the relief of John Howard's takeover, male suicide returned to pre-Liebor figures.  What other event could cause the gradual rise in male suicide through the 80s and 90s culminating with a couple of very high peaks at the end of Liebor?  Such awful figures had not occurred in Australia since the early 60s and before that the Great Depression.  The figures are not coincidence.  History does not lie.  Tragic economic circumstances can make life unbearable for the vulnerable.

I've always wondered where your blinkered partisanship came from. Thanks for clearing that up, your posts make a lot more sense now. People always seek someone to blame when they feel like they have no control over their destiny.

I've always wondered where your blinkered partisanship came from.

So what's your excuse FD?  :D

freediver wrote on Jan 7^th, 2008 at 7:31pm:

I've always wondered where your blinkered partisanship came from. Thanks for clearing that up, your posts make a lot more sense now. People always seek someone to blame when they feel like they have no control over their destiny.

Actually when you read my post for the first time you will see it didn't happen to me.  I also posted elsewhere I have insulated myself from the horror.  Liebor can not affect me.  I am quite in control of my destiny.

But some people are not, due to all kinds of circumstances.  I just hate to see them exploited so I take up the cause on their behalf.  My mate was driven to his knees and I have seen many, many more destroyed by high interest rates and collapsing real estate values.  I also saw many businesses collapse during the Pilot's Dispute of the late 80s.  Cairns businesses were falling like dead men in battle.

And when I was an employer I met very many desperate people who could not find work as unemployment rose to around 10% with Hawke/Cheating determining their destinies.  Sadly I could not employ everyone.

May I suggest you read my posts free.  It will help you with your blinkered partisanship.

deepthought wrote on Jan 7^th, 2008 at 6:43pm:

Sprintcyclist wrote on Jan 7th, 2008 at 11:03am: DT - bump. how come the ALPers continually ignore the WHOLE story ?? I'ld hope the male suicides arose from causes other than hawke and keating. A bad economy does give rise to that, but us guys should communicate better to each other. In 1995 I stood with a mate on the side of the road as the bailiff supervised the emptying of the contents of his house into a removalists van for storage.   His family were evicted, the locks changed and the house was auctioned for far less than he owed.  His family fell apart and have never reconciled - he struggled to see his children as he lived in the back of a borrowed car. He was wiped out by high interest rates and the collapse of the value of his property.  He has never recovered. But he did not 'off himself'.  Though one would understand if he had have done so.  I saw the results of Hawke and Cheating's dynastic chaos first hand and it was often the battlers who paid the price.   Freediver, your comments indicate that you have no idea of the reality of the time - that the wealthy got wealthier with Liebor.  At no other time in Australian history have we seen a deliberate attempt to enrichen corporate Australia to the detriment of Aussie battlers. And I hope we never see it again - yet all the signs are there for it to happen again with the new Liebor government. Male suicide peaked at the end of Hawke/Cheating's ruinous grip on the failed economy.  Following the relief of John Howard's takeover, male suicide returned to pre-Liebor figures.  What other event could cause the gradual rise in male suicide through the 80s and 90s culminating with a couple of very high peaks at the end of Liebor?  Such awful figures had not occurred in Australia since the early 60s and before that the Great Depression.  The figures are not coincidence.  History does not lie.  Tragic economic circumstances can make life unbearable for the vulnerable.

Why don't you explain the logic of Serfchoices in a time of supposed boom, then!

Johnny won't be remebered for nothing!

deepthought wrote on Jan 7^th, 2008 at 7:59pm:

freediver wrote on Jan 7th, 2008 at 7:31pm: I've always wondered where your blinkered partisanship came from. Thanks for clearing that up, your posts make a lot more sense now. People always seek someone to blame when they feel like they have no control over their destiny. Actually when you read my post for the first time you will see it didn't happen to me.  I also posted elsewhere I have insulated myself from the horror.  Liebor can not affect me.  I am quite in control of my destiny. But some people are not, due to all kinds of circumstances.  I just hate to see them exploited so I take up the cause on their behalf.  My mate was driven to his knees and I have seen many, many more destroyed by high interest rates and collapsing real estate values.  I also saw many businesses collapse during the Pilot's Dispute of the late 80s.  Cairns businesses were falling like dead men in battle. And when I was an employer I met very many desperate people who could not find work as unemployment rose to around 10% with Hawke/Cheating determining their destinies.  Sadly I could not employ everyone. May I suggest you read my posts free.  It will help you with your blinkered partisanship.

