FEDERAL politicians could be set for extraordinary pay rises, with the salaries of backbenchers tipped to almost double to $250,000.
Writing exclusively in The Daily Telegraph today, columnist Laurie Oakes said MPs expected backbencher and senator base salaries to rise $110,000 from $140,000.

The Prime Minister's, ministers' and shadow ministers' even bigger paypackets may also rise in line.

The Federal Remuneration Tribunal is expected to make an initial report on political perks before the end of the year, with politicians expecting to trade extra payments such as allowances for bigger personal pay packets.

Any pay rise would likely trigger anger among unions, already unhappy about revelations this week the Tribunal was set to award five key top federal public servants pay rises of $250,000 to $300,000 - taking the chiefs of Defence and Customs, the Tax Commissioner, Auditor-General and the Australian Statistician to $800,000.

Start of sidebar. Skip to end of sidebar.


MPs receive a raft of handouts on top of their salaries including electorate allowances of up to $50,000, printing allowances of $75,000, a resettlement allowance when they lose office and post-career perks such as life gold passes for free domestic travel.

Ms Gillard, who earns $366,366, could earn as much as $650,000 under any new system, while Opposition Leader Tony Abbott's $259,000 could rise to $479,000.

The Tribunal would not say whether any rises would flow on to state and local governments, as can occur with annual rises.

This week increases to NSW MPs' pay and entitlements were capped at 2.5 per cent.

Community and Public Sector Union assistant national secretary Louise Persse said such big pay rises were not a good look when its members were being told to accept pay rises of 3 per cent.

"There is no doubt that our public service heads and politicians work hard and should be paid appropriately," she said.

"However, for the thousands of public sector staff across Australia on modest incomes, these increases may seem a bit rich."

Opposition frontbencher Barnaby Joyce, who has called for the Prime Minister's salary to top $1 million, backed paying politicians more but said he would be surprised if the rise was so much.

Is this payrise fair to the rest of us mere mortals? Tell us below



do the AYES have it?????

You know there is never going to be a disagreement or much debate when it come to giving themselves a pay rise.

The one thing every politician can agree on it that the Australian taxpayer is a sucker, well worth bleeding dry.  >:(

They should triple their pay but hold them accountable for their F^&k ups with threat of execution for serious faux pas.

The whole of the country should go on strike and demand that we all get pay rises in accordance to polly pay rises.

They are sick fks.

qikvtec wrote on Oct 1^st, 2011 at 7:19am:

They should triple their pay but hold them accountable for their F^&k ups with threat of execution for serious faux pas.

can you believe THOMO will get one as well...grooooooooooan

progressiveslol wrote on Oct 1^st, 2011 at 7:38am:

The whole of the country should go on strike and demand that we all get pay rises in accordance to polly pay rises. They are sick fks.

No, but any pay rises should be capped to meet rises in inflation levels, not exceeding it.

This really IS the final straw.

For this sickeningly poorly-performing pack of grubs
to award themselves a pay-rise that ALMOST DOUBLES
their pay-packets is simply shameful.

Especially while the poor continue to suffer.......

Sounds good to me.

Pay peanuts, get monkeys.

We pay them way more than peanuts already.

And we still get monkeys.

Would you use a bank where the CEO only got paid $150k? We are basically saying that the competent managers are better off managing about 10000 other Australian companies first and the ones who don't make that cut can run the country.

For what they are doing and what they are responsible for, you are paying them peanuts.

Kat wrote on Oct 1^st, 2011 at 8:36am:

This really IS the final straw. For this sickeningly poorly-performing pack of grubs to award themselves a pay-rise that ALMOST DOUBLES their pay-packets is simply shameful. Especially while the poor continue to suffer.......

well yes I can see your point.. they are not exactly top of the pops are they?..

but I do agree the PM should get more than $350.000 don tknow about a $1m though.. but at least $750.000but they need to perform..and be more accountable..

the way things are.. its like musical chairs  its called unstable govt... not to be trusted.

it isnt right we have to put up with that

freediver wrote on Oct 1^st, 2011 at 8:39am:

Sounds good to me. Pay peanuts, get monkeys.

But we pay top dollar and still get monkeys.


No-one else gets to 'retire' on a multi million dollar 'retirement' package after only 9 years of service. The taxpayer has to do at least 10 years just to get 3 months long service.

Pay them on performance, they have to prove to an independant body of taxpayers on how they deserve a pay rise. That's how it works in the real world.

They do not deserve their taxpayer funded super and they can beg for pay rises just like the rest of us.

Australia has one of the most stable governments in the world.

freediver wrote on Oct 1^st, 2011 at 8:45am:

Would you use a bank where the CEO only got paid $150k? We are basically saying that the competent managers are better off managing about 10000 other Australian companies first and the ones who don't make that cut can run the country. For what they are doing and what they are responsible for, you are paying them peanuts.

If the top CEO,s p1ss away money and make disasterous decisions they don't get a pay rise they get fired and not in a few years, immediately!

BigOl64 wrote on Oct 1^st, 2011 at 8:46am:

freediver wrote on Oct 1st, 2011 at 8:39am: Sounds good to me. Pay peanuts, get monkeys. But we pay top dollar and still get monkeys. No-one else gets to 'retire' on a multi million dollar 'retirement' package after only 9 years of service. The taxpayer has to do at least 10 years just to get 3 months long service. Pay them on performance, they have to prove to an independant body of taxpayers on how they deserve a pay rise. That's how it works in the real world. They do not deserve their taxpayer funded super and they can beg for pay rises just like the rest of us.

What other jobs do you know of where people get paid peanuts then at the end of the year they have to argue with a bunch of people who are ignorant of their role in order to get a salary that matches the job?

BigOl64 wrote on Oct 1^st, 2011 at 8:49am:

freediver wrote on Oct 1st, 2011 at 8:45am: Would you use a bank where the CEO only got paid $150k? We are basically saying that the competent managers are better off managing about 10000 other Australian companies first and the ones who don't make that cut can run the country. For what they are doing and what they are responsible for, you are paying them peanuts. If the top CEO,s p1ss away money and make disasterous decisions they don't get a pay rise they get fired and not in a few years, immediately!

The difference is that the banks use a big salary to attract top CEOs. They don't pay peanuts then complain about getting monkeys.

freediver wrote on Oct 1^st, 2011 at 8:47am:

Australia has one of the most stable governments in the world.

... being lead by one of the most incompetent leaders in the world.

I would rather see the PM get $15million a year, and when your out, your cut off.

No pensions, no free travel, nothing.

That way they are fairly renumerated while in the job, have to pay their taxes on the income while it is earned (as opposed to deferring it over the rest of their lives) and the taxpayer isnt funding them long after they have been removed from office.

