the left came into a vault packed solid with cold hard cash.

they wasted their way through it, destroying almost every industry they touched.

now, we have a need for money - one that would "stimulate" the economy.
thanks to their financial folly, the economy is now in critical care.


Once again, Tony Abbott comes out with sensible logical alternatives.


Quote:

..........Using her strongest language so far to convey the extent of the budget cuts, Ms Gillard said "every dollar" in the Budget needed to be used for the best possible purpose. "There is going to be some pain around and people are going to have to recognise that," Ms Gillard told reporters on Channel 10. "We will make some choices . . . and they're going to be tough choices." Meanwhile, Opposition Leader Tony Abbott will push to scrap $500 million of Building the Education Revolution projects to partly replace Ms Gillard's flood levy. He would also seek a similar amount in deferrals of the water buyback scheme.Mr Abbott will take the full flood package to his shadow cabinet today as an alternative to the Government's $5.8 billion recovery plan, which includes the $1.8 billion levy to be applied to people with income above $50,000. It is believed that further savings would also be made from cuts to the computers in schools program, which was promised by Kevin Rudd in 2007, and which has blown out from $1 billion to $2 billion. Mr Abbott will unveil his plan before meeting with Independents to try to convince them to block the Government's levy legislation, which is expected to go to Parliament before the end of the week. Mr Abbott yesterday would not confirm what was in the package but said the Murray Darling Basin $1.3 billion water buyback scheme was an area where cuts would also be made. "Now is not the time to be buying back water, particularly when the Murray Darling Basin plan is up for grabs. It seems that would be one area that could be very substantially deferred," he said. "We do not need a new tax on top of all the other misery which these natural disasters have visited upon the Australian people."............

http://www.couriermail.com.au/money/money-matters/julia-gillard-warns-of-budget-pain-following-natural-disasters-throughout-australia/story-fn3hskur-1226001080867

It happens that I agree that there is no need for a levy.

Gillard missed an opportunity to wedge Abbott, who would have looked like a mongrel when he argued against deficit AND disaster relief.

I might disagree with some of the things he would cut, or even the need to cut anything, but in essence, I agree.

That doesn't mean Abbott isn't a damned fool hypocrite, whose party levied us when they didn't need to, and who would have levied businesses for his ridiculous parental leave scheme, had he formed government.

Whats happened to ‘deferring the NBN’ . Has it  vanished from the Coalition’s list of savings ?

wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 9:04am:

Whats happened to ‘deferring the NBN’ . Has it  vanished from the Coalition’s list of savings ?

I think it makes more sense to be putting the NBN into areas that need rebuilding anyway.  It wouldnt be any more expensive to the re-laying fibre as opposed to re-laying copper.

Please delete wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 8:46am:

It happens that I agree that there is no need for a levy. Gillard missed an opportunity to wedge Abbott, who would have looked like a mongrel when he argued against deficit AND disaster relief. I might disagree with some of the things he would cut, or even the need to cut anything, but in essence, I agree. That doesn't mean Abbott isn't a damned fool hypocrite, whose party levied us when they didn't need to, and who would have levied businesses for his ridiculous parental leave scheme, had he formed government.

I agree with you Ernie.

Verge wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 9:12am:

wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 9:04am: Whats happened to ‘deferring the NBN’ . Has it  vanished from the Coalition’s list of savings ? I think it makes more sense to be putting the NBN into areas that need rebuilding anyway.  It wouldnt be any more expensive to the re-laying fibre as opposed to re-laying copper.

Of course I was one of the ones topoint that out earlier. Hpwever I would like to hear that come from Abbott, Hockeys or Turnbulls mouth. AS they ran it down , btw hope all is going well in the farts burps and smiles areas....

wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 9:22am:

Verge wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 9:12am: wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 9:04am: Whats happened to ‘deferring the NBN’ . Has it  vanished from the Coalition’s list of savings ? I think it makes more sense to be putting the NBN into areas that need rebuilding anyway.  It wouldnt be any more expensive to the re-laying fibre as opposed to re-laying copper. Of course I was one of the ones topoint that out earlier. Hpwever I would like to hear that come from Abbott, Hockeys or Turnbulls mouth. AS they ran it down , btw hope all is going well in the farts burps and smiles areas....

All is going very well.

As for the other topic, it makes sense to go to fibre, if not so much for the NBN but for future telecommunications any way.

When I did a major renovation on my old home I replaced all the old wiring with the exposed earths to the new wiring and put 4 times more power points in while I was going.

You never rebuilding to existing standards as they are already decades old.

Verge wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 9:12am:

wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 9:04am: Whats happened to ‘deferring the NBN’ . Has it  vanished from the Coalition’s list of savings ? I think it makes more sense to be putting the NBN into areas that need rebuilding anyway.  It wouldnt be any more expensive to the re-laying fibre as opposed to re-laying copper.

The Liberal Party is DETERMINED that any form of NBN should NOT proceed under a Labor government

The LAST thing they want is the history books giving credit to those "damn commies" building any form of infrastucture

buzzanddidj wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 9:50am:

Verge wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 9:12am: wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 9:04am: Whats happened to ‘deferring the NBN’ . Has it  vanished from the Coalition’s list of savings ? I think it makes more sense to be putting the NBN into areas that need rebuilding anyway.  It wouldnt be any more expensive to the re-laying fibre as opposed to re-laying copper. The Liberal Party is DETERMINED that any form of NBN should NOT proceed under a Labor government The LAST thing they want is the history books giving credit to those "damn commies" building any form of infrastucture

Its not necessarily the NBN, its the laying of fibre optic.

You might as well lay it since we do have an ever increasing population.

I also think they should be putting power under ground at the same time.

Quote:

Tony Abbott will push to scrap $500 million of Building the Education Revolution

TEDDY'S on to this one as WELL ....




Education facing big cuts
February 7, 2011

THE Victorian Education Department is facing budget cuts of almost $350 million over the next 4½ years.

Opposition education spokesman Rob Hulls said department officials had told him at a briefing last week they had been ordered to find $338 million in savings, including $36 million by June 30.

''Here we go again - one of the Liberal government's first decisions is to hack into the education budget,'' Mr Hulls said. ''These are substantial cutbacks … they have decided to turn their back on the state school system.''

The Victorian Association of State Secondary Principals said the cuts were particularly galling given the Coalition would increase funding to non-government schools by $240 million over the next four years, starting from the beginning of the 2011 school year.

''I can't understand why more money is going to the private sector when we have so many government schools that need to be brought up to scratch,'' said president Frank Sal.

''Clearly from a government secondary perspective, I'd be very concerned if they are cutting any dollars from the government school sector.''

The Coalition spokesman said savings would be made by reducing expenditure on media, marketing, advertising, political opinion polling, external consultants and legal advisers, the size of ministerial offices and travel expenses.

''Savings … will be made across all departments without cuts to public servants,'' he said.

But the Victorian president of the Australian Education Union, Mary Bluett, said any suggestion that funding cuts would not affect schools was nonsense.

''I can't see where the cuts can come from - Victoria already has the leanest education bureaucracy in the nation,'' she said. ''They want to cut $338 million from the education budget at a time when every other state and territory is increasing their funding for education.''


http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/education-facing-big-cuts-warns-opposition-20110206-1aigv.html


Sound familiar ?


OPPOSITION leader Ted Baillieu has backed the former Kennett government's controversial school closures, putting him at odds with his own education spokesman.

Shadow education spokesman Martin Dixon has said some of the schools that were shut down probably should have remained open.

"I think we got it wrong in some suburbs," he told The Age.

Three hundred schools were closed and 8000 teachers sacked by the Kennett government, which held power from 1992 until 1999.  

http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/baillieu-backs-kennett-school-closures/2006/09/05/1157222131869.html

Verge wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 9:53am:

buzzanddidj wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 9:50am: Verge wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 9:12am: wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 9:04am: Whats happened to ‘deferring the NBN’ . Has it  vanished from the Coalition’s list of savings ? I think it makes more sense to be putting the NBN into areas that need rebuilding anyway.  It wouldnt be any more expensive to the re-laying fibre as opposed to re-laying copper. The Liberal Party is DETERMINED that any form of NBN should NOT proceed under a Labor government The LAST thing they want is the history books giving credit to those "damn commies" building any form of infrastucture Its not necessarily the NBN, its the laying of fibre optic. You might as well lay it since we do have an ever increasing population. I also think they should be putting power under ground at the same time.

Victorian premier elect Ted Baillieu's promise to implement all of the Bushfire Royal Commission's recommendations has raised questions about how the most costly and controversial proposals would be carried out.

The outgoing Brumby government had rejected the recommendations to put power lines underground and buyout properties in the riskiest bushfire areas.

But Mr Baillieu has always maintained a coalition government would tackle both these proposals, a position he reiterated on Tuesday.


In relation to the buyout, Mr Baillieu explained a coalition government would look to the bushfire reconstruction authority and local councils to identify areas that would qualify for the scheme.

He said the state had a history of similar "buybacks" which had taken up to 20 years to complete.

"This is a program of identifying land and mutually agreeing that it's in everybody's interests for a buyback to take place," Mr Baillieu told reporters.

Former premier John Brumby rejected the commission's buyout recommendation, saying it could actually increase fire risk by leaving some homes surrounded by empty overgrown properties and it would be too costly.


http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/baillieus-costly-bushfire-promise-20101130-18f18.html

Three hundred schools were closed and 8000 teachers sacked by the Kennett government, which held power from 1992 until 1999.  ...buzz


And new schools were built in areas with increasing population growth.  The majority of schools closed in that era were in areas where the number families with school age children were rapidly decreasing, as the outer suburbs were being developed and populated by  younger families .