 :-/

I don't think you understood the bit about disposable income spent on the mortgage.

  :'(

Also, you can't explain the logic of Serfchoices in a time of supposed boom.

 :-X

 :-? ::) ;D :D :P :o :o ;)

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Jan 7^th, 2008 at 8:02pm:

deepthought wrote on Jan 7th, 2008 at 6:43pm: Sprintcyclist wrote on Jan 7th, 2008 at 11:03am: DT - bump. how come the ALPers continually ignore the WHOLE story ?? I'ld hope the male suicides arose from causes other than hawke and keating. A bad economy does give rise to that, but us guys should communicate better to each other. In 1995 I stood with a mate on the side of the road as the bailiff supervised the emptying of the contents of his house into a removalists van for storage.   His family were evicted, the locks changed and the house was auctioned for far less than he owed.  His family fell apart and have never reconciled - he struggled to see his children as he lived in the back of a borrowed car. He was wiped out by high interest rates and the collapse of the value of his property.  He has never recovered. But he did not 'off himself'.  Though one would understand if he had have done so.  I saw the results of Hawke and Cheating's dynastic chaos first hand and it was often the battlers who paid the price.   Freediver, your comments indicate that you have no idea of the reality of the time - that the wealthy got wealthier with Liebor.  At no other time in Australian history have we seen a deliberate attempt to enrichen corporate Australia to the detriment of Aussie battlers. And I hope we never see it again - yet all the signs are there for it to happen again with the new Liebor government. Male suicide peaked at the end of Hawke/Cheating's ruinous grip on the failed economy.  Following the relief of John Howard's takeover, male suicide returned to pre-Liebor figures.  What other event could cause the gradual rise in male suicide through the 80s and 90s culminating with a couple of very high peaks at the end of Liebor?  Such awful figures had not occurred in Australia since the early 60s and before that the Great Depression.  The figures are not coincidence.  History does not lie.  Tragic economic circumstances can make life unbearable for the vulnerable. Why don't you explain the logic of Serfchoices in a time of supposed boom, then! Johnny won't be remebered for nothing!

It's easy, remove the draconian 'unfair dismissal' legislation, allow the individuals the choices they are denied under Liebor governments and reward people according to productivity and profit.  Win, win, win.  

And the evidence is there to see.  The lowest unemployment in 40 years, the lowest incidence of industrial disputation in nearly 100 years, real average wage rises (unlike the real wage drop under Liebor) and astonishing household wealth.  How much better could it have been?

We'll never know - it has gone into reverse since November.

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Jan 7^th, 2008 at 8:06pm:

deepthought wrote on Jan 7th, 2008 at 7:59pm: freediver wrote on Jan 7th, 2008 at 7:31pm: I've always wondered where your blinkered partisanship came from. Thanks for clearing that up, your posts make a lot more sense now. People always seek someone to blame when they feel like they have no control over their destiny. Actually when you read my post for the first time you will see it didn't happen to me.  I also posted elsewhere I have insulated myself from the horror.  Liebor can not affect me.  I am quite in control of my destiny. But some people are not, due to all kinds of circumstances.  I just hate to see them exploited so I take up the cause on their behalf.  My mate was driven to his knees and I have seen many, many more destroyed by high interest rates and collapsing real estate values.  I also saw many businesses collapse during the Pilot's Dispute of the late 80s.  Cairns businesses were falling like dead men in battle. And when I was an employer I met very many desperate people who could not find work as unemployment rose to around 10% with Hawke/Cheating determining their destinies.  Sadly I could not employ everyone. May I suggest you read my posts free.  It will help you with your blinkered partisanship.  :-/ I don't think you understood the bit about disposable income spent on the mortgage.   :'( Also, you can't explain the logic of Serfchoices in a time of supposed boom.  :-X  :-? ::) ;D :D :P :o :o ;)

I understand perfectly and I have already explained the genius of WorkChoices.