If I lose my job, I dont get a pension for life or free travel.  Pay them fairly while there, then thats it

I am fairly certain that US Presidents receive no further income from taxpayers once they leave the Whitehouse. I believe the only taxpayer assistance they receive is security-related, such as Secret Service bodyguards, etc. Besides that, they earn their own income through books, public speaking and other work. We should have a similar system here.

How can incompetent clowns justify any pay rise?  Lets hope Australians have the guts to do what the French people would do, and protest in their millions to stop these parasites from rorting the tax payers any further.  

Something tells me the pollies will get their pay raise without a murmur from the Aussies, and then Australians will wonder why the international community is laughing at them and calling them dumb and a backward people.

The ORIGINAL Laurie Oakes article ...


DID you see the news the Tax Commissioner, the Defence Force chief, the Auditor-General are to get pay rises of up to $300,000 a year?
Add to that list a select few bureaucrats.

The Remuneration Tribunal has decided on the one-off increases to boost their pay packets to a tidy $800,000 - in line with what other public service bosses and corporate regulators receive.

Well, hold on to your hat because another salary hike is in the pipeline, this time for federal MPs. And, given the tribunal's apparently generous mood, it's expected to be big, too.

At the moment, the annual base salary of backbench MPs and senators is just under $140,000. The expectation is that this could jump to $250,000. Some MPs think there is a chance it will be considerably more.

That will mean whopping increases for ministers, and the Prime Minister, too. Also, for the first time, shadow ministers are likely to receive payment for their portfolio responsibilities.

And this time, no matter how hostile the public reaction, the Government will not be able to stop the rise or cut it back in a populist gesture to appease voters battling to make ends meet.

Previously, the tribunal had only an advisory role. So in 2008, the newly elected prime minister, Kevin Rudd, was able to cancel a pay rise for parliamentarians, so they could set an example in wage restraint.

But the law was amended this year to prevent that recurring. Whatever the tribunal decides cannot now be tampered with by pollies. They no longer get a say in setting their own pay.



Cont ...

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/opinion/pollies-reward-a-gilt-complex/story-fn56baaq-1226154538637




Quote:

Because governments have been gun-shy about raising parliamentary salaries, MPs have been recompensed to some extent in other ways - the provision of taxpayer-funded overseas study tours, for example. The tribunal will probably roll the cost of such perks into the base salary figure. The electorate allowance MPs receive may also be reclassified as salary

Quote:

Introducing legislation to implement the Belcher report's central recommendations back in March, Special Minister of State Gary Gray said: "The current situation has resulted in outcomes on parliamentarians' salaries being determined by political considerations, to the detriment of considered and informed decision-making on appropriate remuneration." Former Howard government minister Bronwyn Bishop, enthusiastically backing the Bill on behalf of the Coalition, told the House: "I have recollections of situations where you could end up as a minister and the secretary of your department was being paid an enormous amount more than you - yet your head was on the line every day."

Armchair_Politician wrote on Oct 1^st, 2011 at 8:51am:

freediver wrote on Oct 1st, 2011 at 8:47am: Australia has one of the most stable governments in the world. ... being lead by one of the most incompetent leaders in the world.

A simlistic, immature, partisan opinion

when you hear what the CEOs of mining companie.s. and Banks in particular get well it makes us look like fools I reckon..

I dont think we get monkeys Abbotts a Rhodes scholer..gillard is a lawyer..its just that politics is different.. trouble with the critics on here they all think they could do better...hummmmmmmmmm.. well nice try, but dont think its that easy to be honest..I agree all the gravy train could do with an overhaul.... super is one thing.. but the gold pass its time that went by the wayside.. if they get a good pay increase.. DERAIL THE GRAVYTRAIN..

if the taxpayer has to fill up their car after retirement.. then they shouldnt have a car..ride a bike.

What are they getting paid for?  The majority of these parasites are only figure heads, and don’t do any of the work themselves - so why the hell should some bludging politician earn $800,000 of tax payer money, when people behind the scenes are doing all the work for $50,000 salaries?

Has anyone in Labor, Greens, Independents, Liberal or Nationals worth an $800,000 salary?

How can any rational person advocate that an opposition politician is worth an $800,000 salary when the only thinks they do is “ASK QUESTIONS”.

Their salaries need to be reduced, not increased.  

culldav wrote on Oct 1^st, 2011 at 9:50am:

What are they getting paid for?  The majority of these parasites are only figure heads, and don’t do any of the work themselves - so why the hell should some bludging politician earn $800,000 of tax payer money, when people behind the scenes are doing all the work for $50,000 salaries? Has anyone in Labor, Greens, Independents, Liberal or Nationals worth an $800,000 salary? How can any rational person advocate that an opposition politician is worth an $800,000 salary when the only thinks they do is “ASK QUESTIONS”. Their salaries need to be reduced, not increased.

what do you really know cullday???.. have you worked there or with a pollie..from where we are sitting it looks easy.. you tell me is a football player worth milllions... and what about basketball players... I mean come on!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This is utterly crazy!

The timing being completely wrong, as both Labor & Liberal Politicians oversee a declining Economy & are set to enforce harder times on most of the Public, by restricting pay increases to less than the real inflation rates or worse still, overseeing the sacking of many Public & Private sector employees.

I have also seen the auguement that says, "if you pay peanuts, then you get monkeys", but frankly even where large remuneration is applied, there are no guarantees of getting any other than monkeys, in either the Public or Private sectors.

In fact, the large remuneration now being paid for Private sector CEO's is often a waste of resources, as the "drovers dog" (Red Dog) could often to just as good a job, if not better!

But, as usual, this may be one of the few things that they (the pollies) will agree on?

I'm sure that Australia's pensioners will lap this up (ha! ha!), as their standard of living is forced lower, because governments will not even allow them to keep up with the real inflation, let alone double their income and many are being forced to delay retirements because of the poor planning of many Politicians & others of TPTB. Mind you, many of those pensioners could probably do a better job than many Politicians, on both sides!

Btw, what happens to the Polly salaries, when the OZ Economy takes a nose dive over the next couple of years? Will the Pollies cut their salaries, as the CEO's should, IF they don't perform?
I think the answer is pretty obvious, on both CEO's & Pollies!

Quote:

I have also seen the auguement that says, "if you pay peanuts, then you get monkeys", but frankly even where large remuneration is applied, there are no guarantees of getting any other than monkeys, in either the Public or Private sectors.

This is true. The only guarantee is that if you pay peanuts, you will get monkeys. So you prefer a bad outcome you can be certain about over a good outcome that is not guaranteed?

How many businesses do you know that underpay executive staff on the off chance they actually perform that bad? What makes you think it is a good idea for running a country?

freediver wrote on Oct 1^st, 2011 at 11:15am:

Quote: I have also seen the auguement that says, "if you pay peanuts, then you get monkeys", but frankly even where large remuneration is applied, there are no guarantees of getting any other than monkeys, in either the Public or Private sectors. This is true. The only guarantee is that if you pay peanuts, you will get monkeys. So you prefer a bad outcome you can be certain about over a good outcome that is not guaranteed? How many businesses do you know that underpay executive staff on the off chance they actually perform that bad? What makes you think it is a good idea for running a country?

