Good luck Australia, hope you get the politicians you deserve

____ wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 4:04pm:

Good luck Australia, hope you get the politicians you deserve

Unfortunately, the best are retiring.

In other news, share market up 10000 points.  Ey, longie? ;D

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 4:11pm:

In other news, share market up 10000 points.  Ey, longie? ;D

indecision gone. now is time for an ACTUAL DECISION and one in which Rudd will play little part.

I am tipping a 53/47 victory to Coalition.

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 4:15pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:11pm: In other news, share market up 10000 points.  Ey, longie? ;D indecision gone. now is time for an ACTUAL DECISION and one in which Rudd will play little part. I am tipping a 53/47 victory to Coalition.

Lets keep this as an election thread of tips, so we can go back and poke sticks at longlyingfool and laugh at his outrageous predictions.
My prediction is a very close election, could go either way but if the polls are correct another hung parliament and given Abbott is a shithouse negotiator another three years of a Labor government.

I'm off to buy a bio-suit as protection against the bullshyt that's
now bound to increase in both volume and stench.

If the polls are correct it will be tight. Various poll numbers range from 50/50 to 51/49 etc. The choice for the punters will be who not to vote for or which party will cause the least amount of damage to Australia.

Interesting times ahead.

salad in wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 4:20pm:

If the polls are correct it will be tight. Various poll numbers range from 50/50 to 51/49 etc. The choice for the punters will be who not to vote for or which party will cause the least amount of damage to Australia. Interesting times ahead.

The fact the polls are already 50/50 is interesting given in an election campaign they get even tighter. Australia has a history of  close elections, longwhinyfool calling -53/47 just shows why longwhinyfool is a suitable nick for him.
I doubt we will se a poll over the next five weeks more than two points difference. The voters have to get serious now and so all the huffing and puffing saying they will support phoney Tony that has gone on in the past three years will evaporate as has been evident since Rudds return.
Another hung parliament is the most likly scenario, which means another three years of a minority Labor government given the GREENS and independents will support Labor over phoney Tony. Katter has already gone on record saying he will back Rudd if a hung parliament occurs and Wilkie would be unlikely to support phony Tony too. This will probably all end in tears for the conga line. ;D

salad in wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 4:20pm:

... The choice for the punters will be who not to vote for ...

On the Left, I hear worrying numbers saying they intend to vote informal; in the Rep's, at least. The Right seem to think the sun shines out of Abbott's arse.

The Coalition could win by default.

Whoever wins, the Senate will probably be hostile. The worst result would be for any block to hold a majority in both houses.

Christine Milne: Tony Abbott has chosen to jeopardise the future of children - video

http://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2013/jun/05/election-milne-greens-video

skippy. wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 4:33pm:

salad in wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:20pm: If the polls are correct it will be tight. Various poll numbers range from 50/50 to 51/49 etc. The choice for the punters will be who not to vote for or which party will cause the least amount of damage to Australia. Interesting times ahead. The fact the polls are already 50/50 is interesting given in an election campaign they get even tighter. Australia has a history of  close elections, longwhinyfool calling -53/47 just shows why longwhinyfool is a suitable nick for him. I doubt we will se a poll over the next five weeks more than two points difference. The voters have to get serious now and so all the huffing and puffing saying they will support phoney Tony that has gone on in the past three years will evaporate as has been evident since Rudds return. Another hung parliament is the most likly scenario, which means another three years of a minority Labor government given the GREENS and independents will support Labor over phoney Tony. Katter has already gone on record saying he will back Rudd if a hung parliament occurs and Wilkie would be unlikely to support phony Tony too. This will probably all end in tears for the conga line. ;D

history of close election????  precisely TWO minority govts in 112 years???

There's not much you know of political history, is there?

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 4:15pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:11pm: In other news, share market up 10000 points.  Ey, longie? ;D indecision gone. now is time for an ACTUAL DECISION and one in which Rudd will play little part. I am tipping a 53/47 victory to Coalition.

We will see.  I doubt very much 53/47.  Maybe 51/49, 52/48 at the highest possible.  And then when the wanker gets in and realises leprauchans don't exist and money doesn't grown on trees perhaps he will just slide away into oblivion and let people with brains lead.

And I'm just glad the share market has gone up 10000000 points in the last 40 mins.

the next couple weeks will see where the election is trending.  Since Rudd's return the polls have been all over the place with Rudd in the honeymoon period.  But now the poll questions carries a lot more weight and the answers given more likely to be genuine.

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 4:36pm:

... There's not much you know of political history, is there?

Are you trolling again?

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 4:38pm:

the next couple weeks will see where the election is trending.  Since Rudd's return the polls have been all over the place with Rudd in the honeymoon period.  But now the poll questions carries a lot more weight and the answers given more likely to be genuine.

Do you think tony will now explain how hr will cut spending?  Or will we learn on the 8th?  Going by what you say, it should be very easy for tony to cut spending.  But no one can explain what his cuts will be?

There will need to be significant cuts in the budget.

Did you sleep through that mini budget from this week?

Their much vaunted surplus for 2013/14 has been turned into a $33 bn DEFICIT!!!

The Australian economy since 2007 has been run into the ground and is now in awful condition of debt and deficits.

Public spending needs to be cut, foreign aid needs to be cut and taxes need to be streamlined.

The last 6 years have seen the economy go south wards.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 4:41pm:

... Going by what you say, it should be very easy for tony to cut spending.  But no one can explain what his cuts will be?

Think Robin Hood in reverse. Take from the poor to give to the rich.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 4:47pm:

There will need to be significant cuts in the budget. Did you sleep through that mini budget from this week? Their much vaunted surplus for 2013/14 has been turned into a $33 bn DEFICIT!!! The Australian economy since 2007 has been run into the ground and is now in awful condition of debt and deficits. Public spending needs to be cut, foreign aid needs to be cut and taxes need to be streamlined. The last 6 years have seen the economy go south wards.

Thank you for your usual summary of a newspaper.  And for proving the point that we don't need a man who disagrees with spending cuts, but someone who actually understands the problems with the budget.