Delerium Tremins wrote:


Quote:

My mate was driven to his knees and I have seen many, many more destroyed by high interest rates and collapsing real estate values.  I also saw many businesses collapse during the Pilot's Dispute of the late 80s.  Cairns businesses were falling like dead men in battle.

Well, that is not what is happening.  There are no 'collapsing real estate values,' anywhere in Australia.

There is no current pilot strike.


Quote:

And when I was an employer I met very many desperate people who could not find work as unemployment rose to around 10% with Hawke/Cheating determining their destinies.  Sadly I could not employ everyone. May I suggest you read my posts free.  It will help you with your blinkered partisanship.

You sacked some of your staff......why?  What business were you in?  When?

Aussie wrote on Jan 7^th, 2008 at 9:11pm:

Delerium Tremins wrote: Quote: My mate was driven to his knees and I have seen many, many more destroyed by high interest rates and collapsing real estate values.  I also saw many businesses collapse during the Pilot's Dispute of the late 80s.  Cairns businesses were falling like dead men in battle. Well, that is not what is happening.  There are no 'collapsing real estate values,' anywhere in Australia. There is no current pilot strike.

You should be aware that there is a fairly long lead time for the results to appear as people will generally do everything they can before being forced off their properties.  The stress can be many months if not years long - and the legal process can be delayed for a similar length of time before the inevitable.   I don't expect to see people forced out of their homes soon, but it will happen, and I don't expect to see collapsing real estate values soon either - however as unemployment rises further and government interference kicks in it is only a matter of time.

The banks independent action in raising interest rates last week is indicative of their thinking on this - it mirrors mine.  They are hedging against defaults.  Everyone should take heed.

And while you may be right that airline pilots are not in dispute . . . .


Quote:

Delays possible as Qantas talks fail THOUSANDS of Qantas passengers could experience delays next week, with the airline's engineers saying they would take industrial action over the failure of last-ditch talks to broker a pay deal. The engineers' union wrote to Qantas late yesterday after day-long talks broke down, informing the airline that its members would be banned from working overtime from Wednesday. The dispute could affect thousands of holidaymakers and corporate clients, although Qantas and the engineers' union say the initial impact will be minimal. Paul Cousins, federal president of the Australian Licensed Aircraft Engineers Association, said the protected industrial action would include stop-work meetings and secondments if the dispute was not resolved quickly. "When the overtime bans kick in you probably won't see an immediate impact, but it will all depend on the serviceability within the fleet," he said. "If the serviceability remains high then you probably won't see a lot of effect, but if it starts to decline and you have a couple of aircraft go to the US, then they obviously won't be able to draw on extra manpower, and that is when some aircraft may need to be grounded." Grounded you say?  How will Aussie spin this?