As I said, "the large remuneration now being paid for Private sector CEO's is often a waste of resources, as the "drovers dog" (Red Dog) could often to just as good a job, if not better!

In any event, the timing is utterly & inconceiveably wrong, given what the Politicians (on both sides) are going to be enforcing on the Public over the near term future.

Australia is a stable democracy, but I wouldn't push too much, as everything has a breaking point!

Perhaps that is why you will never be a CEO.

freediver wrote on Oct 1^st, 2011 at 11:44am:

Perhaps that is why you will never be a CEO.

Oh dear!

My world is collapsing?

No, forget that, I just remembered I've retired and I have no interest in working, CEO or anything else!

You have a nice day now.

I dont think politicians get paid enough, considering the likes of Des Hasler has been offered 750 grand a year just to coach a football team and the PM doesn't get half that there seems to be a major problem in the way Australians judge those that lead this country.

freediver wrote on Oct 1^st, 2011 at 8:45am:

Would you use a bank where the CEO only got paid $150k? We are basically saying that the competent managers are better off managing about 10000 other Australian companies first and the ones who don't make that cut can run the country. For what they are doing and what they are responsible for, you are paying them peanuts.

the big change was some years back whgen their super perks were removed and they got the standard 9% just like everyone else. this was an effective drop in salary of quite a large amount. At the time, the govt (howard) flagged increasing the base slary to compensate and this hasnt happened yet. $110,000 is anice salary but it is hardly huge especially for the workload and responsibility they carry. If you want superior politicians then you are goig to want to attract people who are already earning far more than that. I thik $250K is perhaps a tad high but not unreasonable. and if the total package is reduced some then probably quite fair.

That sounds reasonable, Longy.

Kat wrote on Oct 1^st, 2011 at 1:50pm:

That sounds reasonable, Longy.

while it is easy to mock pollies, the reaility is that it is a very tough job and we need the very best we can get. and the very best are already earning a lot more than we can offer - ever. BUT if we offer them a DECENT salary they we can attract them. most MPs partners dont work as the life of an MP makes it very hard to run a household as well. there are many many many families with join incomes well above $110K. for a lot of competent people, the current salary isnt just unattractive but below what they need in one-income scenarios.

longweekend58 wrote on Oct 1^st, 2011 at 2:01pm:

Kat wrote on Oct 1st, 2011 at 1:50pm: That sounds reasonable, Longy. while it is easy to mock pollies, the reaility is that it is a very tough job and we need the very best we can get. and the very best are already earning a lot more than we can offer - ever. BUT if we offer them a DECENT salary they we can attract them. most MPs partners dont work as the life of an MP makes it very hard to run a household as well. there are many many many families with join incomes well above $110K. for a lot of competent people, the current salary isnt just unattractive but below what they need in one-income scenarios.

Agreed & desperately so!

It ain't necessarily so! We will never attract those purely ineterested in money, into Politics, as there will be more to be made outside of Politics.

Decent salary's are already on offer & have been for some time and it hasn't attracted decent people, so what makes you think that more money will attract more decent people?


This is not an issue of money, it is an issue of attitude!

perceptions_now wrote on Oct 1^st, 2011 at 3:27pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Oct 1st, 2011 at 2:01pm: Kat wrote on Oct 1st, 2011 at 1:50pm: That sounds reasonable, Longy. while it is easy to mock pollies, the reaility is that it is a very tough job and we need the very best we can get. and the very best are already earning a lot more than we can offer - ever. BUT if we offer them a DECENT salary they we can attract them. most MPs partners dont work as the life of an MP makes it very hard to run a household as well. there are many many many families with join incomes well above $110K. for a lot of competent people, the current salary isnt just unattractive but below what they need in one-income scenarios. Agreed & desperately so! It ain't necessarily so! We will never attract those purely ineterested in money, into Politics, as there will be more to be made outside of Politics. Decent salary's are already on offer & have been for some time and it hasn't attracted decent people, so what makes you think that more money will attract more decent people? This is not an issue of money, it is an issue of attitude!

It is the people calling for paltry wages that have the wrong attitude. One mistake by a pollie can cost the country billions, but you want to save a few hundred thousand on their salary?


Quote:

while it is easy to mock pollies, the reaility is that it is a very tough job and we need the very best we can get. and the very best are already earning a lot more than we can offer - ever. BUT if we offer them a DECENT salary they we can attract them. most MPs partners dont work as the life of an MP makes it very hard to run a household as well. there are many many many families with join incomes well above $110K. for a lot of competent people, the current salary isnt just unattractive but below what they need in one-income scenarios.

I think half a million to a million would be about right. After all, the public servants who these pollies are responsible for are earning over 5 times the sallary of their superiors, and even that does not compete with the private sector.

The politicians do abuse the system in regards to areas in which they don't have to spend money.

I have been in first class twice from London and both times the person near me was a politician.

Wayne Swan flew his entire staff in first class at our expense.

In normal business, the general policy is not higher than business class, why should public sector employees and politicians be any different?

They don't work to the same rules and often few of them have worked outside the public sector so know bugger all about what its like to run a budget.

Give me a politician who does it for the money rather than the love of power any day. You only have to look at PA to see what you get with a poorly paid, power hungry incompetent, feverishly chanting their little soundbites hoping desperately it will resonate with a disinterested public.

At the very least, a competent CEO would not be so worried about losing an election and going back to a million dollar job in the private sector. They would be far less afraid to call it like they see it and get on with the job.

freediver wrote on Oct 1^st, 2011 at 3:46pm:

Give me a politician who does it for the money rather than the love of power any day. You only have to look at PA to see what you get with a poorly paid, power hungry incompetent, feverishly chanting their little soundbites hoping desperately it will resonate with a disinterested public. At the very least, a competent CEO would not be so worried about losing an election and going back to a million dollar job in the private sector. They would be far less afraid to call it like they see it and get on with the job.

agreed. a senior executive with super skills might simply not be able to afford to take a salary paying 1/4 of what he is used to knowing his wife probably couldnt work as well.  We need to double MP salaries. the actual cost to the country is trivial. with one single mistake - a mistake an experienced CEO or executive wouldnt make - an MP can cost the country 1000 times his salary or more.

Bring it on!

longweekend58 wrote on Oct 1^st, 2011 at 4:05pm:

We need to double MP salaries.

And what would you cut to do this?
Increase the national debt?