Sprintcyclist wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 8:31am:

the left came into a vault packed solid with cold hard cash. they wasted their way through it, destroying almost every industry they touched. now, we have a need for money - one that would "stimulate" the economy. thanks to their financial folly, the economy is now in critical care. Once again, Tony Abbott comes out with sensible logical alternatives. Quote: ..........Using her strongest language so far to convey the extent of the budget cuts, Ms Gillard said "every dollar" in the Budget needed to be used for the best possible purpose. "There is going to be some pain around and people are going to have to recognise that," Ms Gillard told reporters on Channel 10. "We will make some choices . . . and they're going to be tough choices." Meanwhile, Opposition Leader Tony Abbott will push to scrap $500 million of Building the Education Revolution projects to partly replace Ms Gillard's flood levy. He would also seek a similar amount in deferrals of the water buyback scheme.Mr Abbott will take the full flood package to his shadow cabinet today as an alternative to the Government's $5.8 billion recovery plan, which includes the $1.8 billion levy to be applied to people with income above $50,000. It is believed that further savings would also be made from cuts to the computers in schools program, which was promised by Kevin Rudd in 2007, and which has blown out from $1 billion to $2 billion. Mr Abbott will unveil his plan before meeting with Independents to try to convince them to block the Government's levy legislation, which is expected to go to Parliament before the end of the week. Mr Abbott yesterday would not confirm what was in the package but said the Murray Darling Basin $1.3 billion water buyback scheme was an area where cuts would also be made. "Now is not the time to be buying back water, particularly when the Murray Darling Basin plan is up for grabs. It seems that would be one area that could be very substantially deferred," he said. "We do not need a new tax on top of all the other misery which these natural disasters have visited upon the Australian people."............ http://www.couriermail.com.au/money/money-matters/julia-gillard-warns-of-budget-pain-following-natural-disasters-throughout-australia/story-fn3hskur-1226001080867

Can we please stop lying
http://blogs.theaustralian.news.com.au/meganomics/index.php/theaustralian/comments/budget_honesty_in_the_eye_of_the_beholder/

Quote:

KEN Henry must have realised by now that his Treasury Department let the nation down at the last federal election. The charter of budget honesty was meant to take the guesswork out of fiscal policy for voters because it gave Treasury the opportunity to update the numbers in the middle of thecampaign. We were told there would be surpluses into the next decade. In fact, the budget was shot at the time of the election because too much of the revenue windfall from the resources boom had been handed back as tax cuts and increased spending. “The structural budget balance deteriorated from 2002-03, moving into structural deficit in 2006-07,” Treasury said in budget paper No1 on Tuesday night.

buzzanddidj wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 10:03am:

Verge wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 9:53am: buzzanddidj wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 9:50am: Verge wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 9:12am: wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 9:04am: Whats happened to ‘deferring the NBN’ . Has it  vanished from the Coalition’s list of savings ? I think it makes more sense to be putting the NBN into areas that need rebuilding anyway.  It wouldnt be any more expensive to the re-laying fibre as opposed to re-laying copper. The Liberal Party is DETERMINED that any form of NBN should NOT proceed under a Labor government The LAST thing they want is the history books giving credit to those "damn commies" building any form of infrastucture Its not necessarily the NBN, its the laying of fibre optic. You might as well lay it since we do have an ever increasing population. I also think they should be putting power under ground at the same time. Victorian premier elect Ted Baillieu's promise to implement all of the Bushfire Royal Commission's recommendations has raised questions about how the most costly and controversial proposals would be carried out. The outgoing Brumby government had rejected the recommendations to put power lines underground and buyout properties in the riskiest bushfire areas. But Mr Baillieu has always maintained a coalition government would tackle both these proposals, a position he reiterated on Tuesday. In relation to the buyout, Mr Baillieu explained a coalition government would look to the bushfire reconstruction authority and local councils to identify areas that would qualify for the scheme. He said the state had a history of similar "buybacks" which had taken up to 20 years to complete. "This is a program of identifying land and mutually agreeing that it's in everybody's interests for a buyback to take place," Mr Baillieu told reporters. Former premier John Brumby rejected the commission's buyout recommendation, saying it could actually increase fire risk by leaving some homes surrounded by empty overgrown properties and it would be too costly. http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/baillieus-costly-bushfire-promise-20101130-18f18.html

That isnt relevant to this case, and there is substantial repairs required to the power networks there at the moment.  For every line that needs repairing, they should be putting it under ground instead.  It makes sense to do it now when the major repairs are being under taken and the massive amount of repairs that are needed to roads anyway.

But I wouldnt expect you to understand.

Reasonable  response - link attached.

'Currently there is plenty of water so guess what? That means it is CHEAPER to buy back now then at any time! If we wait till we get another drought, then water buybacks would be expensive. In other words, instead of saving the country money, make it spend more than it needed to.

Added to the list of strange ideas came the idea to support those indirectly affected by the floods. He argued that if you are business that had business with Qld or Vic then it will affect your business. Very true. But guess what Tony? Show me one person in Australia that has not been indirectly or directly affected by the flood and cyclone?

While you scoffed at the idea of giving $900 stimulus to taxpayers, you want to give $100K interest free loans to almost every business in the country! Where the hell are you going to pay for that? For example if I had a fruit shop in Sydney and I can not trade in Qld bananas, then am I not indirectly affected by the damage? Good! Send me my interest free $100k please!'


http://ashghebranious.wordpress.com/2011/02/06/tony-abbott-has-things-on-his-mind-none-of-them-good/

Oh veg that is simply a blogger's personal opinion,  and if I remember correctly, you are one the posters most derisive of "Opinion Pieces" .

nichy wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 11:19am:

Oh veg that is simply a blogger's personal opinion,  and if I remember correctly, you are one the posters most derisive of "Opinion Pieces" .

Quite right Nichy.

Tony Abbott has things on his mind. None of them good.
by ashghebranious on 06/02/2011

Who is ashghebranious?

ohnoitisnt wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 11:24am:

nichy wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 11:19am: Oh veg that is simply a blogger's personal opinion,  and if I remember correctly, you are one the posters most derisive of "Opinion Pieces" . Quite right Nichy. Tony Abbott has things on his mind. None of them good. by ashghebranious on 06/02/2011 Who is ashghebranious?

Someone with a more valued opinion and better writing ability than Piers Akerman.

Same old story, money pissed down the drain on totally useless projects.

I have no hesistation in paying the Governments as little as possible - all they do is waste it so what's the point.

Look after yourself first and foremost.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 1:31pm:

Same old story, money pissed down the drain on totally useless projects. I have no hesistation in paying the Governments as little as possible - all they do is waste it so what's the point. Look after yourself first and foremost.

What happened to your idea about subsidising electricity payments?

nichy wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 11:19am:

Oh veg that is simply a blogger's personal opinion,  and if I remember correctly, you are one the posters most derisive of "Opinion Pieces" .

Yes Nichy, she is, that stance however, is highly selective, and conditional. ;)

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 11:26am:

ohnoitisnt wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 11:24am: nichy wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 11:19am: Oh veg that is simply a blogger's personal opinion,  and if I remember correctly, you are one the posters most derisive of "Opinion Pieces" . Quite right Nichy. Tony Abbott has things on his mind. None of them good. by ashghebranious on 06/02/2011 Who is ashghebranious? Someone with a more valued opinion and better writing ability than Piers Akerman.

That`s just your opinion.

mavisdavis wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 1:39pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 11:26am: ohnoitisnt wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 11:24am: nichy wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 11:19am: Oh veg that is simply a blogger's personal opinion,  and if I remember correctly, you are one the posters most derisive of "Opinion Pieces" . Quite right Nichy. Tony Abbott has things on his mind. None of them good. by ashghebranious on 06/02/2011 Who is ashghebranious? Someone with a more valued opinion and better writing ability than Piers Akerman. That`s just your opinion.

and the opinion of anyone who isn't insane.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 1:31pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 1:31pm: Same old story, money pissed down the drain on totally useless projects. I have no hesistation in paying the Governments as little as possible - all they do is waste it so what's the point. Look after yourself first and foremost. What happened to your idea about subsidising electricity payments?

That's not waste.
That's helping ordinary families.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 1:51pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 1:31pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 1:31pm: Same old story, money pissed down the drain on totally useless projects. I have no hesistation in paying the Governments as little as possible - all they do is waste it so what's the point. Look after yourself first and foremost. What happened to your idea about subsidising electricity payments? That's not waste. That's helping ordinary families.

Before making baseless statements you still have to actually talk about the design of your subsidy thought bubble.  Because the way you have described it, it is a complete waste.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 1:58pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 1:51pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 1:31pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 1:31pm: Same old story, money pissed down the drain on totally useless projects. I have no hesistation in paying the Governments as little as possible - all they do is waste it so what's the point. Look after yourself first and foremost. What happened to your idea about subsidising electricity payments? That's not waste. That's helping ordinary families. Before making baseless statements you still have to actually talk about the design of your subsidy thought bubble.  Because the way you have described it, it is a complete waste.

The subsidy in its nature would be an easing of cost of living pressure on family budgets paid for by removal of Government waste and unnecessary welfare spending.

There would be areas to be looked at -

1) I'd freeze public sector pay to inflation only.
2) I'd increase GST to 17.5%
3) I would cut unemployment benefit
4) I would removal Government waste on public sector projects

It would be a subsidy designed to help and assist families.
I'd have a very family orientated budget for Australia, and it would work.

Hicks, I think you should return triumphantly to your homeland and allow yourself to be declared El Presidente!

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 2:01pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 1:58pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 1:51pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 1:31pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 1:31pm: Same old story, money pissed down the drain on totally useless projects. I have no hesistation in paying the Governments as little as possible - all they do is waste it so what's the point. Look after yourself first and foremost. What happened to your idea about subsidising electricity payments? That's not waste. That's helping ordinary families. Before making baseless statements you still have to actually talk about the design of your subsidy thought bubble.  Because the way you have described it, it is a complete waste. The subsidy in its nature would be an easing of cost of living pressure on family budgets paid for by removal of Government waste and unnecessary welfare spending. There would be areas to be looked at - 1) I'd freeze public sector pay to inflation only. 2) I'd increase GST to 17.5% 3) I would cut unemployment benefit 4) I would removal Government waste on public sector projects It would be a subsidy designed to help and assist families. I'd have a very family orientated budget for Australia, and it would work.

1. You haven't answered how you will control the cost of electricity rising, eventuating in the subsidy becoming quite useless in helping people with living costs.

2. How much will the levy be?

3. So basically you would increase a tax to hand a little back? Genius.

nichy wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 11:19am:

Oh veg that is simply a blogger's personal opinion,  and if I remember correctly, you are one the posters most derisive of "Opinion Pieces" .

I am all for alternate news away from the MSM. I advocate it. And have many times here.

These 'opinion' pieces dont have a paid interest. OR a boss to please.

Would the $500 million we pledged to Indonesian schools have come in handy now ...had we kept this for a rainy day?

http://www.3aw.com.au/blogs/3aw-generic-blog/gillards-500-million-pledge-for-indonesian-schools/20101103-17d05.html?page=2

That $500 million would have covered the damage done to our sugar industry.

She has no idea!

::)

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 2:03pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 2:01pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 1:58pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 1:51pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 1:31pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 1:31pm: Same old story, money pissed down the drain on totally useless projects. I have no hesistation in paying the Governments as little as possible - all they do is waste it so what's the point. Look after yourself first and foremost. What happened to your idea about subsidising electricity payments? That's not waste. That's helping ordinary families. Before making baseless statements you still have to actually talk about the design of your subsidy thought bubble.  Because the way you have described it, it is a complete waste. The subsidy in its nature would be an easing of cost of living pressure on family budgets paid for by removal of Government waste and unnecessary welfare spending. There would be areas to be looked at - 1) I'd freeze public sector pay to inflation only. 2) I'd increase GST to 17.5% 3) I would cut unemployment benefit 4) I would removal Government waste on public sector projects It would be a subsidy designed to help and assist families. I'd have a very family orientated budget for Australia, and it would work. 1. You haven't answered how you will control the cost of electricity rising, eventuating in the subsidy becoming quite useless in helping people with living costs. 2. How much will the levy be? 3. So basically you would increase a tax to hand a little back? Genius.

No I would increase sales tax as part of an overall tax strategy designed to cut direct income tax and plug the revenue gap that would entail.

At this point in time Australia has much higher levels of direct income tax than other countries and much lower sales tax.
That needs to be addressed.

Australia also has high levels of unnecessary public welfare.

I'd probably leave healthcare alone but that is an area which has absurd amount of waste.
A more privatised transport system would be beneficial.