deepthought wrote on Jan 7^th, 2008 at 8:09pm:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Jan 7th, 2008 at 8:02pm: deepthought wrote on Jan 7th, 2008 at 6:43pm: Sprintcyclist wrote on Jan 7th, 2008 at 11:03am: DT - bump. how come the ALPers continually ignore the WHOLE story ?? I'ld hope the male suicides arose from causes other than hawke and keating. A bad economy does give rise to that, but us guys should communicate better to each other. In 1995 I stood with a mate on the side of the road as the bailiff supervised the emptying of the contents of his house into a removalists van for storage.   His family were evicted, the locks changed and the house was auctioned for far less than he owed.  His family fell apart and have never reconciled - he struggled to see his children as he lived in the back of a borrowed car. He was wiped out by high interest rates and the collapse of the value of his property.  He has never recovered. But he did not 'off himself'.  Though one would understand if he had have done so.  I saw the results of Hawke and Cheating's dynastic chaos first hand and it was often the battlers who paid the price.   Freediver, your comments indicate that you have no idea of the reality of the time - that the wealthy got wealthier with Liebor.  At no other time in Australian history have we seen a deliberate attempt to enrichen corporate Australia to the detriment of Aussie battlers. And I hope we never see it again - yet all the signs are there for it to happen again with the new Liebor government. Male suicide peaked at the end of Hawke/Cheating's ruinous grip on the failed economy.  Following the relief of John Howard's takeover, male suicide returned to pre-Liebor figures.  What other event could cause the gradual rise in male suicide through the 80s and 90s culminating with a couple of very high peaks at the end of Liebor?  Such awful figures had not occurred in Australia since the early 60s and before that the Great Depression.  The figures are not coincidence.  History does not lie.  Tragic economic circumstances can make life unbearable for the vulnerable. Why don't you explain the logic of Serfchoices in a time of supposed boom, then! Johnny won't be remebered for nothing! It's easy, remove the draconian 'unfair dismissal' legislation, allow the individuals the choices they are denied under Liebor governments and reward people according to productivity and profit.  Win, win, win.   And the evidence is there to see.  The lowest unemployment in 40 years, the lowest incidence of industrial disputation in nearly 100 years, real average wage rises (unlike the real wage drop under Liebor) and astonishing household wealth.  How much better could it have been? We'll never know - it has gone into reverse since November.

Which "individuals" are you talking about?

Why did the Liberals kill Serfchoices if it was so good?

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Jan 8^th, 2008 at 1:28am:

Which "individuals" are you talking about? Why did the Liberals kill Serfchoices if it was so good?

An individual is anyone at all.  You are an individual.  As am I.

The Liberals are not in government and have no power to do anything.  They have done no 'killing'.  WorkChoices will be killed by the Liebor Party because they oppose freedom to choose and believe they should do your thinking for you.

deepthought wrote on Jan 8^th, 2008 at 6:46am:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Jan 8th, 2008 at 1:28am: Which "individuals" are you talking about? Why did the Liberals kill Serfchoices if it was so good? An individual is anyone at all.  You are an individual.  As am I. The Liberals are not in government and have no power to do anything.  They have done no 'killing'.  WorkChoices will be killed by the Liebor Party because they oppose freedom to choose and believe they should do your thinking for you.

Are you not crumbling, as all rust does?

 ;D

deepthought wrote on Jan 8^th, 2008 at 6:46am:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Jan 8th, 2008 at 1:28am: Which "individuals" are you talking about? Why did the Liberals kill Serfchoices if it was so good? An individual is anyone at all.  You are an individual.  As am I. The Liberals are not in government and have no power to do anything.  They have done no 'killing'.  WorkChoices will be killed by the Liebor Party because they oppose freedom to choose and believe they should do your thinking for you.

You know very well what was meant.  Here try this.

Please explain why Nelson, not long after the Lieberals and hayseed were sent packing, formally abandoned serfchoices as policy.

8-)

from crikey, a bit of perspective on the itnerest rates issue:

Treasury must have left something out of “the red book”, the incoming minister’s brief it prepared for Wayne Swan.

Last week, ANZ chief economist Saul Eslake admitted the banks would have upped their mortgage rates earlier if it had not been for heavying by Peter Costello. “The main reason why banks haven't moved before this point is, to put it bluntly, because of the extraordinary political pressure exerted on banks by the previous government, and in particularly by the previous treasurer Peter Costello during the lead-up to the last election campaign,” he said.

Now, the ANZ has become the second major bank to raise its mortgage rates independent of the Reserve.

Yesterday, Swan said he would seek briefings from the Reserve and regulatory authorities to ensure banks do not take advantage of their customers. This was seen by the markets as a coded warning.