Bear in mind you already have oppressive levels of taxation on people compared to this country.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Oct 1^st, 2011 at 4:21pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Oct 1st, 2011 at 4:05pm:  We need to double MP salaries. And what would you cut to do this? Increase the national debt? Bear in mind you already have oppressive levels of taxation on people compared to this country.

A) doubling the salraies would cost far less than one tiny worthless govt program. $15M per year. the embarrassingly stupid set-top box program for pensioners which is close to worthless cost $350M
B) our 'oppressive' taxaion is why we have high growth , low unemployment and a a prosperous future while the two countries you admire so much have massive debt, high unemployment and teetering on yet another long deep recession. IN any reasonable debat that wuld show the australian way is the correct way and the USA/UK way clearly the wrong one.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Oct 1^st, 2011 at 4:21pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Oct 1st, 2011 at 4:05pm:  We need to double MP salaries. And what would you cut to do this? Increase the national debt? Bear in mind you already have oppressive levels of taxation on people compared to this country.

It would probably save money. The money involved in doubling salaries is insignificant compared to the amount of money at stake and the cost of any mistakes they make. For example, how much do you think the failed Malaysia bid cost? Probably enough to double every federal politicians salary for ten years.

freediver wrote on Oct 1^st, 2011 at 5:48pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Oct 1st, 2011 at 4:21pm: longweekend58 wrote on Oct 1st, 2011 at 4:05pm:  We need to double MP salaries. And what would you cut to do this? Increase the national debt? Bear in mind you already have oppressive levels of taxation on people compared to this country. It would probably save money. The money involved in doubling salaries is insignificant compared to the amount of money at stake and the cost of any mistakes they make. For example, how much do you think the failed Malaysia bid cost? Probably enough to double every federal politicians salary for ten years.

and a half-intelligent or experienced Cabinet would never have tried such a dumb stunt.

longweekend58 wrote on Oct 1^st, 2011 at 4:05pm:

freediver wrote on Oct 1st, 2011 at 3:46pm: Give me a politician who does it for the money rather than the love of power any day. You only have to look at PA to see what you get with a poorly paid, power hungry incompetent, feverishly chanting their little soundbites hoping desperately it will resonate with a disinterested public. At the very least, a competent CEO would not be so worried about losing an election and going back to a million dollar job in the private sector. They would be far less afraid to call it like they see it and get on with the job. agreed. a senior executive with super skills might simply not be able to afford to take a salary paying 1/4 of what he is used to knowing his wife probably couldnt work as well.  We need to double MP salaries. the actual cost to the country is trivial. with one single mistake - a mistake an experienced CEO or executive wouldnt make - an MP can cost the country 1000 times his salary or more. Bring it on!

Your opinion of CEO's is not backed up by the many company bankruptcies and businesses that have been bailed out by the Public purse, including a close relative of a former OZ PM.

Whether they be former Trade Unionists, OR former private sector CEO's, they all make mistakes, some more than others and almost all are afflicted with a background of baggage, which says the status quo must continue, when the reality is that it can not, so decisions are simply being taken based on incorrect assumptions!  



I agree, the wrong people in government (from both major party's), can be very costly, as we are now in the process of finding out, unyet we keep making the same assumptions & errors!

perceptions_now wrote on Oct 1^st, 2011 at 6:35pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Oct 1st, 2011 at 4:05pm: freediver wrote on Oct 1st, 2011 at 3:46pm: Give me a politician who does it for the money rather than the love of power any day. You only have to look at PA to see what you get with a poorly paid, power hungry incompetent, feverishly chanting their little soundbites hoping desperately it will resonate with a disinterested public. At the very least, a competent CEO would not be so worried about losing an election and going back to a million dollar job in the private sector. They would be far less afraid to call it like they see it and get on with the job. agreed. a senior executive with super skills might simply not be able to afford to take a salary paying 1/4 of what he is used to knowing his wife probably couldnt work as well.  We need to double MP salaries. the actual cost to the country is trivial. with one single mistake - a mistake an experienced CEO or executive wouldnt make - an MP can cost the country 1000 times his salary or more. Bring it on! Your opinion of CEO's is not backed up by the many company bankruptcies and businesses that have been bailed out by the Public purse, including a close relative of a former OZ PM. Whether they be former Trade Unionists, OR former private sector CEO's, they all make mistakes, some more than others and almost all are afflicted with a background of baggage, which says the status quo must continue, when the reality is that it can not, so decisions are simply being taken based on incorrect assumptions!   I agree, the wrong people in government (from both major party's), can be very costly, as we are now in the process of finding out, unyet we keep making the same assumptions & errors!

your opinion of CEOs is nor supported by the vast majority that run their companeis very well and make good profits for them. you only hear of the failures. the healthy ones rarely make the media.

longweekend58 wrote on Oct 1^st, 2011 at 6:40pm:

perceptions_now wrote on Oct 1st, 2011 at 6:35pm: longweekend58 wrote on Oct 1st, 2011 at 4:05pm: freediver wrote on Oct 1st, 2011 at 3:46pm: Give me a politician who does it for the money rather than the love of power any day. You only have to look at PA to see what you get with a poorly paid, power hungry incompetent, feverishly chanting their little soundbites hoping desperately it will resonate with a disinterested public. At the very least, a competent CEO would not be so worried about losing an election and going back to a million dollar job in the private sector. They would be far less afraid to call it like they see it and get on with the job. agreed. a senior executive with super skills might simply not be able to afford to take a salary paying 1/4 of what he is used to knowing his wife probably couldnt work as well.  We need to double MP salaries. the actual cost to the country is trivial. with one single mistake - a mistake an experienced CEO or executive wouldnt make - an MP can cost the country 1000 times his salary or more. Bring it on! Your opinion of CEO's is not backed up by the many company bankruptcies and businesses that have been bailed out by the Public purse, including a close relative of a former OZ PM. Whether they be former Trade Unionists, OR former private sector CEO's, they all make mistakes, some more than others and almost all are afflicted with a background of baggage, which says the status quo must continue, when the reality is that it can not, so decisions are simply being taken based on incorrect assumptions!   I agree, the wrong people in government (from both major party's), can be very costly, as we are now in the process of finding out, unyet we keep making the same assumptions & errors! your opinion of CEOs is nor supported by the vast majority that run their companeis very well and make good profits for them. you only hear of the failures. the healthy ones rarely make the media.

You are entitled to your opinion LW! Even if YOU ARE WRONG!

That's the free speech you need to defend!

That said, your opinion is based on a past way of life, which many of TPTB wish to retain and that will simply not be possible, for a number of reasons and therefore CEO's, Politicians & people like yourself will continue to make incorrect decisions based on a past, which is now all but extinct.