Swing Voters decide close elections and they like backing winners.

The party leading the last week will likely hold their lead.

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 4:36pm:

skippy. wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:33pm: salad in wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:20pm: If the polls are correct it will be tight. Various poll numbers range from 50/50 to 51/49 etc. The choice for the punters will be who not to vote for or which party will cause the least amount of damage to Australia. Interesting times ahead. The fact the polls are already 50/50 is interesting given in an election campaign they get even tighter. Australia has a history of  close elections, longwhinyfool calling -53/47 just shows why longwhinyfool is a suitable nick for him. I doubt we will se a poll over the next five weeks more than two points difference. The voters have to get serious now and so all the huffing and puffing saying they will support phoney Tony that has gone on in the past three years will evaporate as has been evident since Rudds return. Another hung parliament is the most likly scenario, which means another three years of a minority Labor government given the GREENS and independents will support Labor over phoney Tony. Katter has already gone on record saying he will back Rudd if a hung parliament occurs and Wilkie would be unlikely to support phony Tony too. This will probably all end in tears for the conga line. ;D history of close election????  precisely TWO minority govts in 112 years??? There's not much you know of political history, is there?

Close means 51/49 or even 52/48 , but your dementia riddled brain would battle to get around that.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 4:50pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:47pm: There will need to be significant cuts in the budget. Did you sleep through that mini budget from this week? Their much vaunted surplus for 2013/14 has been turned into a $33 bn DEFICIT!!! The Australian economy since 2007 has been run into the ground and is now in awful condition of debt and deficits. Public spending needs to be cut, foreign aid needs to be cut and taxes need to be streamlined. The last 6 years have seen the economy go south wards. Thank you for your usual summary of a newspaper.  And for proving the point that we don't need a man who disagrees with spending cuts, but someone who actually understands the problems with the budget.

Do you find it acceptable to promise a surplus and produce a $33bn deficit?

There should be no consequences to that?

How can the old capitalist parties convince the electorate that they can secure Australias economic future and uphold law and order?

# wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 4:48pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:41pm: ... Going by what you say, it should be very easy for tony to cut spending.  But no one can explain what his cuts will be? Think Robin Hood in reverse. Take from the poor to give to the rich.

We should be encouraging higher earners to stay.
Not pushing them overseas with punitive taxes.

You need a combination of streamlining taxes and bracket creep, as well austerity cuts to public spending.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 4:53pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:50pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:47pm: There will need to be significant cuts in the budget. Did you sleep through that mini budget from this week? Their much vaunted surplus for 2013/14 has been turned into a $33 bn DEFICIT!!! The Australian economy since 2007 has been run into the ground and is now in awful condition of debt and deficits. Public spending needs to be cut, foreign aid needs to be cut and taxes need to be streamlined. The last 6 years have seen the economy go south wards. Thank you for your usual summary of a newspaper.  And for proving the point that we don't need a man who disagrees with spending cuts, but someone who actually understands the problems with the budget. Do you find it acceptable to promise a surplus and produce a $33bn deficit? There should be no consequences to that?

Do you think its acceptable to cry DEBT AND DEFICIT DEBT AND DEFICIT and then go against all spending measures?  How will Tony END THE WASTE?

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 4:55pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:53pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:50pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:47pm: There will need to be significant cuts in the budget. Did you sleep through that mini budget from this week? Their much vaunted surplus for 2013/14 has been turned into a $33 bn DEFICIT!!! The Australian economy since 2007 has been run into the ground and is now in awful condition of debt and deficits. Public spending needs to be cut, foreign aid needs to be cut and taxes need to be streamlined. The last 6 years have seen the economy go south wards. Thank you for your usual summary of a newspaper.  And for proving the point that we don't need a man who disagrees with spending cuts, but someone who actually understands the problems with the budget. Do you find it acceptable to promise a surplus and produce a $33bn deficit? There should be no consequences to that? Do you think its acceptable to cry DEBT AND DEFICIT DEBT AND DEFICIT and then go against all spending measures?  How will Tony END THE WASTE?

You never answered my question.

Do you not think there should be a consequence to a Government that promises the people a surplus come hell or high water, then actually produces a $33bn deficit?

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 4:57pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:55pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:53pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:50pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:47pm: There will need to be significant cuts in the budget. Did you sleep through that mini budget from this week? Their much vaunted surplus for 2013/14 has been turned into a $33 bn DEFICIT!!! The Australian economy since 2007 has been run into the ground and is now in awful condition of debt and deficits. Public spending needs to be cut, foreign aid needs to be cut and taxes need to be streamlined. The last 6 years have seen the economy go south wards. Thank you for your usual summary of a newspaper.  And for proving the point that we don't need a man who disagrees with spending cuts, but someone who actually understands the problems with the budget. Do you find it acceptable to promise a surplus and produce a $33bn deficit? There should be no consequences to that? Do you think its acceptable to cry DEBT AND DEFICIT DEBT AND DEFICIT and then go against all spending measures?  How will Tony END THE WASTE? You never answered my question. Do you not think there should be a consequence to a Government that promises the people a surplus come hell or high water, then actually produces a $33bn deficit?

I think its not that black and white.  The question is, if we know there are structural problems with the budget, then would you rather one that has proposals, or one who simply whines like a b1tch, opposes everything and has no solution?

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 4:57pm:

Do you not think there should be a consequence to a Government that promises the people a surplus come hell or high water, then actually produces a $33bn deficit?

No.

It's economic forecasting, not science.

Kevin Rudd on the news

"This is truly a great country....."


LOL someone pass me a bucket

greggerypeccary wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 5:00pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:57pm: Do you not think there should be a consequence to a Government that promises the people a surplus come hell or high water, then actually produces a $33bn deficit? No. It's economic forecasting, not science.

If I or any of our FP&A team forecasted as poor as that we'd be fired.

US listed companies don't accept such such failure that it seems the Australian Government does.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 5:01pm:

Kevin Rudd on the news "This is truly a great country....."