Basically things that can be run by private businesses instead of public ones can be first cars off the block.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 2:08pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 2:03pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 2:01pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 1:58pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 1:51pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 1:31pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 1:31pm: Same old story, money pissed down the drain on totally useless projects. I have no hesistation in paying the Governments as little as possible - all they do is waste it so what's the point. Look after yourself first and foremost. What happened to your idea about subsidising electricity payments? That's not waste. That's helping ordinary families. Before making baseless statements you still have to actually talk about the design of your subsidy thought bubble.  Because the way you have described it, it is a complete waste. The subsidy in its nature would be an easing of cost of living pressure on family budgets paid for by removal of Government waste and unnecessary welfare spending. There would be areas to be looked at - 1) I'd freeze public sector pay to inflation only. 2) I'd increase GST to 17.5% 3) I would cut unemployment benefit 4) I would removal Government waste on public sector projects It would be a subsidy designed to help and assist families. I'd have a very family orientated budget for Australia, and it would work. 1. You haven't answered how you will control the cost of electricity rising, eventuating in the subsidy becoming quite useless in helping people with living costs. 2. How much will the levy be? 3. So basically you would increase a tax to hand a little back? Genius. No I would increase sales tax as part of an overall tax strategy designed to cut direct income tax and plug the revenue gap that would entail. At this point in time Australia has much higher levels of direct income tax than other countries and much lower sales tax. That needs to be addressed. Australia also has high levels of unnecessary public welfare. I'd probably leave healthcare alone but that is an area which has absurd amount of waste. A more privatised transport system would be beneficial. Basically things that can be run by private businesses instead of public ones can be first cars off the block.

Good cover.

But answer the questions:

1. You haven't answered how you will control the cost of electricity rising, eventuating in the subsidy becoming quite useless in helping people with living costs.

2. How much will the levy be?

3. and what happens when private businesses begin to increase the costs of day-to-day necessities for society? Will you introduce subsidies here too, to help the working family?

mellie wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 2:07pm:

Would the $500 million we pledged to Indonesian schools have come in handy now ...had we kept this for a rainy day? http://www.3aw.com.au/blogs/3aw-generic-blog/gillards-500-million-pledge-for-indonesian-schools/20101103-17d05.html?page=2 That $500 million would have covered the damage done to our sugar industry. She has no idea! ::)

Is it too late to ask for the $500 mil back?

;D

Quote:

The subsidy in its nature would be an easing of cost of living pressure on family budgets paid for by removal of Government waste and unnecessary welfare spending. There would be areas to be looked at - 1) I'd freeze public sector pay to inflation only. 2) I'd increase GST to 17.5% 3) I would cut unemployment benefit 4) I would removal Government waste on public sector projects It would be a subsidy designed to help and assist families. I'd have a very family orientated budget for Australia, and it would work.

LOL, yea cutting unemployment benefits and lifting the GST to 17.5% would really help families, numnut.

mellie wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 2:11pm:

mellie wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 2:07pm: Would the $500 million we pledged to Indonesian schools have come in handy now ...had we kept this for a rainy day? http://www.3aw.com.au/blogs/3aw-generic-blog/gillards-500-million-pledge-for-indonesian-schools/20101103-17d05.html?page=2 That $500 million would have covered the damage done to our sugar industry. She has no idea! ::) Is it too late to ask for the $500 mil back? ;D

We know you don't quite understand simple things about foreign relations, so there isn't much point continuing this one.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 2:13pm:

mellie wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 2:11pm: mellie wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 2:07pm: Would the $500 million we pledged to Indonesian schools have come in handy now ...had we kept this for a rainy day? http://www.3aw.com.au/blogs/3aw-generic-blog/gillards-500-million-pledge-for-indonesian-schools/20101103-17d05.html?page=2 That $500 million would have covered the damage done to our sugar industry. She has no idea! ::) Is it too late to ask for the $500 mil back? ;D We know you don't quite understand simple things about foreign relations, so there isn't much point continuing this one.

She just doesn't understand simple things, FULL STOP.

skippy. wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 2:14pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 2:13pm: mellie wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 2:11pm: mellie wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 2:07pm: Would the $500 million we pledged to Indonesian schools have come in handy now ...had we kept this for a rainy day? http://www.3aw.com.au/blogs/3aw-generic-blog/gillards-500-million-pledge-for-indonesian-schools/20101103-17d05.html?page=2 That $500 million would have covered the damage done to our sugar industry. She has no idea! ::) Is it too late to ask for the $500 mil back? ;D We know you don't quite understand simple things about foreign relations, so there isn't much point continuing this one. She just doesn't understand simple things, FULL STOP.

The poor girl :( Maybe we should just give her a toffy apple and let her sit there for a few hours and eat it...

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 2:08pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 2:03pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 2:01pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 1:58pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 1:51pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 1:31pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 1:31pm: Same old story, money pissed down the drain on totally useless projects. I have no hesistation in paying the Governments as little as possible - all they do is waste it so what's the point. Look after yourself first and foremost. What happened to your idea about subsidising electricity payments? That's not waste. That's helping ordinary families. Before making baseless statements you still have to actually talk about the design of your subsidy thought bubble.  Because the way you have described it, it is a complete waste. The subsidy in its nature would be an easing of cost of living pressure on family budgets paid for by removal of Government waste and unnecessary welfare spending. There would be areas to be looked at - 1) I'd freeze public sector pay to inflation only. 2) I'd increase GST to 17.5% 3) I would cut unemployment benefit 4) I would removal Government waste on public sector projects It would be a subsidy designed to help and assist families. I'd have a very family orientated budget for Australia, and it would work. 1. You haven't answered how you will control the cost of electricity rising, eventuating in the subsidy becoming quite useless in helping people with living costs. 2. How much will the levy be? 3. So basically you would increase a tax to hand a little back? Genius. No I would increase sales tax as part of an overall tax strategy designed to cut direct income tax and plug the revenue gap that would entail. At this point in time Australia has much higher levels of direct income tax than other countries and much lower sales tax. That needs to be addressed. Australia also has high levels of unnecessary public welfare. I'd probably leave healthcare alone but that is an area which has absurd amount of waste. A more privatised transport system would be beneficial. Basically things that can be run by private businesses instead of public ones can be first cars off the block.

In light of knowing your views about welfare I'd rather not ask what you believe to be "unnecessary."  

instead I'll just assume that your "subsidy" will be exactly like the coalition's 5cent petrol excise subsidy that was meant to mean so much to working families.

mellie wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 2:11pm:

mellie wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 2:07pm: Would the $500 million we pledged to Indonesian schools have come in handy now ...had we kept this for a rainy day? http://www.3aw.com.au/blogs/3aw-generic-blog/gillards-500-million-pledge-for-indonesian-schools/20101103-17d05.html?page=2 That $500 million would have covered the damage done to our sugar industry. She has no idea! ::) Is it too late to ask for the $500 mil back? ;D

Charity begins at home... and it was irresponsible to donate $500 mil (we really didn't have) to another country's schools, when we are struggling to find the funds to sustain our own.

What a mess, say what you like, scream it from the tallest tree, but I think it's clear, Gillard is on her last legs.

I can hear the roar of excitement now,  the day Abbott comes in.

By this time, even your watermelon Labor supporters will be cheering, because they like to eat too.

mellie wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 2:28pm:

mellie wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 2:11pm: mellie wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 2:07pm: Would the $500 million we pledged to Indonesian schools have come in handy now ...had we kept this for a rainy day? http://www.3aw.com.au/blogs/3aw-generic-blog/gillards-500-million-pledge-for-indonesian-schools/20101103-17d05.html?page=2 That $500 million would have covered the damage done to our sugar industry. She has no idea! ::) Is it too late to ask for the $500 mil back? ;D Charity begins at home... and it was irresponsible to donate $500 mil (we really didn't have) to another country's schools, when we are struggling to find the funds to sustain our own. What a mess, say what you like, scream it from the tallest tree, but I think it's clear, Gillard is on her last legs. I can hear the roar of excitement now,  the day Abbott comes in. By this time, even your watermelon Labor supporters will be cheering, because they like to eat too.

Perhaps we are struggling to find the funds ourselves because of our overflowing middle class welfare?

Foreign relations are imperative to the success of this country, especially with it comes to the Howard-created security issues with terrorism, and also the fact that we are not self-sustaining. And guess what, foreign friends are NOT free.  

Go read up and find out that Indonesia has the number 1 terrorism deterrent program, which very much assists Australia in our security. Now work out why it is imperative we keep them as an ally, and why we support them in their program with funding we provide to other areas where they struggle.

So, if you worry about terrorism, which I'm sure you do as you are a coalition partisan loony, then perhaps try to understand what this $500m actually does.

Of course for me, I am also happy knowing my government is being a responsible world neighbour and assisting another country to develop themselves, to open up new emerging markets and assist us in long-term prosperity.  

Quote:

I can hear the roar of excitement now,  the day Abbott comes in

LOL, there's always at least one idiot who never gets it.
Abbott is about to get dumped as Lib leader, will you be supporting Turnbull, or Hockey? when Abbott is rolled.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 2:21pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 2:08pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 2:03pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 2:01pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 1:58pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 1:51pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 1:31pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 1:31pm: Same old story, money pissed down the drain on totally useless projects. I have no hesistation in paying the Governments as little as possible - all they do is waste it so what's the point. Look after yourself first and foremost. What happened to your idea about subsidising electricity payments? That's not waste. That's helping ordinary families. Before making baseless statements you still have to actually talk about the design of your subsidy thought bubble.  Because the way you have described it, it is a complete waste. The subsidy in its nature would be an easing of cost of living pressure on family budgets paid for by removal of Government waste and unnecessary welfare spending. There would be areas to be looked at - 1) I'd freeze public sector pay to inflation only. 2) I'd increase GST to 17.5% 3) I would cut unemployment benefit 4) I would removal Government waste on public sector projects It would be a subsidy designed to help and assist families. I'd have a very family orientated budget for Australia, and it would work. 1. You haven't answered how you will control the cost of electricity rising, eventuating in the subsidy becoming quite useless in helping people with living costs. 2. How much will the levy be? 3. So basically you would increase a tax to hand a little back? Genius. No I would increase sales tax as part of an overall tax strategy designed to cut direct income tax and plug the revenue gap that would entail. At this point in time Australia has much higher levels of direct income tax than other countries and much lower sales tax. That needs to be addressed. Australia also has high levels of unnecessary public welfare. I'd probably leave healthcare alone but that is an area which has absurd amount of waste. A more privatised transport system would be beneficial. Basically things that can be run by private businesses instead of public ones can be first cars off the block. In light of knowing your views about welfare I'd rather not ask what you believe to be "unnecessary."   instead I'll just assume that your "subsidy" will be exactly like the coalition's 5cent petrol excise subsidy that was meant to mean so much to working families.

This assumption would be about as well thought-out an assumption as my school being 'snobby' despite not knowing where or what the school is I suppose?
You know, just a clear stereotype based on errr, nothing.