Anyhow, good luck with what you want, but just don't expect the fairy tales to come true, as the "exponential Growth Fairy is Dead" and it will not rise again, at least not in our life times!

perceptions_now wrote on Oct 1^st, 2011 at 6:53pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Oct 1st, 2011 at 6:40pm: perceptions_now wrote on Oct 1st, 2011 at 6:35pm: longweekend58 wrote on Oct 1st, 2011 at 4:05pm: freediver wrote on Oct 1st, 2011 at 3:46pm: Give me a politician who does it for the money rather than the love of power any day. You only have to look at PA to see what you get with a poorly paid, power hungry incompetent, feverishly chanting their little soundbites hoping desperately it will resonate with a disinterested public. At the very least, a competent CEO would not be so worried about losing an election and going back to a million dollar job in the private sector. They would be far less afraid to call it like they see it and get on with the job. agreed. a senior executive with super skills might simply not be able to afford to take a salary paying 1/4 of what he is used to knowing his wife probably couldnt work as well.  We need to double MP salaries. the actual cost to the country is trivial. with one single mistake - a mistake an experienced CEO or executive wouldnt make - an MP can cost the country 1000 times his salary or more. Bring it on! Your opinion of CEO's is not backed up by the many company bankruptcies and businesses that have been bailed out by the Public purse, including a close relative of a former OZ PM. Whether they be former Trade Unionists, OR former private sector CEO's, they all make mistakes, some more than others and almost all are afflicted with a background of baggage, which says the status quo must continue, when the reality is that it can not, so decisions are simply being taken based on incorrect assumptions!   I agree, the wrong people in government (from both major party's), can be very costly, as we are now in the process of finding out, unyet we keep making the same assumptions & errors! your opinion of CEOs is nor supported by the vast majority that run their companeis very well and make good profits for them. you only hear of the failures. the healthy ones rarely make the media. You are entitled to your opinion LW! Even if YOU ARE WRONG! That's the free speech you need to defend! That said, your opinion is based on a past way of life, which many of TPTB wish to retain and that will simply not be possible, for a number of reasons and therefore CEO's, Politicians & people like yourself will continue to make incorrect decisions based on a past, which is now all but extinct. Anyhow, good luck with what you want, but just don't expect the fairy tales to come true, as the "exponential Growth Fairy is Dead" and it will not rise again, at least not in our life times!

your answer to everything pinhead is 'it has all changed' which despite the fact that it hasnt is a pointless response because if it truly HAS all changed then you dont have any more idea than anyone else.

and as I look around me I see a world economy that is stressed. hmmm how many times have I seen that inthe past 50 years? only about 20 times. and yet capitalism seems to emerge from every struggle. you predicted the GFC would destroy the worlds economy and you were wrong. youve been wrong on well, pretty much everything so I can confidently say when you make a prediction that truth is to be found 180 degrees from your direction.

If a company goes bankrupt it says nothing about CEOs in general. It just means that one CEO helped one company drive another company out of business.

What is it with the doom and gloom brigade on here?

With the racists you can assume they've copped a smack at some time from one or more of our more swarthy brothers (or sisters), but what's the go with the doom and gloom brigade?

A black eye heals. A bad credit record is with you for life.

By the "doom and gloom brigade" I was referring to perceptions, equatist, pansi, bobby, nails et al.

I was referring to the fact that in the long run bank balances can hurt people a lot more than fisticuffs. If it were otherwise, we wouldn't spend so much of our lives trying to earn money. That is why people can easily develop a grudge against big earners, especially if the media starts to blame them for some poor bloke's home loan being called in.

longweekend58 wrote on Oct 1^st, 2011 at 7:00pm:

perceptions_now wrote on Oct 1st, 2011 at 6:53pm: longweekend58 wrote on Oct 1st, 2011 at 6:40pm: perceptions_now wrote on Oct 1st, 2011 at 6:35pm: longweekend58 wrote on Oct 1st, 2011 at 4:05pm: freediver wrote on Oct 1st, 2011 at 3:46pm: Give me a politician who does it for the money rather than the love of power any day. You only have to look at PA to see what you get with a poorly paid, power hungry incompetent, feverishly chanting their little soundbites hoping desperately it will resonate with a disinterested public. At the very least, a competent CEO would not be so worried about losing an election and going back to a million dollar job in the private sector. They would be far less afraid to call it like they see it and get on with the job. agreed. a senior executive with super skills might simply not be able to afford to take a salary paying 1/4 of what he is used to knowing his wife probably couldnt work as well.  We need to double MP salaries. the actual cost to the country is trivial. with one single mistake - a mistake an experienced CEO or executive wouldnt make - an MP can cost the country 1000 times his salary or more. Bring it on! Your opinion of CEO's is not backed up by the many company bankruptcies and businesses that have been bailed out by the Public purse, including a close relative of a former OZ PM. Whether they be former Trade Unionists, OR former private sector CEO's, they all make mistakes, some more than others and almost all are afflicted with a background of baggage, which says the status quo must continue, when the reality is that it can not, so decisions are simply being taken based on incorrect assumptions!   I agree, the wrong people in government (from both major party's), can be very costly, as we are now in the process of finding out, unyet we keep making the same assumptions & errors! your opinion of CEOs is nor supported by the vast majority that run their companeis very well and make good profits for them. you only hear of the failures. the healthy ones rarely make the media. You are entitled to your opinion LW! Even if YOU ARE WRONG! That's the free speech you need to defend! That said, your opinion is based on a past way of life, which many of TPTB wish to retain and that will simply not be possible, for a number of reasons and therefore CEO's, Politicians & people like yourself will continue to make incorrect decisions based on a past, which is now all but extinct. Anyhow, good luck with what you want, but just don't expect the fairy tales to come true, as the "exponential Growth Fairy is Dead" and it will not rise again, at least not in our life times! your answer to everything pinhead is 'it has all changed' which despite the fact that it hasnt is a pointless response because if it truly HAS all changed then you dont have any more idea than anyone else. and as I look around me I see a world economy that is stressed. hmmm how many times have I seen that inthe past 50 years? only about 20 times. and yet capitalism seems to emerge from every struggle. you predicted the GFC would destroy the worlds economy and you were wrong. youve been wrong on well, pretty much everything so I can confidently say when you make a prediction that truth is to be found 180 degrees from your direction.

Well LW, let's just wait & see, as I've said even you you start to get the idea what's happening, by around the end of 2012?

But, in the mean time, you may want to consider how many once in history events are now driving Global Economics?