Indeed, it is.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 5:03pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 5:00pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:57pm: Do you not think there should be a consequence to a Government that promises the people a surplus come hell or high water, then actually produces a $33bn deficit? No. It's economic forecasting, not science. If I or any of our FP&A team forecasted as poor as that we'd be fired. US listed companies don't accept such such failure that it seems the Australian Government does.

Australia is not a listed company.

You're making a ridiculous comparison.

How can the capitalist parties convince the moral community in Australias to continue to have confidence in an inherently rotten, corrupt and unfair system...

corporate_whitey wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 5:07pm:

How can the capitalist parties convince the moral community in Australias to continue to have confidence in an inherently rotten, corrupt and unfair system...

You weren't Doc Mercury in another life, were you?

Aussie wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 5:12pm:

corporate_whitey wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 5:07pm: How can the capitalist parties convince the moral community in Australias to continue to have confidence in an inherently rotten, corrupt and unfair system... You weren't Doc Mercury in another life, were you?

We in the moral community want the capitalist parties to make clear who they are going to punish this time to pay for their never ending economic failure.  Who are they going to exclude, who are they going to cut this time...

We all know they get their policy from far right wing capitalist think tanks that are mouth pieces for corrupt criminal organized crime networks....

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 4:50pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:47pm: There will need to be significant cuts in the budget. Did you sleep through that mini budget from this week? Their much vaunted surplus for 2013/14 has been turned into a $33 bn DEFICIT!!! The Australian economy since 2007 has been run into the ground and is now in awful condition of debt and deficits. Public spending needs to be cut, foreign aid needs to be cut and taxes need to be streamlined. The last 6 years have seen the economy go south wards. Thank you for your usual summary of a newspaper.  And for proving the point that we don't need a man who disagrees with spending cuts, but someone who actually understands the problems with the budget.

Rudd???  Labor????  how do you come to THAT conclusion????

skippy. wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 4:51pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:36pm: skippy. wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:33pm: salad in wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:20pm: If the polls are correct it will be tight. Various poll numbers range from 50/50 to 51/49 etc. The choice for the punters will be who not to vote for or which party will cause the least amount of damage to Australia. Interesting times ahead. The fact the polls are already 50/50 is interesting given in an election campaign they get even tighter. Australia has a history of  close elections, longwhinyfool calling -53/47 just shows why longwhinyfool is a suitable nick for him. I doubt we will se a poll over the next five weeks more than two points difference. The voters have to get serious now and so all the huffing and puffing saying they will support phoney Tony that has gone on in the past three years will evaporate as has been evident since Rudds return. Another hung parliament is the most likly scenario, which means another three years of a minority Labor government given the GREENS and independents will support Labor over phoney Tony. Katter has already gone on record saying he will back Rudd if a hung parliament occurs and Wilkie would be unlikely to support phony Tony too. This will probably all end in tears for the conga line. ;D history of close election????  precisely TWO minority govts in 112 years??? There's not much you know of political history, is there? Close means 51/49 or even 52/48 , but your dementia riddled brain would battle to get around that.

52/48 usually means a margin of 20 seats.  by no rational definition is that CLOSE.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 4:59pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:57pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:55pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:53pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:50pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:47pm: There will need to be significant cuts in the budget. Did you sleep through that mini budget from this week? Their much vaunted surplus for 2013/14 has been turned into a $33 bn DEFICIT!!! The Australian economy since 2007 has been run into the ground and is now in awful condition of debt and deficits. Public spending needs to be cut, foreign aid needs to be cut and taxes need to be streamlined. The last 6 years have seen the economy go south wards. Thank you for your usual summary of a newspaper.  And for proving the point that we don't need a man who disagrees with spending cuts, but someone who actually understands the problems with the budget. Do you find it acceptable to promise a surplus and produce a $33bn deficit? There should be no consequences to that? Do you think its acceptable to cry DEBT AND DEFICIT DEBT AND DEFICIT and then go against all spending measures?  How will Tony END THE WASTE? You never answered my question. Do you not think there should be a consequence to a Government that promises the people a surplus come hell or high water, then actually produces a $33bn deficit? I think its not that black and white.  The question is, if we know there are structural problems with the budget, then would you rather one that has proposals, or one who simply whines like a b1tch, opposes everything and has no solution?

what proposals???  more tobacco taxes?  that's it???  that comes up with ONE billion in a budget that is 33 billion in deficit.

greggerypeccary wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 5:00pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:57pm: Do you not think there should be a consequence to a Government that promises the people a surplus come hell or high water, then actually produces a $33bn deficit? No. It's economic forecasting, not science.

that explains your belief in ACC.  the models don't nee to be close or even remotely accurate for you to 'believe'.

greggerypeccary wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 5:06pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 5:03pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 5:00pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:57pm: Do you not think there should be a consequence to a Government that promises the people a surplus come hell or high water, then actually produces a $33bn deficit? No. It's economic forecasting, not science. If I or any of our FP&A team forecasted as poor as that we'd be fired. US listed companies don't accept such such failure that it seems the Australian Government does. Australia is not a listed company. You're making a ridiculous comparison.

Listed companies are held to account.
How do you think our share price would look if we were $34 billion out in a forecast?

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 5:29pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 5:00pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:57pm: Do you not think there should be a consequence to a Government that promises the people a surplus come hell or high water, then actually produces a $33bn deficit? No. It's economic forecasting, not science. that explains your belief in ACC.  the models don't nee to be close or even remotely accurate for you to 'believe'.

What on earth are you talking about?

greggerypeccary wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 5:04pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 5:01pm: Kevin Rudd on the news "This is truly a great country....." Indeed, it is.