Anyway, that aside. If you don't think there is considerable welfare waste you need to get your eyes checked.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 2:33pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 2:21pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 2:08pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 2:03pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 2:01pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 1:58pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 1:51pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 1:31pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 1:31pm: Same old story, money pissed down the drain on totally useless projects. I have no hesistation in paying the Governments as little as possible - all they do is waste it so what's the point. Look after yourself first and foremost. What happened to your idea about subsidising electricity payments? That's not waste. That's helping ordinary families. Before making baseless statements you still have to actually talk about the design of your subsidy thought bubble.  Because the way you have described it, it is a complete waste. The subsidy in its nature would be an easing of cost of living pressure on family budgets paid for by removal of Government waste and unnecessary welfare spending. There would be areas to be looked at - 1) I'd freeze public sector pay to inflation only. 2) I'd increase GST to 17.5% 3) I would cut unemployment benefit 4) I would removal Government waste on public sector projects It would be a subsidy designed to help and assist families. I'd have a very family orientated budget for Australia, and it would work. 1. You haven't answered how you will control the cost of electricity rising, eventuating in the subsidy becoming quite useless in helping people with living costs. 2. How much will the levy be? 3. So basically you would increase a tax to hand a little back? Genius. No I would increase sales tax as part of an overall tax strategy designed to cut direct income tax and plug the revenue gap that would entail. At this point in time Australia has much higher levels of direct income tax than other countries and much lower sales tax. That needs to be addressed. Australia also has high levels of unnecessary public welfare. I'd probably leave healthcare alone but that is an area which has absurd amount of waste. A more privatised transport system would be beneficial. Basically things that can be run by private businesses instead of public ones can be first cars off the block. In light of knowing your views about welfare I'd rather not ask what you believe to be "unnecessary."   instead I'll just assume that your "subsidy" will be exactly like the coalition's 5cent petrol excise subsidy that was meant to mean so much to working families. This assumption would be about as well thought-out an assumption as my school being 'snobby' despite not knowing where or what the school is I suppose? You know, just a clear stereotype based on errr, nothing. Anyway, that aside. If you don't think there is considerable welfare waste you need to get your eyes checked.

I didn't say I didn't think there was wastage in welfare.  I said I did not wish to continue because I can only guess what you meant by "waste" in welfare, as opposed to what I mean.

BTW, why do you keep ducking from answering how much the subsidy is, and what you will do to prevent costs from further rising, making the subsidy useless? Seriously man, you should've had this outlined by now!  And if you think my assumption was incorrect, then prove me wrong.

And while I may not know your school I clearly said it was a stereotype  based on you. In other words, I'm more referring to your belief that you are somehow elite. Which is of course just hilarious, hickory bacon ;)

skippy. wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 2:33pm:

Quote: I can hear the roar of excitement now,  the day Abbott comes in LOL, there's always at least one idiot who never gets it. Abbott is about to get dumped as Lib leader, will you be supporting Turnbull, or Hockey? when Abbott is rolled.

I just hope it isn't Robb; just another disaster in the waiting.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 2:37pm:

skippy. wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 2:33pm: Quote: I can hear the roar of excitement now,  the day Abbott comes in LOL, there's always at least one idiot who never gets it. Abbott is about to get dumped as Lib leader, will you be supporting Turnbull, or Hockey? when Abbott is rolled. I just hope it isn't Robb; just another disaster in the waiting.

I think there will be 4 candidates stand
Turnbull
Hockey
Robb
Abbott
I think having so many  stand will work in either Hockey or Turnbulls favour, one thing I'll put money on now, is that Abbott will run 4th.

God I love a good coup, Abbott probably doesn't even see it coming, he'll be out on his bike in his pink Lycra while the others are counting the numbers.
What Abbott and his support base fail to realise is that he won the leadership ballot last time by just one vote, that was before the party saw what a bad job he'd make of it.Abbott is dead man walking.

skippy. wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 2:41pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 2:37pm: skippy. wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 2:33pm: Quote: I can hear the roar of excitement now,  the day Abbott comes in LOL, there's always at least one idiot who never gets it. Abbott is about to get dumped as Lib leader, will you be supporting Turnbull, or Hockey? when Abbott is rolled. I just hope it isn't Robb; just another disaster in the waiting. I think there will be 4 candidates stand Turnbull Hockey Robb Abbott I think having so many  stand will work in either Hockey or Turnbulls favour, one thing I'll put money on now, is that Abbott will run 4th.

I don't think Turnball will get a chance this time around.  I think he might resurge in a few years time.

But it's quite clear Robb is making a move, either for Bishop or for Abbott!

Speaking of Bishop, is the drone still alive?

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 2:46pm:

skippy. wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 2:41pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 2:37pm: skippy. wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 2:33pm: Quote: I can hear the roar of excitement now,  the day Abbott comes in LOL, there's always at least one idiot who never gets it. Abbott is about to get dumped as Lib leader, will you be supporting Turnbull, or Hockey? when Abbott is rolled. I just hope it isn't Robb; just another disaster in the waiting. I think there will be 4 candidates stand Turnbull Hockey Robb Abbott I think having so many  stand will work in either Hockey or Turnbulls favour, one thing I'll put money on now, is that Abbott will run 4th. I don't think Turnball will get a chance this time around.  I think he might resurge in a few years time. But it's quite clear Robb is making a move, either for Bishop or for Abbott! Speaking of Bishop, is the drone still alive?

LOL, cyclops is hiding under her rock, pretending all this talk will go away.
Robb wants the treasurers job and deputy leaders job, but Hockey wont give his job up without a fight, cyclops will try and hold her job too.
If Robb makes a move on cyclops and Hockey, Hockey has no choice but to take out Abbott, or lose his chance.
I think the end result, this time around will be Hockey as leader, Robb as deputy and shadow treasurer.

alevine wrote on Today at 1:58pm


Quote:

The subsidy in its nature would be an easing of cost of living pressure on family budgets paid for by removal of Government waste and unnecessary welfare spending. There would be areas to be looked at - 1) I'd freeze public sector pay to inflation only. 2) I'd increase GST to 17.5% 3) I would cut unemployment benefit 4) I would removal Government waste on public sector projects It would be a subsidy designed to help and assist families. I'd have a very family orientated budget for Australia, and it would work.

great thinking - that should see the alp in opposition for the next 30 years.

Sprintcyclist wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 3:03pm:

alevine wrote on Today at 1:58pm Quote: The subsidy in its nature would be an easing of cost of living pressure on family budgets paid for by removal of Government waste and unnecessary welfare spending. There would be areas to be looked at - 1) I'd freeze public sector pay to inflation only. 2) I'd increase GST to 17.5% 3) I would cut unemployment benefit 4) I would removal Government waste on public sector projects It would be a subsidy designed to help and assist families. I'd have a very family orientated budget for Australia, and it would work. great thinking - that should see the alp in opposition for the next 30 years.

LOL, your comrade hicks wrote that sprint, but I agree, it would keep the Libs in opposition for 30 years.lol.

skippy. wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 3:05pm:

Sprintcyclist wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 3:03pm: alevine wrote on Today at 1:58pm Quote: The subsidy in its nature would be an easing of cost of living pressure on family budgets paid for by removal of Government waste and unnecessary welfare spending. There would be areas to be looked at - 1) I'd freeze public sector pay to inflation only. 2) I'd increase GST to 17.5% 3) I would cut unemployment benefit 4) I would removal Government waste on public sector projects It would be a subsidy designed to help and assist families. I'd have a very family orientated budget for Australia, and it would work. great thinking - that should see the alp in opposition for the next 30 years. LOL, your comrade hicks wrote that sprint, but I agree, it would keep the Libs in opposition for 30 years.lol.

Good budgeting and a sound, prosperous economy putting working families first?
yeah sure it will.....

Sprintcyclist wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 3:03pm:

alevine wrote on Today at 1:58pm Quote: The subsidy in its nature would be an easing of cost of living pressure on family budgets paid for by removal of Government waste and unnecessary welfare spending. There would be areas to be looked at - 1) I'd freeze public sector pay to inflation only. 2) I'd increase GST to 17.5% 3) I would cut unemployment benefit 4) I would removal Government waste on public sector projects It would be a subsidy designed to help and assist families. I'd have a very family orientated budget for Australia, and it would work. great thinking - that should see the alp in opposition for the next 30 years.

You realise Andrei wrote that, right?

BTW Andrei, sorry mate, my mind's in my work atm but I just went back to your post. Your 17.5% GST won't help your subsidy considering its all going back to the states.

And on that, still waiting for a response to the other questions.  How long shall I wait?

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 3:12pm:

Sprintcyclist wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 3:03pm: alevine wrote on Today at 1:58pm Quote: The subsidy in its nature would be an easing of cost of living pressure on family budgets paid for by removal of Government waste and unnecessary welfare spending. There would be areas to be looked at - 1) I'd freeze public sector pay to inflation only. 2) I'd increase GST to 17.5% 3) I would cut unemployment benefit 4) I would removal Government waste on public sector projects It would be a subsidy designed to help and assist families. I'd have a very family orientated budget for Australia, and it would work. great thinking - that should see the alp in opposition for the next 30 years. You realise Andrei wrote that, right? BTW Andrei, sorry mate, my mind's in my work atm but I just went back to your post. Your 17.5% GST won't help your subsidy considering its all going back to the states.

It would because funding to the states for healthcare would be cut as result.

I'd completely overhaul Australia's punitive tax system.

Including the petrol tax.
Does it seem right to you that her I am taxed 12c per liter and you are hit with 50c per liter?
Does that seem fair?

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 3:13pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 3:12pm: Sprintcyclist wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 3:03pm: alevine wrote on Today at 1:58pm Quote: The subsidy in its nature would be an easing of cost of living pressure on family budgets paid for by removal of Government waste and unnecessary welfare spending. There would be areas to be looked at - 1) I'd freeze public sector pay to inflation only. 2) I'd increase GST to 17.5% 3) I would cut unemployment benefit 4) I would removal Government waste on public sector projects It would be a subsidy designed to help and assist families. I'd have a very family orientated budget for Australia, and it would work. great thinking - that should see the alp in opposition for the next 30 years. You realise Andrei wrote that, right? BTW Andrei, sorry mate, my mind's in my work atm but I just went back to your post. Your 17.5% GST won't help your subsidy considering its all going back to the states. It would because funding to the states for healthcare would be cut as result. I'd completely overhaul Australia's punitive tax system. Including the petrol tax. Does it seem right to you that her I am taxed 12c per liter and you are hit with 50c per liter? Does that seem fair?

Now now, don't go changing the subject.  I've been asking you for 5 days to explain how your subsidy thought bubble will control the increases to electricity prices.  

Not to mention that your income tax cuts will counteract the 17.5% GST...unless of course the 17.5% gets more revenue in which case once again, working families are... worse off...

What you don't seem to get here is that I am all for the everyday working man here, the everyday family.

I run a family myself, I was brought up on the morals and values of hard work.
I too have strived to acheieve and work hard in tough circumstances at times.

What we need is to reward people, we don't need to cut them off at the knees to give to oxygen stealers.

Overall as well, I would look at the moral and social fabric of society.
Where are we going as a society? Where do we need to check things a little?
What do we need to encourage? What do we need to discourage?