That is, if you can pull your head out of the past, long enough and you have any idea what is actually driving the Global Economy?

perceptions_now wrote on Oct 1^st, 2011 at 10:18pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Oct 1st, 2011 at 7:00pm: perceptions_now wrote on Oct 1st, 2011 at 6:53pm: longweekend58 wrote on Oct 1st, 2011 at 6:40pm: perceptions_now wrote on Oct 1st, 2011 at 6:35pm: longweekend58 wrote on Oct 1st, 2011 at 4:05pm: freediver wrote on Oct 1st, 2011 at 3:46pm: Give me a politician who does it for the money rather than the love of power any day. You only have to look at PA to see what you get with a poorly paid, power hungry incompetent, feverishly chanting their little soundbites hoping desperately it will resonate with a disinterested public. At the very least, a competent CEO would not be so worried about losing an election and going back to a million dollar job in the private sector. They would be far less afraid to call it like they see it and get on with the job. agreed. a senior executive with super skills might simply not be able to afford to take a salary paying 1/4 of what he is used to knowing his wife probably couldnt work as well.  We need to double MP salaries. the actual cost to the country is trivial. with one single mistake - a mistake an experienced CEO or executive wouldnt make - an MP can cost the country 1000 times his salary or more. Bring it on! Your opinion of CEO's is not backed up by the many company bankruptcies and businesses that have been bailed out by the Public purse, including a close relative of a former OZ PM. Whether they be former Trade Unionists, OR former private sector CEO's, they all make mistakes, some more than others and almost all are afflicted with a background of baggage, which says the status quo must continue, when the reality is that it can not, so decisions are simply being taken based on incorrect assumptions!   I agree, the wrong people in government (from both major party's), can be very costly, as we are now in the process of finding out, unyet we keep making the same assumptions & errors! your opinion of CEOs is nor supported by the vast majority that run their companeis very well and make good profits for them. you only hear of the failures. the healthy ones rarely make the media. You are entitled to your opinion LW! Even if YOU ARE WRONG! That's the free speech you need to defend! That said, your opinion is based on a past way of life, which many of TPTB wish to retain and that will simply not be possible, for a number of reasons and therefore CEO's, Politicians & people like yourself will continue to make incorrect decisions based on a past, which is now all but extinct. Anyhow, good luck with what you want, but just don't expect the fairy tales to come true, as the "exponential Growth Fairy is Dead" and it will not rise again, at least not in our life times! your answer to everything pinhead is 'it has all changed' which despite the fact that it hasnt is a pointless response because if it truly HAS all changed then you dont have any more idea than anyone else. and as I look around me I see a world economy that is stressed. hmmm how many times have I seen that inthe past 50 years? only about 20 times. and yet capitalism seems to emerge from every struggle. you predicted the GFC would destroy the worlds economy and you were wrong. youve been wrong on well, pretty much everything so I can confidently say when you make a prediction that truth is to be found 180 degrees from your direction. Well LW, let's just wait & see, as I've said even you you start to get the idea what's happening, by around the end of 2012? But, in the mean time, you may want to consider how many once in history events are now driving Global Economics? That is, if you can pull your head out of the past, long enough and you have any idea what is actually driving the Global Economy?

Let me give you a helping hand start LW, with the following chart, because it is apparent that you struggle a little with newer concepts.
It seems that anything past the Fonz era seems to give you some difficulties.

http://www.theoildrum.com/files/global_production.png

What this chart says, is that Global oil production (crude + condensate + natural gas liquids) has been on an 82 million barrel per day plateau for 7 years, despite record high oil price, the deployment of new technologies and the supposed big new Oil Fields that have been discovered.
Wasn't Price meant to be the great Capitalist equaliser? Doesn't higher Price lead to more exploration and higher production?
The Truth is, there's only a limited amount of this "black gold" and the Global Demand is now exceeding our capacity to Supply, leaving a few likely, but unpalatable outcomes.

What is also says, is that Production of the worlds largest Energy sources (fossil fuels) are set to go into terminal decline, as existing fields go into depletion.

Now, the decline of the premier world Energy source is not something that happens to often and in fact, it has never happened, in a world of 7 Biilion humans, which COULD set you to thinking about another extraordinary set of events that are influencing Global Economics?

Author on Outlook for "The Great Crash Ahead"

Sept. 30 (Bloomberg) -- Harry Dent, founder of economic advisory firm HS Dent and author of "The Great Crash Ahead," talks about the outlook for the U.S. economy.

Embedded video -
http://www.bloomberg.com/video/76381224/
====================================
This may give you some hints on one of the other influencing factors?

That said, this guy falls into the one trick pony brigade and there isn't just one cause, there are a few!

With longweekends usual responses I got to wondering why many people are ignoring the looming financial meltdown. This response from some American blog is interesting. It seems people are only too ready to accept what the popular media tell them.
..................................................................

Despite a deepening global depression, Washington, Wall Street and America's media remain largely in denial, for how much longer isn't certain as hard times get tougher for growing millions worldwide.

Tough enough, in fact, for angry demonstrators to strike and protest austerity measures across Europe in Greece, Spain, Ireland, Portugal, Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Georgia, and elsewhere, as well as others scattered across America against budget cuts, tax and tuition hikes, and layoffs when workers more than ever need jobs.

Trends expert Gerald Celente calls it "the greatest depression," warning months ago that when anger erupts, unrest will cause governments to "take draconian measures to prevent total economic collapse and panic." Nonetheless, he expects massive bank failures, bank runs, and a bank holiday, preventing easy access to deposits as dire conditions worsen.

On June 14, his latest trends alert headlined, "Collapse: It's Coming! Are You Ready? saying:

"Everything is not all right. And things are going to get worse....much worse. The economy is on the threshold of calamity. Wars are spreading like wildfires. The world is on a razor's edge," cutting deeply, causing pain, and getting growing, angry responses.

Instead of addressing problems responsibly, Western policies are worsening them economically, politically, socially and militarily by allying with America's imperial war agenda, wrecking the world to save it.

As a result, resolving today's greatest depression is further than ever removed, no matter how intensely politicians and media sources deny it. Three and a half years into an economic meltdown, their excuses long ago wore thin, including Obama just saying:

"I wish I could tell you there was a quick fix to our economic problems. But the truth is, we didn't get into this mess overnight, and we won't get out of it overnight."

In fact, getting out of it isn't possible when policies on his watch are wrecking, not fixing, the economy. Moreover, Celente expects continued bipartisan failures ahead. With "Beltway Incompetents" in charge, who can believe politicians or central bankers responsible for wrecking economies, officials concerned only for their own self-interest, bankers, and other corporate favorites they support.

The business of America is pillaging for wealth and power, waging a discredited war on drugs, as well as lawless imperial ones against Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Libya, Yemen, and planning others on unnamed enemies, requiring little insight to imagine which ones, enough to feed America's insatiable appetite for belligerence.

No matter what justifications are given, Celente calls all US wars "murderous, immoral, (illegal), interminable, ruinously expensive and abject failures." As a result, who can "believe the optimistic battle communiques issued by the (paid to lie) 'czars' in charge and (echo chamber) battlefield brass who keep reassuring the public that" repeating failed strategies this time will work?

No wonder a June 8 CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll found 48% of Americans believing another Great Depression is imminent despite political rhetoric and media reports at most saying the economy hit a soft spot. The survey also learned that nearly half of respondents live in households in which someone is unemployed or worries they will be soon given how dire they view conditions.