;D

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 5:26pm:

skippy. wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:51pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:36pm: skippy. wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:33pm: salad in wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:20pm: If the polls are correct it will be tight. Various poll numbers range from 50/50 to 51/49 etc. The choice for the punters will be who not to vote for or which party will cause the least amount of damage to Australia. Interesting times ahead. The fact the polls are already 50/50 is interesting given in an election campaign they get even tighter. Australia has a history of  close elections, longwhinyfool calling -53/47 just shows why longwhinyfool is a suitable nick for him. I doubt we will se a poll over the next five weeks more than two points difference. The voters have to get serious now and so all the huffing and puffing saying they will support phoney Tony that has gone on in the past three years will evaporate as has been evident since Rudds return. Another hung parliament is the most likly scenario, which means another three years of a minority Labor government given the GREENS and independents will support Labor over phoney Tony. Katter has already gone on record saying he will back Rudd if a hung parliament occurs and Wilkie would be unlikely to support phony Tony too. This will probably all end in tears for the conga line. ;D history of close election????  precisely TWO minority govts in 112 years??? There's not much you know of political history, is there? Close means 51/49 or even 52/48 , but your dementia riddled brain would battle to get around that. 52/48 usually means a margin of 20 seats.  by no rational definition is that CLOSE.

A delusional pedantic fvckwit on the verge of dementia would think that.

greggerypeccary wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 5:32pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 5:29pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 5:00pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:57pm: Do you not think there should be a consequence to a Government that promises the people a surplus come hell or high water, then actually produces a $33bn deficit? No. It's economic forecasting, not science. that explains your belief in ACC.  the models don't nee to be close or even remotely accurate for you to 'believe'. What on earth are you talking about?

you seem very happy for a forecast/prediction to be massively off-target and yet still believe ie Labor and ACCC

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 5:28pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:59pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:57pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:55pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:53pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:50pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:47pm: There will need to be significant cuts in the budget. Did you sleep through that mini budget from this week? Their much vaunted surplus for 2013/14 has been turned into a $33 bn DEFICIT!!! The Australian economy since 2007 has been run into the ground and is now in awful condition of debt and deficits. Public spending needs to be cut, foreign aid needs to be cut and taxes need to be streamlined. The last 6 years have seen the economy go south wards. Thank you for your usual summary of a newspaper.  And for proving the point that we don't need a man who disagrees with spending cuts, but someone who actually understands the problems with the budget. Do you find it acceptable to promise a surplus and produce a $33bn deficit? There should be no consequences to that? Do you think its acceptable to cry DEBT AND DEFICIT DEBT AND DEFICIT and then go against all spending measures?  How will Tony END THE WASTE? You never answered my question. Do you not think there should be a consequence to a Government that promises the people a surplus come hell or high water, then actually produces a $33bn deficit? I think its not that black and white.  The question is, if we know there are structural problems with the budget, then would you rather one that has proposals, or one who simply whines like a b1tch, opposes everything and has no solution? what proposals???  more tobacco taxes?  that's it???  that comes up with ONE billion in a budget that is 33 billion in deficit.

5.3b.  Firstly.  Tony support it? No?
Fbt.
Bank levy
What does tony say?
Go away long ie, your partusanship has caused you to become maqqa.

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 5:29pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 5:00pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:57pm: Do you not think there should be a consequence to a Government that promises the people a surplus come hell or high water, then actually produces a $33bn deficit? No. It's economic forecasting, not science. that explains your belief in ACC.  the models don't nee to be close or even remotely accurate for you to 'believe'.

ACC?    Anthropogenic Climate Change?  Is that what you mean?

You do realise that I'm probably the most sceptical person on this forum when it comes to ACC/AGW don't you?

skippy. wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 5:34pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 5:26pm: skippy. wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:51pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:36pm: skippy. wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:33pm: salad in wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:20pm: If the polls are correct it will be tight. Various poll numbers range from 50/50 to 51/49 etc. The choice for the punters will be who not to vote for or which party will cause the least amount of damage to Australia. Interesting times ahead. The fact the polls are already 50/50 is interesting given in an election campaign they get even tighter. Australia has a history of  close elections, longwhinyfool calling -53/47 just shows why longwhinyfool is a suitable nick for him. I doubt we will se a poll over the next five weeks more than two points difference. The voters have to get serious now and so all the huffing and puffing saying they will support phoney Tony that has gone on in the past three years will evaporate as has been evident since Rudds return. Another hung parliament is the most likly scenario, which means another three years of a minority Labor government given the GREENS and independents will support Labor over phoney Tony. Katter has already gone on record saying he will back Rudd if a hung parliament occurs and Wilkie would be unlikely to support phony Tony too. This will probably all end in tears for the conga line. ;D history of close election????  precisely TWO minority govts in 112 years??? There's not much you know of political history, is there? Close means 51/49 or even 52/48 , but your dementia riddled brain would battle to get around that. 52/48 usually means a margin of 20 seats.  by no rational definition is that CLOSE. A delusional pedantic fvckwit on the verge of dementia would think that.

no... professional analysts say so. 'close' is 3-5 seats not 20 you literally dumb bunny.

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 5:26pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:50pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:47pm: There will need to be significant cuts in the budget. Did you sleep through that mini budget from this week? Their much vaunted surplus for 2013/14 has been turned into a $33 bn DEFICIT!!! The Australian economy since 2007 has been run into the ground and is now in awful condition of debt and deficits. Public spending needs to be cut, foreign aid needs to be cut and taxes need to be streamlined. The last 6 years have seen the economy go south wards. Thank you for your usual summary of a newspaper.  And for proving the point that we don't need a man who disagrees with spending cuts, but someone who actually understands the problems with the budget. Rudd???  Labor????  how do you come to THAT conclusion????

Well if its a choice between Rudd Bowen and Wong vs wankjob, idiot and moron. 

greggerypeccary wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 5:40pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 5:29pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 5:00pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:57pm: Do you not think there should be a consequence to a Government that promises the people a surplus come hell or high water, then actually produces a $33bn deficit? No. It's economic forecasting, not science. that explains your belief in ACC.  the models don't nee to be close or even remotely accurate for you to 'believe'. ACC?    Anthropogenic Climate Change?  Is that what you mean? You do realise that I'm probably the most sceptical person on this forum when it comes to ACC/AGW don't you?

then why do you treat a fiscal forecast miss by $34B as nothing?  After all, it is only 6 continual years of missing targets by a mile!