He was a little less subtle on this morning’s AM, but still seemed to give the banks the benefit of the doubt: “At the end of the day, it is a competitive market out there,” he said, “and customers can vote with their feet.”

They can – but punters like Treasurers go in against the banks with their fists swinging. Sooner or later Swan will need assertiveness training.

Aussie wrote on Jan 8^th, 2008 at 3:36pm:

deepthought wrote on Jan 8th, 2008 at 6:46am: BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Jan 8th, 2008 at 1:28am: Which "individuals" are you talking about? Why did the Liberals kill Serfchoices if it was so good? An individual is anyone at all.  You are an individual.  As am I. The Liberals are not in government and have no power to do anything.  They have done no 'killing'.  WorkChoices will be killed by the Liebor Party because they oppose freedom to choose and believe they should do your thinking for you. You know very well what was meant.  Here try this. Please explain why Nelson, not long after the Lieberals and hayseed were sent packing, formally abandoned serfchoices as policy. 8-)

I can't speak for Brendan but my opinion is he needs to grow some bigger ones.  But that aside no matter what Brendan (or anyone else in the coalition) says they have no effect on policy as they are not the government.  

Mind you he could be very sly though.  I don't know enough about him.

freediver wrote on Jan 8^th, 2008 at 3:45pm:

from crikey, a bit of perspective on the itnerest rates issue: Treasury must have left something out of “the red book”, the incoming minister’s brief it prepared for Wayne Swan. Last week, ANZ chief economist Saul Eslake admitted the banks would have upped their mortgage rates earlier if it had not been for heavying by Peter Costello. “The main reason why banks haven't moved before this point is, to put it bluntly, because of the extraordinary political pressure exerted on banks by the previous government, and in particularly by the previous treasurer Peter Costello during the lead-up to the last election campaign,” he said. Now, the ANZ has become the second major bank to raise its mortgage rates independent of the Reserve. Yesterday, Swan said he would seek briefings from the Reserve and regulatory authorities to ensure banks do not take advantage of their customers. This was seen by the markets as a coded warning. He was a little less subtle on this morning’s AM, but still seemed to give the banks the benefit of the doubt: “At the end of the day, it is a competitive market out there,” he said, “and customers can vote with their feet.” They can – but punters like Treasurers go in against the banks with their fists swinging. Sooner or later Swan will need assertiveness training.

The Treasurer whoever he is should use all the encouragement he/she can muster to ensure banks don't act arbitrarily.  Swan let Australia down by watching the fireworks as the mortgagor picked up the tab.

However any efforts should stop short of 'coded warning' which are threats.  Swan is still letting Australia down with his threatening behaviour towards commercial concerns.  It is now he should be watching the fireworks - the horse has already bolted.

deepthought wrote on Jan 8^th, 2008 at 6:51pm:

Aussie wrote on Jan 8th, 2008 at 3:36pm: deepthought wrote on Jan 8th, 2008 at 6:46am: BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Jan 8th, 2008 at 1:28am: Which "individuals" are you talking about? Why did the Liberals kill Serfchoices if it was so good? An individual is anyone at all.  You are an individual.  As am I. The Liberals are not in government and have no power to do anything.  They have done no 'killing'.  WorkChoices will be killed by the Liebor Party because they oppose freedom to choose and believe they should do your thinking for you. You know very well what was meant.  Here try this. Please explain why Nelson, not long after the Lieberals and hayseed were sent packing, formally abandoned serfchoices as policy. 8-) I can't speak for Brendan but my opinion is he needs to grow some bigger ones.  But that aside no matter what Brendan (or anyone else in the coalition) says they have no effect on policy as they are not the government.   Mind you he could be very sly though.  I don't know enough about him.

Well, why, in your opinion, you 'political genius' did the Lieberals ditch WorkChoices as THEIR policy.  While you do that, please explain why, before the 24th November 2007 it was the Saviour of Australia, and now it is not.

What changed, apart from the election result?

Is what was, for about 2.5 years, the Saviour of Australia, no longer so.