I'd have a more safe, secure, prosperous country which the right kind of people in it.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 3:16pm:

What you don't seem to get here is that I am all for the everyday working man here, the everyday family. I run a family myself, I was brought up on the morals and values of hard work. I too have strived to acheieve and work hard in tough circumstances at times. What we need is to reward people, we don't need to cut them off at the knees to give to oxygen stealers. Overall as well, I would look at the moral and social fabric of society. Where are we going as a society? Where do we need to check things a little? What do we need to encourage? What do we need to discourage? I'd have a more safe, secure, prosperous country which the right kind of people in it.

1. You don't run a family. You're part of a family.  If you really believe you "run" a family then god help all women out there and the rights they've been fighting for during the past century if you were ever allowed to run ANY country.

2. You are just releasing little thought bubbles here and there.  SUBSTANTIATE my bacony friend!!  Now, let's start of with:
- HOW will your subsidy CONTROL price increases in energy?  

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 3:16pm:

What you don't seem to get here is that I am all for the everyday working man here, the everyday family.

i


LOLOLOLOLOLOL







(If Andrei DIDN'T exist, some comedy writer would have to have created him)

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 3:16pm:

What you don't seem to get here is that I am all for the everyday working man here, the everyday family. I run a family myself, I was brought up on the morals and values of hard work. I too have strived to acheieve and work hard in tough circumstances at times. What we need is to reward people, we don't need to cut them off at the knees to give to oxygen stealers. Overall as well, I would look at the moral and social fabric of society. Where are we going as a society? Where do we need to check things a little? What do we need to encourage? What do we need to discourage? I'd have a more safe, secure, prosperous country which the right kind of people in it.

How many kids does an everyday family have?

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 3:20pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 3:16pm: What you don't seem to get here is that I am all for the everyday working man here, the everyday family. I run a family myself, I was brought up on the morals and values of hard work. I too have strived to acheieve and work hard in tough circumstances at times. What we need is to reward people, we don't need to cut them off at the knees to give to oxygen stealers. Overall as well, I would look at the moral and social fabric of society. Where are we going as a society? Where do we need to check things a little? What do we need to encourage? What do we need to discourage? I'd have a more safe, secure, prosperous country which the right kind of people in it. How many kids does an everyday family have?

As many as they would like.
As regards your nit-picking - I run a family BUDGET and am part of a family of four.
We strive through life and to make the best of what we can.

What we need though is a Government and a leadership to help us run that family budget and not try to hinder us.

Is it any surprise that for example a Labor party (allegedly the party of the working class - my demographic) have only ever financially hindered my family?

Why do they seem to make us worse off but John Howard made us better off?
Ideology?

The corporate liberal welfare state places to much of a burden on working people - Government is too big, bureaucracy is too big and corporations are far too inefficient - enough of the same old failed socialist policies.  Now we can see coming into view a new world based in community, social justice and equality - when we have defeated the Nazis - and we will - we have a real shot at that new world - a world where people will not be denied opportunities based on how they look, how well they play football or if they are the biggest thug in the school yard. :)

buzzanddidj wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 3:19pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 3:16pm: What you don't seem to get here is that I am all for the everyday working man here, the everyday family. i LOLOLOLOLOLOL (If Andrei DIDN'T exist, some comedy writer would have to have created him)

Buzz you have no right whatsoever to discuss either families or children.

Your choice of lifestyle - which you yourself made - prohibits you from making any comment.

As in most things, you are a non-contributer to the fabric of Australia.

As LW pointed out, it is you who chose your immoral and deviant lifestyle, nobody else.

Why for example did John Howard's party feel we as a family deserved the right to the welfare assistance to help start our family but the Labor Party then attempted to remove this and decide only people earning a certain amount deserved assistance?

Why do they feel the need to discriminate the very people they are supposed to assist?

I am sorry but the whole system would need re-invigorating to ensure that the middle of Australia, to which I was a part, are stopped from being bled to support an underclass of under-achievers and losers.

And I am working class myself - yet simply at this point in time have felt that the Labor Party have let me down time and time again.

Or perhaps all those consultants Gillard continues employing at the tax-payers expense to run her government are responsible for the budget blow-out, because she's not really the sharpest tool in the shed now is she,.. wanted to wear the pants, but really needs to employ others to do the leg-work for her.

If she was capable, would she be outsourcing others to make her decisions for her?  My god, this unco git cant even speak or walk properly, ...moeeeving foooeewwweeed, cant even keep a promise.


Has Obama offered Gillard any Aid, the way Bush did Howard after cyclone Larry?  Howard said no thanks, we can take care of ourselves, and he did so with a sense of duty and pride.

Gillard is using the floods and cyclone as an excuse all to restore what she herself squandered like a spoilt child in a lolly shop.

There's been far too much consultancy with this government without anything to show for it.

What became of the Climate panel? Moving backwards on that to it seems.  

All this money squandered, waisted, with nothing to show for it.

Now we have to foot the bill.


Howard managed without bleeding the working class, why cant she?

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 3:29pm:

And I am working class myself - yet simply at this point in time have felt that the Labor Party have let me down time and time again.

Well, you wont be for long, you will be dog-sh1t poor once Gillards sapped you.

8-)

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 3:23pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 3:20pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 3:16pm: What you don't seem to get here is that I am all for the everyday working man here, the everyday family. I run a family myself, I was brought up on the morals and values of hard work. I too have strived to acheieve and work hard in tough circumstances at times. What we need is to reward people, we don't need to cut them off at the knees to give to oxygen stealers. Overall as well, I would look at the moral and social fabric of society. Where are we going as a society? Where do we need to check things a little? What do we need to encourage? What do we need to discourage? I'd have a more safe, secure, prosperous country which the right kind of people in it. How many kids does an everyday family have? As many as they would like. As regards your nit-picking - I run a family BUDGET and am part of a family of four. We strive through life and to make the best of what we can. What we need though is a Government and a leadership to help us run that family budget and not try to hinder us. Is it any surprise that for example a Labor party (allegedly the party of the working class - my demographic) have only ever financially hindered my family? Why do they seem to make us worse off but John Howard made us better off? Ideology?

It most likely is.  Howard increased the gap between rich and poor.  

Labor from history has always tried, or at least understood, that the gap should be narrowed by a government.

Not saying that's the best thing, but definitely the gap needs to narrow, with people still being able to prosper at their own will.

Why do you always reply to things that DON'T HAVE TO DO with your subsidy thought bubble? Answer the questions, my inspiring to be the worst prime minister hickory bacon friend!

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 3:29pm:

And I am working class myself - yet simply at this point in time have felt that the Labor Party have let me down time and time again.

Answer about the subsidy Mr "working" class. ;D ;D ;D ;D

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 3:31pm:

Labor from history has always tried, or at least understood, that the gap should be narrowed by a government.

By what?
Capping the middle incomes at the knees and handing it to oxygen stealers and refugee drop outs?

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 3:33pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 3:31pm: Labor from history has always tried, or at least understood, that the gap should be narrowed by a government. By what? Capping the middle incomes at the knees and handing it to oxygen stealers and refugee drop outs?

Aha.

Now, answer the question about the subsidy, please :0

cause seriously, if you can't work out one of your "key" policies about helping "working class" families such as your one, then I'm not sure you would make a very good leader of any government.

mellie wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 3:29pm:

Or perhaps all those consultants Gillard continues employing at the tax-payers expense to run her government are responsible for the budget blow-out, because she's not really the sharpest tool in the shed now is she,.. wanted to wear the pants, but really needs to employ others to do the leg-work for her. If she was capable, would she be outsourcing others to make her decisions for her?  My god, this unco git cant even speak or walk properly, ...moeeeving foooeewwweeed, cant even keep a promise. Has Obama offered Gillard any Aid, the way Bush did Howard after cyclone Larry?  Howard said no thanks, we can take care of ourselves, and he did so with a sense of duty and pride. Gillard is using the floods and cyclone as an excuse all to restore what she herself squandered like a spoilt child in a lolly shop. There's been far too much consultancy with this government without anything to show for it. What became of the Climate panel? Moving backwards on that to it seems.   All this money squandered, waisted, with nothing to show for it. Now we have to foot the bill. Howard managed without bleeding the working class, why cant she?

You are seriously the BIGGEST dipshit in this entire forum.

Do you SERIOUSLY think the 1.8billion is a cash grab to replace what has been spent??????????  Now, I know you probably don't quite understand the maths...but try and work out if through maths what you are saying makes any sense at all.

As for Howard, the fact that the working class now has a mortgage that is 6 times their income, not 3, shows just how much he did.

We were all better off under Howard, rich or poor...our economy was in good shape..we had a surplus, and could even afford natural disasters, without compromising the living standards of middle class Australians.

Why only the middle class, why not everyone?

The working class choosing an income 6 times has nothing to do with the Government but rather personal responsibility.

Look at any successful Government where the people prospered - take Britain under Mrs Thatcher for example - she believed it was necessary to have people accept responsibility and for people to look after themselves - not to rely on Governments.

A Government's job is to get out of the way.

A lot of the time half of things people on here talk about is tantamount to socialism - and nobody wants a return to the failure of those days.

Quote:

You are seriously the BIGGEST dipshit in this entire forum.

Whilst I agree, Andrei tries very hard too.

skippy. wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 3:40pm:

Quote: You are seriously the BIGGEST dipshit in this entire forum. Whilst I agree, Andrei tries very hard too.

Sadly I see you a none more than some uneducated Aussie bogan so I'm afraid your opinion counts for nothing.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 3:37pm:

mellie wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 3:29pm: Or perhaps all those consultants Gillard continues employing at the tax-payers expense to run her government are responsible for the budget blow-out, because she's not really the sharpest tool in the shed now is she,.. wanted to wear the pants, but really needs to employ others to do the leg-work for her. If she was capable, would she be outsourcing others to make her decisions for her?  My god, this unco git cant even speak or walk properly, ...moeeeving foooeewwweeed, cant even keep a promise. Has Obama offered Gillard any Aid, the way Bush did Howard after cyclone Larry?  Howard said no thanks, we can take care of ourselves, and he did so with a sense of duty and pride. Gillard is using the floods and cyclone as an excuse all to restore what she herself squandered like a spoilt child in a lolly shop. There's been far too much consultancy with this government without anything to show for it. What became of the Climate panel? Moving backwards on that to it seems.   All this money squandered, waisted, with nothing to show for it. Now we have to foot the bill. Howard managed without bleeding the working class, why cant she? You are seriously the BIGGEST dipshit in this entire forum. Do you SERIOUSLY think the 1.8billion is a cash grab to replace what has been spent??????????  Now, I know you probably don't quite understand the maths...but try and work out if through maths what you are saying makes any sense at all. As for Howard, the fact that the working class now has a mortgage that is 6 times their income, not 3, shows just how much he did.

Arrogant half-bake.

8-)

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 3:40pm:

The working class choosing an income 6 times has nothing to do with the Government but rather personal responsibility. Look at any successful Government where the people prospered - take Britain under Mrs Thatcher for example - she believed it was necessary to have people accept responsibility and for people to look after themselves - not to rely on Governments. A Government's job is to get out of the way. A lot of the time half of things people on here talk about is tantamount to socialism - and nobody wants a return to the failure of those days.

Hey I agree; that's why your subsidy idea is complete wonk because all it will inevitably do is drive the cost of electricity upwards and become obsolete.  