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 5:41pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 5:26pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:50pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:47pm: There will need to be significant cuts in the budget. Did you sleep through that mini budget from this week? Their much vaunted surplus for 2013/14 has been turned into a $33 bn DEFICIT!!! The Australian economy since 2007 has been run into the ground and is now in awful condition of debt and deficits. Public spending needs to be cut, foreign aid needs to be cut and taxes need to be streamlined. The last 6 years have seen the economy go south wards. Thank you for your usual summary of a newspaper.  And for proving the point that we don't need a man who disagrees with spending cuts, but someone who actually understands the problems with the budget. Rudd???  Labor????  how do you come to THAT conclusion???? Well if its a choice between Rudd Bowen and Wong vs wankjob, idiot and moron.

Did you call LW partisan?

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 5:41pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 5:26pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:50pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:47pm: There will need to be significant cuts in the budget. Did you sleep through that mini budget from this week? Their much vaunted surplus for 2013/14 has been turned into a $33 bn DEFICIT!!! The Australian economy since 2007 has been run into the ground and is now in awful condition of debt and deficits. Public spending needs to be cut, foreign aid needs to be cut and taxes need to be streamlined. The last 6 years have seen the economy go south wards. Thank you for your usual summary of a newspaper.  And for proving the point that we don't need a man who disagrees with spending cuts, but someone who actually understands the problems with the budget. Rudd???  Labor????  how do you come to THAT conclusion???? Well if its a choice between Rudd Bowen and Wong vs wankjob, idiot and moron.

that was a lastnail type respone.  obviously you think labor are economic duds but your partisanship makes it impossible for you to say so.

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 5:38pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 5:32pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 5:29pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 5:00pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:57pm: Do you not think there should be a consequence to a Government that promises the people a surplus come hell or high water, then actually produces a $33bn deficit? No. It's economic forecasting, not science. that explains your belief in ACC.  the models don't nee to be close or even remotely accurate for you to 'believe'. What on earth are you talking about? you seem very happy for a forecast/prediction to be massively off-target and yet still believe ie Labor and ACCC

Oh, it's the ACCC now, not ACC.

When have I ever mentioned the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission in this forum?

Or, did you mean ACCCC, or some other ACCC?

Please make yourself clear.

And, I never said I was "very happy for a forecast/prediction to be massively off-target".  Not once.  Not here or anywhere else.

Stop making poo up.

Seriously.

greggerypeccary wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 5:44pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 5:38pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 5:32pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 5:29pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 5:00pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:57pm: Do you not think there should be a consequence to a Government that promises the people a surplus come hell or high water, then actually produces a $33bn deficit? No. It's economic forecasting, not science. that explains your belief in ACC.  the models don't nee to be close or even remotely accurate for you to 'believe'. What on earth are you talking about? you seem very happy for a forecast/prediction to be massively off-target and yet still believe ie Labor and ACCC Oh, it's the ACCC now, not ACC. When have I ever mentioned the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission in this forum? Or, did you mean ACCCC, or some other ACCC? Please make yourself clear. And, I never said I was "very happy for a forecast/prediction to be massively off-target".  Not once.  Not here or anywhere else. Stop making poo up. Seriously.

then be unequivocal and tell us that Labors fiscal planning and predictions are crap.  a $33B miss is about as bad as it gets

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 5:41pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 5:40pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 5:29pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 5:00pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:57pm: Do you not think there should be a consequence to a Government that promises the people a surplus come hell or high water, then actually produces a $33bn deficit? No. It's economic forecasting, not science. that explains your belief in ACC.  the models don't nee to be close or even remotely accurate for you to 'believe'. ACC?    Anthropogenic Climate Change?  Is that what you mean? You do realise that I'm probably the most sceptical person on this forum when it comes to ACC/AGW don't you? then why do you treat a fiscal forecast miss by $34B as nothing?  After all, it is only 6 continual years of missing targets by a mile!

Please show me where I described "a fiscal forecast miss by $34B as nothing".

Once again: never said it, here or anywhere else.

Why do you keep making this poo up?

Attack me on things I've actually said: that's fine.  But don't just make poo up.

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 5:47pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 5:44pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 5:38pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 5:32pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 5:29pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 5:00pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:57pm: Do you not think there should be a consequence to a Government that promises the people a surplus come hell or high water, then actually produces a $33bn deficit? No. It's economic forecasting, not science. that explains your belief in ACC.  the models don't nee to be close or even remotely accurate for you to 'believe'. What on earth are you talking about? you seem very happy for a forecast/prediction to be massively off-target and yet still believe ie Labor and ACCC Oh, it's the ACCC now, not ACC. When have I ever mentioned the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission in this forum? Or, did you mean ACCCC, or some other ACCC? Please make yourself clear. And, I never said I was "very happy for a forecast/prediction to be massively off-target".  Not once.  Not here or anywhere else. Stop making poo up. Seriously. then be unequivocal ... a $33B miss is about as bad as it gets

Yep, sure is.

unless we get the Australian manufacturing industry going again unemployment will continue to rise and rise...

one of the best ways of doing this would be to get rid of one of the biggest abominable lies off all time... The Carbon Tax....

there's only one Party that says they will get rid of it...

so for those people who didn't fall for the biggest con of all time and want to see the back of it, the choice is simple...

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 5:40pm:

skippy. wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 5:34pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 5:26pm: skippy. wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:51pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:36pm: skippy. wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:33pm: salad in wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:20pm: If the polls are correct it will be tight. Various poll numbers range from 50/50 to 51/49 etc. The choice for the punters will be who not to vote for or which party will cause the least amount of damage to Australia. Interesting times ahead. The fact the polls are already 50/50 is interesting given in an election campaign they get even tighter. Australia has a history of  close elections, longwhinyfool calling -53/47 just shows why longwhinyfool is a suitable nick for him. I doubt we will se a poll over the next five weeks more than two points difference. The voters have to get serious now and so all the huffing and puffing saying they will support phoney Tony that has gone on in the past three years will evaporate as has been evident since Rudds return. Another hung parliament is the most likly scenario, which means another three years of a minority Labor government given the GREENS and independents will support Labor over phoney Tony. Katter has already gone on record saying he will back Rudd if a hung parliament occurs and Wilkie would be unlikely to support phony Tony too. This will probably all end in tears for the conga line. ;D history of close election????  precisely TWO minority govts in 112 years??? There's not much you know of political history, is there? Close means 51/49 or even 52/48 , but your dementia riddled brain would battle to get around that. 52/48 usually means a margin of 20 seats.  by no rational definition is that CLOSE. A delusional pedantic fvckwit on the verge of dementia would think that. no... professional analysts say so. 'close' is 3-5 seats not 20 you literally dumb bunny.