What happened DT?

Aussie wrote on Jan 8^th, 2008 at 8:51pm:

deepthought wrote on Jan 8th, 2008 at 6:51pm: Aussie wrote on Jan 8th, 2008 at 3:36pm: deepthought wrote on Jan 8th, 2008 at 6:46am: BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Jan 8th, 2008 at 1:28am: Which "individuals" are you talking about? Why did the Liberals kill Serfchoices if it was so good? An individual is anyone at all.  You are an individual.  As am I. The Liberals are not in government and have no power to do anything.  They have done no 'killing'.  WorkChoices will be killed by the Liebor Party because they oppose freedom to choose and believe they should do your thinking for you. You know very well what was meant.  Here try this. Please explain why Nelson, not long after the Lieberals and hayseed were sent packing, formally abandoned serfchoices as policy. 8-) I can't speak for Brendan but my opinion is he needs to grow some bigger ones.  But that aside no matter what Brendan (or anyone else in the coalition) says they have no effect on policy as they are not the government.   Mind you he could be very sly though.  I don't know enough about him. Well, why, in your opinion, you 'political genius' did the Lieberals ditch WorkChoices as THEIR policy.  While you do that, please explain why, before the 24th November 2007 it was the Saviour of Australia, and now it is not. What changed, apart from the election result? Is what was, for about 2.5 years, the Saviour of Australia, no longer so. What happened DT?

I think you will find I already gave my opinion but as you didn't read my post I am happy to repeat it.  "My opinion is he needs to grow some bigger ones".

And you answered your own second question.  What changed?  The election result.

Liebor have canned the saviour as they detest freedom to choose.  They prefer to do your thinking for you.

deepthought wrote on Jan 8^th, 2008 at 7:00pm:

freediver wrote on Jan 8th, 2008 at 3:45pm: from crikey, a bit of perspective on the itnerest rates issue: Treasury must have left something out of “the red book”, the incoming minister’s brief it prepared for Wayne Swan. Last week, ANZ chief economist Saul Eslake admitted the banks would have upped their mortgage rates earlier if it had not been for heavying by Peter Costello. “The main reason why banks haven't moved before this point is, to put it bluntly, because of the extraordinary political pressure exerted on banks by the previous government, and in particularly by the previous treasurer Peter Costello during the lead-up to the last election campaign,” he said. Now, the ANZ has become the second major bank to raise its mortgage rates independent of the Reserve. Yesterday, Swan said he would seek briefings from the Reserve and regulatory authorities to ensure banks do not take advantage of their customers. This was seen by the markets as a coded warning. He was a little less subtle on this morning’s AM, but still seemed to give the banks the benefit of the doubt: “At the end of the day, it is a competitive market out there,” he said, “and customers can vote with their feet.” They can – but punters like Treasurers go in against the banks with their fists swinging. Sooner or later Swan will need assertiveness training. The Treasurer whoever he is should use all the encouragement he/she can muster to ensure banks don't act arbitrarily.  Swan let Australia down by watching the fireworks as the mortgagor picked up the tab. However any efforts should stop short of 'coded warning' which are threats.  Swan is still letting Australia down with his threatening behaviour towards commercial concerns.  It is now he should be watching the fireworks - the horse has already bolted.

And it worsens as Wayne Swan decides he is not the people's representative - he is the boss of everyone.  Like Little Kevvy ordering the airport chiefs around Wayne has decided he can order everyone into the principal's office for a dressing down.  Just who do these Liebor tyrants think they are.  Have they forgotten they were voted in - they didn't stage a military coup.

Meantime the remaining banks prepare for the coming recession by making hay before the clouds appear.  Watch out folks - the effects of voting for Liebor loom menacingly . . . .