As for 6times their income, no it's thanks to the introduction of unfavourable negative gearing and capital gains policies, along with the state governments not releasing new land and the commonwealth not releasing their land. But the issue would not be the same if it weren't for the unfavourable negative gearing and capital gians policies introduced by the retarded Howard government.

In any case, you are constantly contradicting your view. ON one hand you believe in small government.  On another hand, you are advocating for subsidies to be handed out by a government to all, which straight away will effect the private market.

You are a complete num nut.  Go back to your rock for the day and come back tomorrow to sprout that you're a family man who is "working class" blah blah blah blah blah no one actually cares.

mellie wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 3:42pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 3:37pm: mellie wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 3:29pm: Or perhaps all those consultants Gillard continues employing at the tax-payers expense to run her government are responsible for the budget blow-out, because she's not really the sharpest tool in the shed now is she,.. wanted to wear the pants, but really needs to employ others to do the leg-work for her. If she was capable, would she be outsourcing others to make her decisions for her?  My god, this unco git cant even speak or walk properly, ...moeeeving foooeewwweeed, cant even keep a promise. Has Obama offered Gillard any Aid, the way Bush did Howard after cyclone Larry?  Howard said no thanks, we can take care of ourselves, and he did so with a sense of duty and pride. Gillard is using the floods and cyclone as an excuse all to restore what she herself squandered like a spoilt child in a lolly shop. There's been far too much consultancy with this government without anything to show for it. What became of the Climate panel? Moving backwards on that to it seems.   All this money squandered, waisted, with nothing to show for it. Now we have to foot the bill. Howard managed without bleeding the working class, why cant she? You are seriously the BIGGEST dipshit in this entire forum. Do you SERIOUSLY think the 1.8billion is a cash grab to replace what has been spent??????????  Now, I know you probably don't quite understand the maths...but try and work out if through maths what you are saying makes any sense at all. As for Howard, the fact that the working class now has a mortgage that is 6 times their income, not 3, shows just how much he did. Arrogant half-bake. 8-)

I see you did the maths.

Well done, nutter.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 3:43pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 3:40pm: The working class choosing an income 6 times has nothing to do with the Government but rather personal responsibility. Look at any successful Government where the people prospered - take Britain under Mrs Thatcher for example - she believed it was necessary to have people accept responsibility and for people to look after themselves - not to rely on Governments. A Government's job is to get out of the way. A lot of the time half of things people on here talk about is tantamount to socialism - and nobody wants a return to the failure of those days. Hey I agree; that's why your subsidy idea is complete wonk because all it will inevitably do is drive the cost of electricity upwards and become obsolete.   As for 6times their income, no it's thanks to the introduction of unfavourable negative gearing and capital gains policies, along with the state governments not releasing new land and the commonwealth not releasing their land. But the issue would not be the same if it weren't for the unfavourable negative gearing and capital gians policies introduced by the retarded Howard government. In any case, you are constantly contradicting your view. ON one hand you believe in small government.  On another hand, you are advocating for subsidies to be handed out by a government to all, which straight away will effect the private market. You are a complete num nut.  Go back to your rock for the day and come back tomorrow to sprout that you're a family man who is "working class" blah blah blah blah blah no one actually cares.

Absolute bollocks.
You can believe in smaller Government and have targetted subsidies!

Mrs Thatcher did exactly that and nobody was a more firm believer in smaller Government than her!

Small Government relates to the Government getting out of areas in which it adds little value.
Transport, schools, healthcare - all areas where the private sector would be better placed to run.
Governments role should be to remove red-tape, help businesses, put in place policies which bring about stable, efficient movement of resources and capital.

Subsidies to help everyday working people as they face cost of living pressure is such a tool.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 2:46pm:

skippy. wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 2:41pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 2:37pm: skippy. wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 2:33pm: Quote: I can hear the roar of excitement now,  the day Abbott comes in LOL, there's always at least one idiot who never gets it. Abbott is about to get dumped as Lib leader, will you be supporting Turnbull, or Hockey? when Abbott is rolled. I just hope it isn't Robb; just another disaster in the waiting. I think there will be 4 candidates stand Turnbull Hockey Robb Abbott I think having so many  stand will work in either Hockey or Turnbulls favour, one thing I'll put money on now, is that Abbott will run 4th. I don't think Turnball will get a chance this time around.  I think he might resurge in a few years time. But it's quite clear Robb is making a move, either for Bishop or for Abbott! Speaking of Bishop, is the drone still alive?

I hope Turnbull smart enough to keep his head down this time.
Let the Howard boot lickers fight it out, they haven't got an original thought between them let alone a policy.
Let them bumble along they'll be shown for what they are USELESS.
Then about 18months before the poll Turnbull can take over & hammer not only the incompetants in his own party but this joke of a government.

Howard managed natural disasters, this and didn't have to resort to stealing school kids tuck-shop money, this and didn't have to resort to periodic blood-letting of the middle class either.

Australians felt  far more secure under a Howard government.

So don't give me your bullsh1t...


Gillard is  an incompetent commy- fascist git who should be sacked.

And you know what?

Being a working class family man is important.

It means we can relate to the difficulties that people face?

Take Julia Gillard, Bob Brown or even Buzz on here.

All chose lifestyles that mean they cannot possibly relate to what its like to be part of an ordinary, Australian family running a budget.
Hence, they may listen and try to understand but in reality - they have no idea.

Often that shows.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 3:48pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 3:43pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 3:40pm: The working class choosing an income 6 times has nothing to do with the Government but rather personal responsibility. Look at any successful Government where the people prospered - take Britain under Mrs Thatcher for example - she believed it was necessary to have people accept responsibility and for people to look after themselves - not to rely on Governments. A Government's job is to get out of the way. A lot of the time half of things people on here talk about is tantamount to socialism - and nobody wants a return to the failure of those days. Hey I agree; that's why your subsidy idea is complete wonk because all it will inevitably do is drive the cost of electricity upwards and become obsolete.   As for 6times their income, no it's thanks to the introduction of unfavourable negative gearing and capital gains policies, along with the state governments not releasing new land and the commonwealth not releasing their land. But the issue would not be the same if it weren't for the unfavourable negative gearing and capital gians policies introduced by the retarded Howard government. In any case, you are constantly contradicting your view. ON one hand you believe in small government.  On another hand, you are advocating for subsidies to be handed out by a government to all, which straight away will effect the private market. You are a complete num nut.  Go back to your rock for the day and come back tomorrow to sprout that you're a family man who is "working class" blah blah blah blah blah no one actually cares. Absolute bollocks. You can believe in smaller Government and have targetted subsidies! Mrs Thatcher did exactly that and nobody was a more firm believer in smaller Government than her! Small Government relates to the Government getting out of areas in which it adds little value. Transport, schools, healthcare - all areas where the private sector would be better placed to run. Governments role should be to remove red-tape, help businesses, put in place policies which bring about stable, efficient movement of resources and capital. Subsidies to help everyday working people as they face cost of living pressure is such a tool.

And yet you once again avoid to explain exactly how it will AVOID continued increases in the energy costs above inflation. Why can't you answer this, mr. subsidised bacon?  

Smaller governments should not interfere in private markets through direct subsidies to all individuals.  Doing so is nothing more than trying to curl up to the voter and spoon them.

Dsmithy70 wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 3:48pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 2:46pm: skippy. wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 2:41pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 2:37pm: skippy. wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 2:33pm: Quote: I can hear the roar of excitement now,  the day Abbott comes in LOL, there's always at least one idiot who never gets it. Abbott is about to get dumped as Lib leader, will you be supporting Turnbull, or Hockey? when Abbott is rolled. I just hope it isn't Robb; just another disaster in the waiting. I think there will be 4 candidates stand Turnbull Hockey Robb Abbott I think having so many  stand will work in either Hockey or Turnbulls favour, one thing I'll put money on now, is that Abbott will run 4th. I don't think Turnball will get a chance this time around.  I think he might resurge in a few years time. But it's quite clear Robb is making a move, either for Bishop or for Abbott! Speaking of Bishop, is the drone still alive? I hope Turnbull smart enough to keep his head down this time. Let the Howard boot lickers fight it out, they haven't got an original thought between them let alone a policy. Let them bumble along they'll be shown for what they are USELESS. Then about 18months before the poll Turnbull can take over & hammer not only the incompetants in his own party but this joke of a government.

Oh hang on that would require a smart government.
Sorry false alarm, nothing to see here, move along :(

mellie wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 3:48pm:

Howard managed natural disasters, this and didn't have to resort to stealing school kids tuck-shop money, this and didn't have to resort to periodic blood-letting of the middle class either. Australians felt  far more secure under a Howard government. So don't give me your bullsh1t... Gillard is  an incompetent commy- fascist git who should be sacked.

Which Australians? Australians who say "this" a lot? ;D ;D ;D

Please, substantiate when you mention ALL Australians. Where did you mis-read that from? ;D ;D ;D

Like I said, if you need $50, I'll donate it to ya.  just promise me it'll go towards a slab of beer for yourself.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 3:52pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 3:48pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 3:43pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 3:40pm: The working class choosing an income 6 times has nothing to do with the Government but rather personal responsibility. Look at any successful Government where the people prospered - take Britain under Mrs Thatcher for example - she believed it was necessary to have people accept responsibility and for people to look after themselves - not to rely on Governments. A Government's job is to get out of the way. A lot of the time half of things people on here talk about is tantamount to socialism - and nobody wants a return to the failure of those days. Hey I agree; that's why your subsidy idea is complete wonk because all it will inevitably do is drive the cost of electricity upwards and become obsolete.   As for 6times their income, no it's thanks to the introduction of unfavourable negative gearing and capital gains policies, along with the state governments not releasing new land and the commonwealth not releasing their land. But the issue would not be the same if it weren't for the unfavourable negative gearing and capital gians policies introduced by the retarded Howard government. In any case, you are constantly contradicting your view. ON one hand you believe in small government.  On another hand, you are advocating for subsidies to be handed out by a government to all, which straight away will effect the private market. You are a complete num nut.  Go back to your rock for the day and come back tomorrow to sprout that you're a family man who is "working class" blah blah blah blah blah no one actually cares. Absolute bollocks. You can believe in smaller Government and have targetted subsidies! Mrs Thatcher did exactly that and nobody was a more firm believer in smaller Government than her! Small Government relates to the Government getting out of areas in which it adds little value. Transport, schools, healthcare - all areas where the private sector would be better placed to run. Governments role should be to remove red-tape, help businesses, put in place policies which bring about stable, efficient movement of resources and capital. Subsidies to help everyday working people as they face cost of living pressure is such a tool. And yet you once again avoid to explain exactly how it will AVOID continued increases in the energy costs above inflation. Why can't you answer this, mr. subsidised bacon?   Smaller governments should not interfere in private markets through direct subsidies to all individuals.  Doing so is nothing more than trying to curl up to the voter and spoon them.

Because industry regulators would ensure there is not excessive price increases.
Plus also there would be a removal of barriers of entry on competition with an opening up to foreigh owned suppliers to create price competition to benefit the consumer.