LOL at you, fool.
Hawke won an Election with 49.9 percent of the vote and a majority of 78 to 69 seats, dickwad, your percentages mean bugger all.

The capitalist parties have spent decades cutting decency out of Australia, its time to make organized crime unemployed and take away their business model...its time for Socialism...

True Blue... wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 5:51pm:

unless we get the Australian manufacturing industry going again unemployment will continue to rise and rise... one of the best ways of doing this would be to get rid of one of the biggest abominable lies off all time... The Carbon Tax.... there's only one Party that says they will get rid of it... so for those people who didn't fall for the biggest con of all time and want to see the back of it, the choice is simple...

The carbon tax can stay, get rid of the GST because it is a regressive tax that stifles the economy, put taxes where they belong progressively on private industries that manufacture overseas and lets build Australias new publicly owned collectivist manufacturing industries and defend ourselves from capitalist organized crime....

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 5:43pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 5:41pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 5:26pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:50pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:47pm: There will need to be significant cuts in the budget. Did you sleep through that mini budget from this week? Their much vaunted surplus for 2013/14 has been turned into a $33 bn DEFICIT!!! The Australian economy since 2007 has been run into the ground and is now in awful condition of debt and deficits. Public spending needs to be cut, foreign aid needs to be cut and taxes need to be streamlined. The last 6 years have seen the economy go south wards. Thank you for your usual summary of a newspaper.  And for proving the point that we don't need a man who disagrees with spending cuts, but someone who actually understands the problems with the budget. Rudd???  Labor????  how do you come to THAT conclusion???? Well if its a choice between Rudd Bowen and Wong vs wankjob, idiot and moron.  that was a lastnail type respone.  obviously you think labor are economic duds but your partisanship makes it impossible for you to say so.

Says the man who is voting for Mr end the waste only no plan on how to do it.  He must be an economic genius!!!!!

;D. And mine might be a last nail response, but you my friend have become worse than Matty.  Seriously, you are blindly following the wank job and have turned intoone of those tea party hacks you despised only 2 yrs ago.

skippy. wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 5:51pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 5:40pm: skippy. wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 5:34pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 5:26pm: skippy. wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:51pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:36pm: skippy. wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:33pm: salad in wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:20pm: If the polls are correct it will be tight. Various poll numbers range from 50/50 to 51/49 etc. The choice for the punters will be who not to vote for or which party will cause the least amount of damage to Australia. Interesting times ahead. The fact the polls are already 50/50 is interesting given in an election campaign they get even tighter. Australia has a history of  close elections, longwhinyfool calling -53/47 just shows why longwhinyfool is a suitable nick for him. I doubt we will se a poll over the next five weeks more than two points difference. The voters have to get serious now and so all the huffing and puffing saying they will support phoney Tony that has gone on in the past three years will evaporate as has been evident since Rudds return. Another hung parliament is the most likly scenario, which means another three years of a minority Labor government given the GREENS and independents will support Labor over phoney Tony. Katter has already gone on record saying he will back Rudd if a hung parliament occurs and Wilkie would be unlikely to support phony Tony too. This will probably all end in tears for the conga line. ;D history of close election????  precisely TWO minority govts in 112 years??? There's not much you know of political history, is there? Close means 51/49 or even 52/48 , but your dementia riddled brain would battle to get around that. 52/48 usually means a margin of 20 seats.  by no rational definition is that CLOSE. A delusional pedantic fvckwit on the verge of dementia would think that. no... professional analysts say so. 'close' is 3-5 seats not 20 you literally dumb bunny. LOL at you, fool. Hawke won an Election with 49.9 percent of the vote and a majority of 78 to 69 seats, dickwad, your percentages mean bugger all.

NINE SEATS fool.  learn to comprehend English.

Hawke is a sell out front bottoms.

I will not allow a thread to mention his name without me posting that.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 5:56pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 5:43pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 5:41pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 5:26pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:50pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:47pm: There will need to be significant cuts in the budget. Did you sleep through that mini budget from this week? Their much vaunted surplus for 2013/14 has been turned into a $33 bn DEFICIT!!! The Australian economy since 2007 has been run into the ground and is now in awful condition of debt and deficits. Public spending needs to be cut, foreign aid needs to be cut and taxes need to be streamlined. The last 6 years have seen the economy go south wards. Thank you for your usual summary of a newspaper.  And for proving the point that we don't need a man who disagrees with spending cuts, but someone who actually understands the problems with the budget. Rudd???  Labor????  how do you come to THAT conclusion???? Well if its a choice between Rudd Bowen and Wong vs wankjob, idiot and moron.  that was a lastnail type respone.  obviously you think labor are economic duds but your partisanship makes it impossible for you to say so. Says the man who is voting for Mr end the waste only no plan on how to do it.  He must be an economic genius!!!!! ;D. And mine might be a last nail response, but you my friend have become worse than Matty.  Seriously, you are blindly following the wank job and have turned intoone of those tea party hacks you despised only 2 yrs ago.

your hysteria about Tea Party and crap like that discredits you.  I m still exactly the same person whiel you have turned into someone that excuses labor no matter what. Massive debt, massive Deficit and 5 years after the GFC they cant get within $34B of a forcast and you continue to support them!  Will Abbott be great?  don't know.  But the likelihood of being worse than Labor is rather small.  Every labor policy is s shambles.  Every leader is dysfunctional.  and you support them.  why??  Personally, I'd love to know.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 6:04pm:

Hawke is a sell out front bottoms. I will not allow a thread to mention his name without me posting that.

Raise your hands anyone who cares?  ;D.