Quote:

Remaining banks likely to hike rates INTEREST rate rises from the rest of the major Australian banks are inevitable, according to analysts, despite pressure from the federal government and trade unions. ANZ yesterday followed National Australia Bank (NAB) and increased its variable interest rate on mortgages, independent of any action by the Reserve Bank of Australia. The banks cite increased costs from the global credit crisis as the key driver of the increases. Westpac , Commonwealth Bank of Australia  and St George Bank all have said their standard variable home loan rates remain under review. Shaw Stockbroking banking analyst David McDonald said it was only a matter of time before the remaining banks follow suit. "They are experiencing the same problems that NAB and ANZ are, so they should react in the same way,'' Mr McDonald told AAP today. "If they don't, they might be able to win a bit of market share back, but given there is not a lot of growth in the homeland cycle anyway, it's probably not in their interest to go against the trend.'' Macquarie Research Equities expects the other majors to follow shortly with similar rate rises. "We believe the other majors (CBA, Westpac and St George) will follow shortly with similar standard variable mortgage rate increases,'' Macquarie said in a January 8 client note. Federal Treasurer Wayne Swan today demanded ANZ explain its "excessive'' decision to raise home loan rates, saying the bank owes its customers and the government an explanation. "Excessive rises won't be viewed favourably by the Australian government or Australian families,'' he told ABC Radio. Mr Swan has summonsed officials from the central bank, Treasury and the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority to a meeting in Brisbane today. You boys to the headmaster's office.  NOW!

http://news.smh.com.au/swan-attacks-banks-over-rate-rise/20080111-1lgp.html

Federal Treasurer Wayne Swan has singled out another bank for making an "excessive" increase in home loan interest rates.

Mr Swan also said the government would "harshly" judge banks which do not cut their lending rates when the US sub-prime credit crisis subsides.

St George Bank on Friday followed ANZ Bank in announcing a 0.2 percentage point rise in its standard variable rate because of the credit crisis.

Westpac raised its rates by 0.15 points, also on Friday.

"I say to all banks, you will be judged very harshly if you try to take advantage of the US sub-prime crisis by lifting rates excessively."

Mr Swan said while expected, St George and Westpac's rate rises were very bad news for families.

Customers in a competitive banking market would punish banks which excessively lifted rates, Mr Swan said.

"I note also that banks that do not reduce their lending rates as soon as the US sub-prime crisis subsides will be judged very harshly by the Australian government as well their customers."

freediver wrote on Jan 11^th, 2008 at 4:35pm:

http://news.smh.com.au/swan-attacks-banks-over-rate-rise/20080111-1lgp.html Federal Treasurer Wayne Swan has singled out another bank for making an "excessive" increase in home loan interest rates. Mr Swan also said the government would "harshly" judge banks which do not cut their lending rates when the US sub-prime credit crisis subsides. St George Bank on Friday followed ANZ Bank in announcing a 0.2 percentage point rise in its standard variable rate because of the credit crisis. Westpac raised its rates by 0.15 points, also on Friday. "I say to all banks, you will be judged very harshly if you try to take advantage of the US sub-prime crisis by lifting rates excessively." Mr Swan said while expected, St George and Westpac's rate rises were very bad news for families. Customers in a competitive banking market would punish banks which excessively lifted rates, Mr Swan said. "I note also that banks that do not reduce their lending rates as soon as the US sub-prime crisis subsides will be judged very harshly by the Australian government as well their customers."

Will Wayne summon the boys to his office to get the cane and they will front up with exercise books stuffed down their shorts?

Crikey he's a loser that dude.   I guess his next act is to slip someone an envelope filled with cash to buy a few favours as he did during the 1996 election.

....and what would that clown Costello have done?

Aussie wrote on Jan 11^th, 2008 at 8:42pm:

....and what would that clown Costello have done?

I don't believe the humorous Peter Costello would have slipped anyone a few notes.  That's more Wayne Swan's thing - he slipped an envelope full of the folding stuff to the Democrats dude.

I don't think Pete's into corruption.