It's a long article:

http://newamerica-now.blogspot.com/2011/06/dismissively-ignoring-hard-times.html

At the risk of over exposing the optimists to some expert opinion I will post this article. There are plenty of similar ones on the www if you get your head out of the sand long enough to do a search longweekend. Believe it or not.
...........................................................................

Economists: Another Financial Crisis on the Way

Even as many Americans still struggle to recover from the country's worst economic downturn since the Great Depression, another crisis – one that will be even worse than the current one – is looming, according to a new report from a group of leading economists, financiers, and former federal regulators.

In the report, the panel, which includes Rob Johnson of the United Nations Commission of Experts on Finance and bailout watchdog Elizabeth Warren, warns that financial regulatory reform measures proposed by the Obama administration and Congress must be beefed up to prevent banks from continuing to engage in high-risk investing that precipitated the near-collapse of the U.S. economy in 2008.

The report warns that the country is now immersed in a "doomsday cycle" wherein banks use borrowed money to take massive risks in an attempt to pay big dividends to shareholders and big bonuses to management – and when the risks go wrong, the banks receive taxpayer bailouts from the government.

"Risk-taking at banks," the report cautions, "will soon be larger than ever."

Without more stringent reforms, "another crisis – a bigger crisis that weakens both our financial sector and our larger economy – is more than predictable, it is inevitable," Johnson says in the report, commissioned by the nonpartisan Roosevelt Institute.

The institute's chief economist, Nobel Prize-winner Joseph Stiglitz, calls the report "an important point of departure for a debate on where we are on the road to regulatory reform."

The report blasts some of Washington's key players. Johnson writes, "Our government leaders have shown little capacity to fix the flaws in our market system." Two other panelists, Simon Johnson, a professor at MIT, and Peter Boone of the Centre for Economic Performance, voiced similar criticisms.

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke and Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner "oversaw policy as the bubble was inflating," write Johnson and Boone, and "these same men are now designing our 'rescue.'"

The study says that "In 2008-09, we came remarkably close to another Great Depression. Next time we may not be so 'lucky.' The threat of the doomsday cycle remains strong and growing," they say. "What will happen when the next shock hits? We may be nearing the stage where the answer will be – just as it was in the Great Depression – a calamitous global collapse."

The panelists call for major banks to maintain liquid capital of at least 15 to 25 percent of their assets, the enactment of stiffer consequences for executives of bailout recipients and for government officials to start breaking up firms that grow too big.

In the report, Elizabeth Warren, who was chair of the Congressional Oversight Panel, reiterates her calls for an independent agency to protect consumers from abusive Wall Street practices.

"While manufacturers have developed iPods and flat-screen televisions, the financial industry has perfected the art of offering mortgages, credit cards and check overdrafts laden with hidden terms that obscure price and risk," Warren writes. "Good products are mixed with dangerous products, and consumers are left on their own to try to sort out which is which. The consequences can be disastrous."

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/economists-warn-financial-us-economy/story?id=9990828

Life_goes_on wrote on Oct 1^st, 2011 at 9:33pm:

By the "doom and gloom brigade" I was referring to perceptions, equatist, pansi, bobby, nails et al.

You call it 'doom and gloom', I call it keeping your eyes on the ball. Do you know about the debt level in the western world? If it is unable to be paid, what will the consequences be? any ideas? or are you denying the debt in the first place? maybe you see it as a piddly little debt that can be paid back by next year, much like Swan with the deficit.

Discuss.

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Oct 2^nd, 2011 at 7:20am:

Life_goes_on wrote on Oct 1st, 2011 at 9:33pm: By the "doom and gloom brigade" I was referring to perceptions, equatist, pansi, bobby, nails et al. You call it 'doom and gloom', I call it keeping your eyes on the ball. Do you know about the debt level in the western world? If it is unable to be paid, what will the consequences be? any ideas? or are you denying the debt in the first place? maybe you see it as a piddly little debt that can be paid back by next year, much like Swan with the deficit. Discuss.

pansi you have a greater understanding of all this.... but why cant they just wipe the slate clean.. and start over???????

I mean where does all this credit/money come from in the first place..??

I am begining to wonder if there is such a thing as a well managed country to be honest..

as for Greece isnt it time the good folk over there came to the conclusion that their govt cannot change their position unless they change their BAD WAYS..and that mean everyone not just the govt..sheeeez it aint rocket science......or is it?

Imagine the repercussions if all the banks were to close on the same day, it would not be pretty. Anyway there's not much we the people can do about it, it's far too late now, and I don't think that whatever route the governments took/take to block it would have made much difference.

Most people agree that Roosevelts stimulus packages (New Deals)eased the Great Depression if nothing else, so by following the same path maybe it will lessen the impact this time too. Who knows? One thing for sure, fiat money ended up being a disaster.

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Oct 2^nd, 2011 at 8:23am:

Imagine the repercussions if all the banks were to close on the same day, it would not be pretty. Anyway there's not much we the people can do about it, it's far too late now, and I don't think that whatever route the governments took/take to block it would have made much difference. Most people agree that Roosevelts stimulus packages (New Deals)eased the Great Depression if nothing else, so by following the same path maybe it will lessen the impact this time too. Who knows? One thing for sure, fiat money ended up being a disaster.

pansi! people dont spend money on necessities...these days.. its all must haves.. they dont save a for a rainy day...because the big fat pay packet will cover that unexpected bill..[car break down]..and if it doesnt doesnt everyone have a credit card??.. another must have!!..

the biggest enemy today is the credit card... we never had them and never had the debt like they have today.. just kids out of school are running up debts on these thing.s..maybe the world money people should put a big ban on them for starters... cant pay cash... cany have it!! pretty simple.

when I think of THOMO spending up big on brothels..grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

and he wouldnt be alone would he???????????????????

cods wrote on Oct 1^st, 2011 at 9:53am:

culldav wrote on Oct 1st, 2011 at 9:50am: What are they getting paid for?  The majority of these parasites are only figure heads, and don’t do any of the work themselves - so why the hell should some bludging politician earn $800,000 of tax payer money, when people behind the scenes are doing all the work for $50,000 salaries? Has anyone in Labor, Greens, Independents, Liberal or Nationals worth an $800,000 salary? How can any rational person advocate that an opposition politician is worth an $800,000 salary when the only thinks they do is “ASK QUESTIONS”. Their salaries need to be reduced, not increased.   what do you really know cullday???.. have you worked there or with a pollie..from where we are sitting it looks easy.. you tell me is a football player worth milllions... and what about basketball players... I mean come on!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Politicians do nothing except read and rehearse the reports their staff research and prepare for them.  They simply get paid their massive salaries for being “talking heads” and I don’t think that good enough in this day and age.  Them not being involved in the process also represents why “SO MANY” politicians are “SO” out of touch with what’s happening in the Australian community.  