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 6:05pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 5:56pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 5:43pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 5:41pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 5:26pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:50pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:47pm: There will need to be significant cuts in the budget. Did you sleep through that mini budget from this week? Their much vaunted surplus for 2013/14 has been turned into a $33 bn DEFICIT!!! The Australian economy since 2007 has been run into the ground and is now in awful condition of debt and deficits. Public spending needs to be cut, foreign aid needs to be cut and taxes need to be streamlined. The last 6 years have seen the economy go south wards. Thank you for your usual summary of a newspaper.  And for proving the point that we don't need a man who disagrees with spending cuts, but someone who actually understands the problems with the budget. Rudd???  Labor????  how do you come to THAT conclusion???? Well if its a choice between Rudd Bowen and Wong vs wankjob, idiot and moron.  that was a lastnail type respone.  obviously you think labor are economic duds but your partisanship makes it impossible for you to say so. Says the man who is voting for Mr end the waste only no plan on how to do it.  He must be an economic genius!!!!! ;D. And mine might be a last nail response, but you my friend have become worse than Matty.  Seriously, you are blindly following the wank job and have turned intoone of those tea party hacks you despised only 2 yrs ago. your hysteria about Tea Party and crap like that discredits you.  I m still exactly the same person whiel you have turned into someone that excuses labor no matter what. Massive debt, massive Deficit and 5 years after the GFC they cant get within $34B of a forcast and you continue to support them!  Will Abbott be great?  don't know.  But the likelihood of being worse than Labor is rather small.  Every labor policy is s shambles.  Every leader is dysfunctional.  and you support them.  why??  Personally, I'd love to know.

;D. So again, with things so dire, what plans does tony have to END THE WASTE?  What will
He cut?  What will he raise?  Comeon, surely for someone voting for him with your intellect you can tell us??  Especially given labor haven't been able to but HAVE Proposed spending cut measures; all of which tony HAS OPPOSED but somehow he will magically bring the budget into surplus.

This is the tea party mentality I'm talking about.  Magical fairyland economics.  "end the waste"! How?  Not via any cuts. But just end the waste!

I am not going into it further again.

My views on that pisshead and his sell out of Australian workers are clear.

Carry on......

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 6:15pm:

I am not going into it further again. My views on that pisshead and his sell out of Australian workers are clear. Carry on......

Anyone care? Anyone?  No?  Awww

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 6:14pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:05pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 5:56pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 5:43pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 5:41pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 5:26pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:50pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:47pm: There will need to be significant cuts in the budget. Did you sleep through that mini budget from this week? Their much vaunted surplus for 2013/14 has been turned into a $33 bn DEFICIT!!! The Australian economy since 2007 has been run into the ground and is now in awful condition of debt and deficits. Public spending needs to be cut, foreign aid needs to be cut and taxes need to be streamlined. The last 6 years have seen the economy go south wards. Thank you for your usual summary of a newspaper.  And for proving the point that we don't need a man who disagrees with spending cuts, but someone who actually understands the problems with the budget. Rudd???  Labor????  how do you come to THAT conclusion???? Well if its a choice between Rudd Bowen and Wong vs wankjob, idiot and moron.  that was a lastnail type respone.  obviously you think labor are economic duds but your partisanship makes it impossible for you to say so. Says the man who is voting for Mr end the waste only no plan on how to do it.  He must be an economic genius!!!!! ;D. And mine might be a last nail response, but you my friend have become worse than Matty.  Seriously, you are blindly following the wank job and have turned intoone of those tea party hacks you despised only 2 yrs ago. your hysteria about Tea Party and crap like that discredits you.  I m still exactly the same person whiel you have turned into someone that excuses labor no matter what. Massive debt, massive Deficit and 5 years after the GFC they cant get within $34B of a forcast and you continue to support them!  Will Abbott be great?  don't know.  But the likelihood of being worse than Labor is rather small.  Every labor policy is s shambles.  Every leader is dysfunctional.  and you support them.  why??  Personally, I'd love to know. ;D. So again, with things so dire, what plans does tony have to END THE WASTE?  What will He cut?  What will he raise?  Comeon, surely for someone voting for him with your intellect you can tell us??  Especially given labor haven't been able to but HAVE Proposed spending measures; all of which tony HAS OPPOSED but somehow he will magically bring the budget into surplus. This is the tea party mentality I'm talking about.  Magical fairyland economics.  "end the waste"! How?  Not via any cuts. But just end the waste!

for the last year we have been telling you that coalition policies will be in large measure announced during an actual real not-fake election campaign.  given that it is barely 2 hours old and I am not in th inner circle is it not too much to ask that you actually wait for the policy announcements?

IN the meantime feel free to tell me Labors plans to cut the waste and return the budget to surplus.  I presume of course that they have a plan, right?  And it will be ahem... a plan that will work - this time?

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 6:15pm:

I am not going into it further again. My views on that pisshead and his sell out of Australian workers are clear. Carry on......

give it up.  we've heard you on this before.  you don't care a jot about 'workers rights'.  this is about the pilots strike and surprise surprise, 'daddy' was a pilot that lost his job.

I am convinced that you have no one single principled position.  It is all based on how it affects you and your family.

One word can sum up all of the capitalist politicians...fake and liar, take your pick...

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 6:15pm:

I am not going into it further again. My views on that pisshead and his sell out of Australian workers are clear. Carry on......

Yes, they are indeed, Mr Hicks, and Hawke was totally correct when he called your Father's bluff.  He came to the Casino and wanted to gamble on your future, and he lost.  I'll keep saying that whenever you raise the issue.  Your Father, like every Pilot, was a 'glorified bus driver,' nothing more.

Actually that's also wrong longie.  First they were meant to be announced before budget.  Then after budget.  Now it's election. But not costed and still don't know when: probably sept 8th. 

Come on mr intellect: labor has increased spending by 70% and revenue grew by 50% according to you.  SURELY FOR MR END THE WASTE GIVEN THESE FIGURES IT ISN'T TOO HARD TO ANNOUNCE WHAT THE SPENDING CUTS WILL Be??

Back to your fairyland. You are a disgrace.