Plus also you realize an increase in GST and reduction in direct income tax makes it a more fair system because you spread the tax load.
Everyone pays GST, it is known as the 'fair tax'.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 3:49pm:

And you know what? Being a working class family man is important. It means we can relate to the difficulties that people face? Take Julia Gillard, Bob Brown or even Buzz on here. All chose lifestyles that mean they cannot possibly relate to what its like to be part of an ordinary, Australian family running a budget. Hence, they may listen and try to understand but in reality - they have no idea. Often that shows.

Answer about the subsidy. Stop trying to sell yourself as "working class" in each thread you ever post in.  No one here listens to it, and if anything we just laugh.  I've even started a drinking game where we basically drink each tiem "working class" comes out of your mouth.  We got heavily drunk Friday night because of it.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 3:55pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 3:52pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 3:48pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 3:43pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 3:40pm: The working class choosing an income 6 times has nothing to do with the Government but rather personal responsibility. Look at any successful Government where the people prospered - take Britain under Mrs Thatcher for example - she believed it was necessary to have people accept responsibility and for people to look after themselves - not to rely on Governments. A Government's job is to get out of the way. A lot of the time half of things people on here talk about is tantamount to socialism - and nobody wants a return to the failure of those days. Hey I agree; that's why your subsidy idea is complete wonk because all it will inevitably do is drive the cost of electricity upwards and become obsolete.   As for 6times their income, no it's thanks to the introduction of unfavourable negative gearing and capital gains policies, along with the state governments not releasing new land and the commonwealth not releasing their land. But the issue would not be the same if it weren't for the unfavourable negative gearing and capital gians policies introduced by the retarded Howard government. In any case, you are constantly contradicting your view. ON one hand you believe in small government.  On another hand, you are advocating for subsidies to be handed out by a government to all, which straight away will effect the private market. You are a complete num nut.  Go back to your rock for the day and come back tomorrow to sprout that you're a family man who is "working class" blah blah blah blah blah no one actually cares. Absolute bollocks. You can believe in smaller Government and have targetted subsidies! Mrs Thatcher did exactly that and nobody was a more firm believer in smaller Government than her! Small Government relates to the Government getting out of areas in which it adds little value. Transport, schools, healthcare - all areas where the private sector would be better placed to run. Governments role should be to remove red-tape, help businesses, put in place policies which bring about stable, efficient movement of resources and capital. Subsidies to help everyday working people as they face cost of living pressure is such a tool. And yet you once again avoid to explain exactly how it will AVOID continued increases in the energy costs above inflation. Why can't you answer this, mr. subsidised bacon?   Smaller governments should not interfere in private markets through direct subsidies to all individuals.  Doing so is nothing more than trying to curl up to the voter and spoon them. Because industry regulators would ensure there is not excessive price increases. Plus also there would be a removal of barriers of entry on competition with an opening up to foreigh owned suppliers to create price competition to benefit the consumer. Plus also you realize an increase in GST and reduction in direct income tax makes it a more fair system because you spread the tax load. Everyone pays GST, it is known as the 'fair tax'.

Including the "working class" family which inevitably will pay more.

Industry regulators - been there, heard that.  Will we start a commission that will determine nothing, will we?

How will the subsidy remove barriers to entry into prive market? My god! Num nut!

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 3:55pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 3:52pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 3:48pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 3:43pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 3:40pm: The working class choosing an income 6 times has nothing to do with the Government but rather personal responsibility. Look at any successful Government where the people prospered - take Britain under Mrs Thatcher for example - she believed it was necessary to have people accept responsibility and for people to look after themselves - not to rely on Governments. A Government's job is to get out of the way. A lot of the time half of things people on here talk about is tantamount to socialism - and nobody wants a return to the failure of those days. Hey I agree; that's why your subsidy idea is complete wonk because all it will inevitably do is drive the cost of electricity upwards and become obsolete.   As for 6times their income, no it's thanks to the introduction of unfavourable negative gearing and capital gains policies, along with the state governments not releasing new land and the commonwealth not releasing their land. But the issue would not be the same if it weren't for the unfavourable negative gearing and capital gians policies introduced by the retarded Howard government. In any case, you are constantly contradicting your view. ON one hand you believe in small government.  On another hand, you are advocating for subsidies to be handed out by a government to all, which straight away will effect the private market. You are a complete num nut.  Go back to your rock for the day and come back tomorrow to sprout that you're a family man who is "working class" blah blah blah blah blah no one actually cares. Absolute bollocks. You can believe in smaller Government and have targetted subsidies! Mrs Thatcher did exactly that and nobody was a more firm believer in smaller Government than her! Small Government relates to the Government getting out of areas in which it adds little value. Transport, schools, healthcare - all areas where the private sector would be better placed to run. Governments role should be to remove red-tape, help businesses, put in place policies which bring about stable, efficient movement of resources and capital. Subsidies to help everyday working people as they face cost of living pressure is such a tool. And yet you once again avoid to explain exactly how it will AVOID continued increases in the energy costs above inflation. Why can't you answer this, mr. subsidised bacon?   Smaller governments should not interfere in private markets through direct subsidies to all individuals.  Doing so is nothing more than trying to curl up to the voter and spoon them. Because industry regulators would ensure there is not excessive price increases. Plus also there would be a removal of barriers of entry on competition with an opening up to foreigh owned suppliers to create price competition to benefit the consumer. Plus also you realize an increase in GST and reduction in direct income tax makes it a more fair system because you spread the tax load. Everyone pays GST, it is known as the 'fair tax'.

Not to mention that regulators are already observing energy price increases, and guess what, they are above inflation and the regulators haven't put a stop to it...

so num nuts, how will ur subsidy help long term>?

The subsidy doesn't remove barriers to entry.

That's completely separate - but what you do want to do is encourage other suppliers to enter the market - overseas based suppliers being one example.

In California our energy was put on a market based system where you can trade credits in energy, etc.

Competition, targetted subsidies to certain families, a lifting on coal and gas restrictions, an encouragement to overseas suppliers.

Price is everything, remember that.
That is the way to drive down price.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 3:44pm:

mellie wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 3:42pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 3:37pm: mellie wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 3:29pm: Or perhaps all those consultants Gillard continues employing at the tax-payers expense to run her government are responsible for the budget blow-out, because she's not really the sharpest tool in the shed now is she,.. wanted to wear the pants, but really needs to employ others to do the leg-work for her. If she was capable, would she be outsourcing others to make her decisions for her?  My god, this unco git cant even speak or walk properly, ...moeeeving foooeewwweeed, cant even keep a promise. Has Obama offered Gillard any Aid, the way Bush did Howard after cyclone Larry?  Howard said no thanks, we can take care of ourselves, and he did so with a sense of duty and pride. Gillard is using the floods and cyclone as an excuse all to restore what she herself squandered like a spoilt child in a lolly shop. There's been far too much consultancy with this government without anything to show for it. What became of the Climate panel? Moving backwards on that to it seems.   All this money squandered, waisted, with nothing to show for it. Now we have to foot the bill. Howard managed without bleeding the working class, why cant she? You are seriously the BIGGEST dipshit in this entire forum. Do you SERIOUSLY think the 1.8billion is a cash grab to replace what has been spent??????????  Now, I know you probably don't quite understand the maths...but try and work out if through maths what you are saying makes any sense at all. As for Howard, the fact that the working class now has a mortgage that is 6 times their income, not 3, shows just how much he did. Arrogant half-bake. 8-) I see you did the maths. Well done, nutter.

You are an idiot, and have no idea what you are talking about.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 4:05pm:

The subsidy doesn't remove barriers to entry. That's completely separate - but what you do want to do is encourage other suppliers to enter the market - overseas based suppliers being one example. In California our energy was put on a market based system where you can trade credits in energy, etc. Competition, targetted subsidies to certain families, a lifting on coal and gas restrictions, an encouragement to overseas suppliers. Price is everything, remember that. That is the way to drive down price.

Your price has been reduced, has it?

Note i can do all this without once needing to resort to personal names etc.

Seen it all before - usually from the chip on the shoulder people who could only get into the type of school I went to by watering the plants.

It's the "Them and Us" syndrome and its alive and well in you my friend.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 4:06pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 4:05pm: The subsidy doesn't remove barriers to entry. That's completely separate - but what you do want to do is encourage other suppliers to enter the market - overseas based suppliers being one example. In California our energy was put on a market based system where you can trade credits in energy, etc. Competition, targetted subsidies to certain families, a lifting on coal and gas restrictions, an encouragement to overseas suppliers. Price is everything, remember that. That is the way to drive down price. Your price has been reduced, has it?

It's lower than you pay.
Which by the way is pretty much the case for anything as we have discussed.
I live a better lifestyle and a cheaper one than I did in Australia.

We used to pay over $600 per quarter in utilities in Australia to run all our air cons in the house in Melbourne.
In San Diego we run the same sized house at roughly the same level for less than $400,

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 4:08pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 4:06pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 4:05pm: The subsidy doesn't remove barriers to entry. That's completely separate - but what you do want to do is encourage other suppliers to enter the market - overseas based suppliers being one example. In California our energy was put on a market based system where you can trade credits in energy, etc. Competition, targetted subsidies to certain families, a lifting on coal and gas restrictions, an encouragement to overseas suppliers. Price is everything, remember that. That is the way to drive down price. Your price has been reduced, has it? It's lower than you pay. Which by the way is pretty much the case for anything as we have discussed. I live a better lifestyle and a cheaper one than I did in Australia. We used to pay over $600 per quarter in utilities in Australia to run all our air cons in the house in Melbourne. In San Diego we run the same sized house at roughly the same level for less than $400,

... but the price is still going up.  So again, short term fix. Well done.

As a benchmark - we have 6 air con units in our house here.

We had 5 in Australia.

We run a lot of them, sometimes all at once.

Yet the cost is lower. Why?

Competition, barriers to entry, supply and demand economics.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 4:10pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 4:08pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 4:06pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 4:05pm: The subsidy doesn't remove barriers to entry. That's completely separate - but what you do want to do is encourage other suppliers to enter the market - overseas based suppliers being one example. In California our energy was put on a market based system where you can trade credits in energy, etc. Competition, targetted subsidies to certain families, a lifting on coal and gas restrictions, an encouragement to overseas suppliers. Price is everything, remember that. That is the way to drive down price. Your price has been reduced, has it? It's lower than you pay. Which by the way is pretty much the case for anything as we have discussed. I live a better lifestyle and a cheaper one than I did in Australia. We used to pay over $600 per quarter in utilities in Australia to run all our air cons in the house in Melbourne. In San Diego we run the same sized house at roughly the same level for less than $400, ... but the price is still going up.  So again, short term fix. Well done.

So is my salary.
Everything goes up - its called inflation.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 4:06pm:

Note i can do all this without once needing to resort to personal names etc. Seen it all before - usually from the chip on the shoulder people who could only get into the type of school I went to by watering the plants. It's the "Them and Us" syndrome and its alive and well in you my friend.

the snob school, right?

;D ;D ;D ;D

Can you say "working class" again please... I want a drink...