We have Education Ministers and opposition education ministers who don’t have any qualifications in “BEING” an education minister, and the same can be said for all the other portfolios.

Seriously, who in the private sector would employ an individual without any qualifications or education in a specific job they want filled?  

This is what’s happening in the Australian Government ALL THE TIME, and when something goes wrong, you people start criticising and running around like chickens with your heads cut off.  Well, maybe its time you started to wake up to what’s happening before you vote these unqualified people into Parliament and give them Ministerial positions.    

Remember 98% of them are solicitors…

Quote:

Imagine the repercussions if all the banks were to close on the same day

You mean like today?


Quote:

Politicians do nothing except read and rehearse the reports their staff research and prepare for them.

Not really. This just reinforces the point that those calling for lower politicians salaries do so out of ignorance of what politicians need to do.


Quote:

They simply get paid their massive salaries for being “talking heads”

It is not a massive salary. You do not have to get very far in the private sector to earn the same.


Quote:

We have Education Ministers and opposition education ministers who don’t have any qualifications in “BEING” an education minister

What are the qualifications?


Quote:

Remember 98% of them are solicitors…

And this is the wrong qualification to have for writing legislation?

Imagine the repercussions if all the banks were to close on the same day


You mean like today?

They're not closed today. I'm sure the ATM's are in full service as usual and internet banking is a 24/7 event.

I meant closed like Roosevelt closed them for a week in the first depression. Closed until further notice, meaning no transactions at all = chaos and mayhem.......want money, can't get  :(

I find it both very poor and appalling though Pansi that you take pleasure in others' misfortune and actually WANT economies to fail.

Think of all the families and mortgages that will go under, and you think that's funny.

You and Lastnail need to take a good look at yourself as to taking pleasure in that possibility.

culldav wrote on Oct 2^nd, 2011 at 10:14am:

cods wrote on Oct 1st, 2011 at 9:53am: culldav wrote on Oct 1st, 2011 at 9:50am: What are they getting paid for?  The majority of these parasites are only figure heads, and don’t do any of the work themselves - so why the hell should some bludging politician earn $800,000 of tax payer money, when people behind the scenes are doing all the work for $50,000 salaries? Has anyone in Labor, Greens, Independents, Liberal or Nationals worth an $800,000 salary? How can any rational person advocate that an opposition politician is worth an $800,000 salary when the only thinks they do is “ASK QUESTIONS”. Their salaries need to be reduced, not increased.   what do you really know cullday???.. have you worked there or with a pollie..from where we are sitting it looks easy.. you tell me is a football player worth milllions... and what about basketball players... I mean come on!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Politicians do nothing except read and rehearse the reports their staff research and prepare for them.  They simply get paid their massive salaries for being “talking heads” and I don’t think that good enough in this day and age.  Them not being involved in the process also represents why “SO MANY” politicians are “SO” out of touch with what’s happening in the Australian community.   We have Education Ministers and opposition education ministers who don’t have any qualifications in “BEING” an education minister, and the same can be said for all the other portfolios. Seriously, who in the private sector would employ an individual without any qualifications or education in a specific job they want filled?   This is what’s happening in the Australian Government ALL THE TIME, and when something goes wrong, you people start criticising and running around like chickens with your heads cut off.  Well, maybe its time you started to wake up to what’s happening before you vote these unqualified people into Parliament and give them Ministerial positions.     Remember 98% of them are solicitors…

but they do make the final decision they do have to TRY at least to make the right one at the right time.. as they do have to live with it..

like the decision to assassinate rudd......wrong call but they made it they have to live with it..

we dont like it.. and we have a right to say so at the next election.. I am sure one or two independents are asking themselves what did we do???


I dont know about you but I couldnt run BHP.. or .. Westpak... or run the govt...but I do like to think  they have a duty to perform for this country therefore also myself..

we need sensible confident people to run the show..even CEOs have backroom boys to do the dirty work..

freediver wrote on Oct 1^st, 2011 at 8:39am:

Sounds good to me. Pay peanuts, get monkeys.

The problem is that we already have the monkeys; they just got a substantial increase in peanuts.

freediver wrote on Oct 1^st, 2011 at 8:49am:

BigOl64 wrote on Oct 1st, 2011 at 8:46am: freediver wrote on Oct 1st, 2011 at 8:39am: Sounds good to me. Pay peanuts, get monkeys. But we pay top dollar and still get monkeys. No-one else gets to 'retire' on a multi million dollar 'retirement' package after only 9 years of service. The taxpayer has to do at least 10 years just to get 3 months long service. Pay them on performance, they have to prove to an independant body of taxpayers on how they deserve a pay rise. That's how it works in the real world. They do not deserve their taxpayer funded super and they can beg for pay rises just like the rest of us. What other jobs do you know of where people get paid peanuts then at the end of the year they have to argue with a bunch of people who are ignorant of their role in order to get a salary that matches the job?

Ever worked in sales? ;D

buzzanddidj wrote on Oct 1^st, 2011 at 9:31am:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Oct 1st, 2011 at 8:51am: freediver wrote on Oct 1st, 2011 at 8:47am: Australia has one of the most stable governments in the world. ... being lead by one of the most incompetent leaders in the world. A simlistic, immature, partisan opinion

One that approximately 73% of the population currently agrees with.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Oct 2^nd, 2011 at 2:12pm:

I find it both very poor and appalling though Pansi that you take pleasure in others' misfortune and actually WANT economies to fail. Think of all the families and mortgages that will go under, and you think that's funny. You and Lastnail need to take a good look at yourself as to taking pleasure in that possibility.

I didn't cause it and I refuse to take the blame.

I am one of the 99% as you are andrei.

The 1% are to blame and the 1% are laughing at you.

Obviously many people have not seen these politicians at their place of employment - during question time, or answering questions by the media and the public, when these so-called adults turn into a bunch of screaming name calling children who refuse to answer the questions that are asked of them.

When we see these current batch of politicians act like immature children, the question has to raised, is this the best group people we can find from Australian society to represent all Australians to be Prime Minister of this country and to act as Ministers in senior portfolios in this country?

I personally believe it comes down to qualifications, and right now we have a Prime Minister and Ministers in senior portfolios who have NO qualification to be these senior Ministers.

What qualifications does Gillard have to be PM of Australia and run a $trillion economy besides being a solicitor…LOL  LOL

You need to answer this question yourselves; would you hire someone to do a job if they didn’t have any qualifications or knowledge to do the job?

This is what Australians are doing at every election by voting in unqualified people to senior Ministerial positions, and Australians are wondering why their medical, and school systems have been stagnant and decaying for decades.

No wonder Australia is losing out to the rest of the world, we don’t have educated or qualified people to take over these senior government portfolios.