Rudd has again been huffing and puffing about banks raising rates by more than 0.25%. It will be interesting to see what he does about it, if anything:

NAB lifts mortgage rate by 0.29%

http://news.smh.com.au/nab-lifts-mortgage-rate-by-029/20080306-1xfq.html

National Australia Bank Ltd (NAB) has increased its variable home loan rate by 29 basis points.

The Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) lifted the official cash rate by 25 basis points on Tuesday.

And in a briefing to investors on Thursday, St George Bank Ltd boss Paul Fegan admitted his bank was also considering a 40 basis point rise.

freediver wrote on Mar 6^th, 2008 at 5:13pm:

Rudd has again been huffing and puffing about banks raising rates by more than 0.25%. It will be interesting to see what he does about it, if anything:

Don't you know?  He'll point the finger at everyone else.  Or blame his staff.

None of you have been listening have you?. He and Swan said they are going to put downward pressure on inflation etc. So thats what they are going to do.

It took Howard 12 yrs to screw up interest rates ..How can a spanking new Govt put it all right in a few weeks.? Absurd.

I mean I guess you have to understand about economics a little to hazard even a halfbaked guess. I dont so I wont- but even a blind person can see they havent had a chance as yet.

wrote on Mar 6^th, 2008 at 7:10pm:

None of you have been listening have you?. He and Swan said they are going to put downward pressure on inflation etc. So that what they are going to do. It took Howard 12 yrs to screw up interest rates ..How can a spanking put it all right in a few weeks. Absurd. I mean I guess you have to understand about economics a little to hazard even a halfbaked guess. I dont so I wont- but even a blind person can see they havent had a chance as yet.

As John Howard had achieved a drop in interest rates a few months into his term I reckon they have had quite a long time to show us their skills.  And they have - I count three interest rate rises by the banks since November 2007.   One of which was without Central Bank action.

And I count billions of dollars wiped off Australia's corporate worth.

I reckon it's time for them to own up.  And their apologists to open their eyes.

Oceans, Rudd and Swan were making vieled threats to the banks about what might happen if they exceed the RBA increase. I think Howard and Costello made very similar threats. None of it amounts to anything. If you can't follow through you should keep your mouth shut or you lose credibility.

Quote:

As John Howard had achieved a drop in interest rates a few months into his term I reckon they have had quite a long time to show us their skills.  And they have - I count three interest rate rises by the banks since November 2007.   One of which was without Central Bank action.

So Howard achieved a drop in interest rates a few months into his term DT?   In 3 months - you're saying this is what Howard achieved?  That is a huge lie - in fact one of the biggest porkies I've seen on this board.  Keating got the economy going on a steady ascent through good economic policy and Howard was lucky enough to get in at the right time and run with it - not to mention take false credit for it.  Any economist will tell you that the good times started before Howard got in.   For the second time he's left it in bad shape for Labor.

The consistently escalating interest rates started a couple of years or more before Rudd got into power - no denying that.  

mantra wrote on Mar 6^th, 2008 at 7:27pm:

Quote: As John Howard had achieved a drop in interest rates a few months into his term I reckon they have had quite a long time to show us their skills.  And they have - I count three interest rate rises by the banks since November 2007.   One of which was without Central Bank action. So Howard achieved a drop in interest rates a few months into his term DT?   In 3 months - you're saying this is what Howard achieved?  That is a huge lie - in fact one of the biggest porkies I've seen on this board.  Keating got the economy going on a steady ascent through good economic policy and Howard was lucky enough to get in at the right time and run with it - not to mention take false credit for it.  Any economist will tell you that the good times started before Howard got in.   For the second time he's left it in bad shape for Labor. The consistently escalating interest rates started a couple of years or more before Rudd got into power - no denying that.

Don't tell porkies mantra.  The interest rate John Howard inherited from Paul Cheating had been the same for over a year.  It wasn't falling at all - it was static.  A little knowledge would be helpful if you bothered to gain it.

Little Cardboard Kevvy actually achieved an unprecedented interest rate rise - one without Central Bank action.  This is extraordinary and did not happen ever during the entire 11 years of the coalition's brilliant managing of the economy.