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 4:10pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 4:10pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 4:08pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 4:06pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 4:05pm: The subsidy doesn't remove barriers to entry. That's completely separate - but what you do want to do is encourage other suppliers to enter the market - overseas based suppliers being one example. In California our energy was put on a market based system where you can trade credits in energy, etc. Competition, targetted subsidies to certain families, a lifting on coal and gas restrictions, an encouragement to overseas suppliers. Price is everything, remember that. That is the way to drive down price. Your price has been reduced, has it? It's lower than you pay. Which by the way is pretty much the case for anything as we have discussed. I live a better lifestyle and a cheaper one than I did in Australia. We used to pay over $600 per quarter in utilities in Australia to run all our air cons in the house in Melbourne. In San Diego we run the same sized house at roughly the same level for less than $400, ... but the price is still going up.  So again, short term fix. Well done. So is my salary. Everything goes up - its called inflation.

Yes your salary might go up with inflation; but energy prices go up at a higher rate. Energy goes up 6% annually in California.  Inflation is at 2.43% or there abouts.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 4:11pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 4:06pm: Note i can do all this without once needing to resort to personal names etc. Seen it all before - usually from the chip on the shoulder people who could only get into the type of school I went to by watering the plants. It's the "Them and Us" syndrome and its alive and well in you my friend. the snob school, right? ;D ;D ;D ;D Can you say "working class" again please... I want a drink...

Yeah the school which you have no idea where it is, what it costs, and what its policies are - which you declared was a 'snobby' school.

No different to me thinking your school was like Mad Max, had droo out kids setting fire to cars outside and was full of black people just because it was a Government school.

Stereotyping eh?

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 4:13pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 4:11pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 4:06pm: Note i can do all this without once needing to resort to personal names etc. Seen it all before - usually from the chip on the shoulder people who could only get into the type of school I went to by watering the plants. It's the "Them and Us" syndrome and its alive and well in you my friend. the snob school, right? ;D ;D ;D ;D Can you say "working class" again please... I want a drink... Yeah the school which you have no idea where it is, what it costs, and what its policies are - which you declared was a 'snobby' school. No different to me thinking your school was like Mad Max, had droo out kids setting fire to cars outside and was full of black people just because it was a Government school. Stereotyping eh?

Some kids did set fire to cars, and there were a few black students.

But going by the way you are, it had to come from somewhere... I can only figure it's from your snobby school you keep telling all of us about!  Another drinking game in the works :)  Thanks Hickory!

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 4:13pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 4:11pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 4:06pm: Note i can do all this without once needing to resort to personal names etc. Seen it all before - usually from the chip on the shoulder people who could only get into the type of school I went to by watering the plants. It's the "Them and Us" syndrome and its alive and well in you my friend. the snob school, right? ;D ;D ;D ;D Can you say "working class" again please... I want a drink... Yeah the school which you have no idea where it is, what it costs, and what its policies are - which you declared was a 'snobby' school. No different to me thinking your school was like Mad Max, had droo out kids setting fire to cars outside and was full of black people just because it was a Government school. Stereotyping eh?

You think you can mention a sentence such as the one below from now on?  TRIPLE SHOTS!!!
"I went to a school not many can afford, and I'm a working class man in a working class family."

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 3:41pm:

skippy. wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 3:40pm: Quote: You are seriously the BIGGEST dipshit in this entire forum. Whilst I agree, Andrei tries very hard too. Sadly I see you a none more than some uneducated Aussie bogan so I'm afraid your opinion counts for nothing.

poor old jungle Jim never was very good at constructive criticism.

skippy. wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 4:19pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 3:41pm: skippy. wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 3:40pm: Quote: You are seriously the BIGGEST dipshit in this entire forum. Whilst I agree, Andrei tries very hard too. Sadly I see you a none more than some uneducated Aussie bogan so I'm afraid your opinion counts for nothing. poor old jungle Jim never was very good at constructive criticism.

I just don't really have much time for people I consider below me on so many fronts.

Anyways, going by what you've just spoken about here we can determine that:
1. You can't get energy prices to decrease, only continue increasing.  You would provide a short term fix to this by offering subsidies which manipulate the market for a short time offering "relief" to working families.  To do this, you'd increase GST to 17.5%, which doesn' tgive you any extra revenue, and drop out welfare that you don't think is needed.  IN turn, you put a cost onto the government that will never be able to be removed, and within a few years will be a huge waste to the budget because it will not offer the relief to people it once was meant to.  All because energy costs rise way above inflation and you can't provide a solution to stop that from happening.  Especially when you quote California as your "case study," and in California the price increases double the inflation rate annually.


Back to the snobby school for you my Hickory Friend!  And please stay away from any government.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 4:19pm:

skippy. wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 4:19pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 3:41pm: skippy. wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 3:40pm: Quote: You are seriously the BIGGEST dipshit in this entire forum. Whilst I agree, Andrei tries very hard too. Sadly I see you a none more than some uneducated Aussie bogan so I'm afraid your opinion counts for nothing. poor old jungle Jim never was very good at constructive criticism. I just don't really have much time for people I consider below me on so many fronts.

Name 1.

;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 4:20pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 4:19pm: skippy. wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 4:19pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 3:41pm: skippy. wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 3:40pm: Quote: You are seriously the BIGGEST dipshit in this entire forum. Whilst I agree, Andrei tries very hard too. Sadly I see you a none more than some uneducated Aussie bogan so I'm afraid your opinion counts for nothing. poor old jungle Jim never was very good at constructive criticism. I just don't really have much time for people I consider below me on so many fronts. Name 1. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Education.
Intelligence.
Social values.
Employment status.

I could keep going, I simply can't be bothered.

Skippy has always come across to me as that sort of god-awful person you find in Australia, with one of those terrible accents who declares "Orrrrstraya to be the best place in the world" despite the fact he has likely got no idea what the rest of the world is like.

Just a thought.

On that note my colonial bumpkins, I am going to bed - some of us (not you Buzz) have to work on monday.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 4:22pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 4:20pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 4:19pm: skippy. wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 4:19pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 3:41pm: skippy. wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 3:40pm: Quote: You are seriously the BIGGEST dipshit in this entire forum. Whilst I agree, Andrei tries very hard too. Sadly I see you a none more than some uneducated Aussie bogan so I'm afraid your opinion counts for nothing. poor old jungle Jim never was very good at constructive criticism. I just don't really have much time for people I consider below me on so many fronts. Name 1. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D Education. Intelligence. Social values. Employment status. I could keep going, I simply can't be bothered. Skippy has always come across to me as that sort of god-awful person you find in Australia, with one of those terrible accents who declares "Orrrrstraya to be the best place in the world" despite the fact he has likely got no idea what the rest of the world is like. Just a thought.

Education.  FAIL  Snobby school didn't teach well enough
Intelligence. FAIL See above
Social values. DEFINITELY FAIL
Employment status. Don't know

Sprintcyclist wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 8:31am:

the left came into a vault packed solid with cold hard cash. they wasted their way through it, destroying almost every industry they touched. now, we have a need for money - one that would "stimulate" the economy. thanks to their financial folly, the economy is now in critical care. Once again, Tony Abbott comes out with sensible logical alternatives. Quote: ..........Using her strongest language so far to convey the extent of the budget cuts, Ms Gillard said "every dollar" in the Budget needed to be used for the best possible purpose. "There is going to be some pain around and people are going to have to recognise that," Ms Gillard told reporters on Channel 10. "We will make some choices . . . and they're going to be tough choices." Meanwhile, Opposition Leader Tony Abbott will push to scrap $500 million of Building the Education Revolution projects to partly replace Ms Gillard's flood levy. He would also seek a similar amount in deferrals of the water buyback scheme.Mr Abbott will take the full flood package to his shadow cabinet today as an alternative to the Government's $5.8 billion recovery plan, which includes the $1.8 billion levy to be applied to people with income above $50,000. It is believed that further savings would also be made from cuts to the computers in schools program, which was promised by Kevin Rudd in 2007, and which has blown out from $1 billion to $2 billion. Mr Abbott will unveil his plan before meeting with Independents to try to convince them to block the Government's levy legislation, which is expected to go to Parliament before the end of the week. Mr Abbott yesterday would not confirm what was in the package but said the Murray Darling Basin $1.3 billion water buyback scheme was an area where cuts would also be made. "Now is not the time to be buying back water, particularly when the Murray Darling Basin plan is up for grabs. It seems that would be one area that could be very substantially deferred," he said. "We do not need a new tax on top of all the other misery which these natural disasters have visited upon the Australian people."............ http://www.couriermail.com.au/money/money-matters/julia-gillard-warns-of-budget-pain-following-natural-disasters-throughout-australia/story-fn3hskur-1226001080867

Abbott will get hammered for playing a very weak pugilistic game.

You cannot hide in politics and Gillard will eat him: YOU CAN TAKE THAT TO THE BANK!

The metrosexuals will be getting very worried behind that crack pipe and asking themselves where is the substance in Abbots game!

*** GO THE NBN, HEAVY KEVVYS LEGACY! ***

wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 9:04am:

Whats happened to ‘deferring the NBN’ . Has it  vanished from the Coalition’s list of savings ?

Heavy Kevvys legacy will prove an insurmountable obstacle to Abbots weak brand of pugilism!

The crack smokers know it... they are very quick when it comes to knowing who's got the goods!

 :D :D ;D

buzzanddidj wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 9:50am:

Verge wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 9:12am: wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 9:04am: Whats happened to ‘deferring the NBN’ . Has it  vanished from the Coalition’s list of savings ? I think it makes more sense to be putting the NBN into areas that need rebuilding anyway.  It wouldnt be any more expensive to the re-laying fibre as opposed to re-laying copper. The Liberal Party is DETERMINED that any form of NBN should NOT proceed under a Labor government The LAST thing they want is the history books giving credit to those "damn commies" building any form of infrastucture

The crack smokers are trying to figure out what to tell their children now that they got stuck with one of their crack smokin' hangers on over the old-man-years!

Things change: ABBOTT BETTER LEARN HOW TO DEAL WITH AN OPPONENT WHO KNOWS HER OVERHANDS!

GO JULIA IN 2011!

GO HEAVY KEVVYS NBN LEGACY!

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 1:51pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 1:31pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 7th, 2011 at 1:31pm: Same old story, money pissed down the drain on totally useless projects. I have no hesistation in paying the Governments as little as possible - all they do is waste it so what's the point. Look after yourself first and foremost. What happened to your idea about subsidising electricity payments? That's not waste. That's helping ordinary families.

The NBN isn't about helping yourself!

You say its waste but plenty will be saying the Liberal Party wasted many an opportunity during an alleged once in a century boom to stem the brain drain and more.

I DON'T THINK YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT WASTE IS?!!?

I DON'T THINK YOU CARE WHAT WASTE IS AND I DECLARE YOU, RIGHT HERE AND NOW, UN-AUSTRALIAN!

I DECLARE THE LIBERAL PARTY AND ALL ITS VOTERS, RIGHT HERE AND NOW, UN-AUSTRALIAN!!

TONY ABBOT DOESN'T BELIEVE IN DEBT BECAUSE HE IS A PEANUT!

THE CHASER STITCHED HIM UP, AND IT WAS SO SIMPLE TO DO SO!

ALL CRACK SMOKIN' LIBERAL VOTERS ARE A COMPLETE JOKE!

;)