Aussie wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 6:21pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:15pm: I am not going into it further again. My views on that pisshead and his sell out of Australian workers are clear. Carry on...... Yes, they are indeed, Mr Hicks, and Hawke was totally correct when he called your Father's bluff.  He came to the Casino and wanted to gamble on your future, and he lost.  I'll keep saying that whenever you raise the issue.  Your Father, like every Pilot, was a 'glorified bus driver,' nothing more.

a tad harsh as well as grossly over-stated.

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 5:58pm:

skippy. wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 5:51pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 5:40pm: skippy. wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 5:34pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 5:26pm: skippy. wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:51pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:36pm: skippy. wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:33pm: salad in wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:20pm: If the polls are correct it will be tight. Various poll numbers range from 50/50 to 51/49 etc. The choice for the punters will be who not to vote for or which party will cause the least amount of damage to Australia. Interesting times ahead. The fact the polls are already 50/50 is interesting given in an election campaign they get even tighter. Australia has a history of  close elections, longwhinyfool calling -53/47 just shows why longwhinyfool is a suitable nick for him. I doubt we will se a poll over the next five weeks more than two points difference. The voters have to get serious now and so all the huffing and puffing saying they will support phoney Tony that has gone on in the past three years will evaporate as has been evident since Rudds return. Another hung parliament is the most likly scenario, which means another three years of a minority Labor government given the GREENS and independents will support Labor over phoney Tony. Katter has already gone on record saying he will back Rudd if a hung parliament occurs and Wilkie would be unlikely to support phony Tony too. This will probably all end in tears for the conga line. ;D history of close election????  precisely TWO minority govts in 112 years??? There's not much you know of political history, is there? Close means 51/49 or even 52/48 , but your dementia riddled brain would battle to get around that. 52/48 usually means a margin of 20 seats.  by no rational definition is that CLOSE. A delusional pedantic fvckwit on the verge of dementia would think that. no... professional analysts say so. 'close' is 3-5 seats not 20 you literally dumb bunny. LOL at you, fool. Hawke won an Election with 49.9 percent of the vote and a majority of 78 to 69 seats, dickwad, your percentages mean bugger all. NINE SEATS fool.  learn to comprehend English.

Oh goody, you can subtract 69 from 78 , well done. Pity the gist of the post went way over your excuse for a brain.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 6:22pm:

Actually that's also wrong longie.  First they were meant to be announced before budget.  Then after budget.  Now it's election. But not costed and still don't know when: probably sept 8th.  Come on mr intellect: labor has increased spending by 70% and revenue grew by 50% according to you.  SURELY FOR MR END THE WASTE GIVEN THESE FIGURES IT ISN'T TOO HARD TO ANNOUNCE WHAT THE SPENDING CUTS WILL Be?? Back to your fairyland. You are a disgrace.

what nonsense.  for the last 6 months, every other week has shown a massive change in the govts fiscal position meaning that they are either lying or totally lost control of the economy.


any how fool... when you can show me a detailed prescription for balancing the budget from that mob of buffoons who in 6 years have given us the 6 largest deficits ever, then come back and try again.  for now, you are just screaming because you know Labor are headed to political execution.  You can smell it just as everyone else can (except skippy of course).

skippy. wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 6:24pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 5:58pm: skippy. wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 5:51pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 5:40pm: skippy. wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 5:34pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 5:26pm: skippy. wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:51pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:36pm: skippy. wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:33pm: salad in wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 4:20pm: If the polls are correct it will be tight. Various poll numbers range from 50/50 to 51/49 etc. The choice for the punters will be who not to vote for or which party will cause the least amount of damage to Australia. Interesting times ahead. The fact the polls are already 50/50 is interesting given in an election campaign they get even tighter. Australia has a history of  close elections, longwhinyfool calling -53/47 just shows why longwhinyfool is a suitable nick for him. I doubt we will se a poll over the next five weeks more than two points difference. The voters have to get serious now and so all the huffing and puffing saying they will support phoney Tony that has gone on in the past three years will evaporate as has been evident since Rudds return. Another hung parliament is the most likly scenario, which means another three years of a minority Labor government given the GREENS and independents will support Labor over phoney Tony. Katter has already gone on record saying he will back Rudd if a hung parliament occurs and Wilkie would be unlikely to support phony Tony too. This will probably all end in tears for the conga line. ;D history of close election????  precisely TWO minority govts in 112 years??? There's not much you know of political history, is there? Close means 51/49 or even 52/48 , but your dementia riddled brain would battle to get around that. 52/48 usually means a margin of 20 seats.  by no rational definition is that CLOSE. A delusional pedantic fvckwit on the verge of dementia would think that. no... professional analysts say so. 'close' is 3-5 seats not 20 you literally dumb bunny. LOL at you, fool. Hawke won an Election with 49.9 percent of the vote and a majority of 78 to 69 seats, dickwad, your percentages mean bugger all. NINE SEATS fool.  learn to comprehend English. Oh goody, you can subtract 69 from 78 , well done. Pity the gist of the post went way over your excuse for a brain.

you are the same mathematical simpleton who literally refused for a long time to believe that if labor lost 30 seats then the margin would be SIXTY.  I don't know what grade you went to in school but it feels a lot like 6 the way you go on with anything involving numbers.

Aussie wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 6:21pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:15pm: I am not going into it further again. My views on that pisshead and his sell out of Australian workers are clear. Carry on...... Yes, they are indeed, Mr Hicks, and Hawke was totally correct when he called your Father's bluff.  He came to the Casino and wanted to gamble on your future, and he lost.  I'll keep saying that whenever you raise the issue.  Your Father, like every Pilot, was a 'glorified bus driver,' nothing more.

You can get fked.

Try to concentrate, longlyingfool,an election was called today, can you get your head around that yet? Maybe get one of the support workers to explain it to you as they're giving you your enema tonight.

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 6:17pm:

for the last year we have been telling you that coalition policies will be in large measure announced during an actual real not-fake election campaign.  given that it is barely 2 hours old and I am not in th inner circle is it not too much to ask that you actually wait for the policy announcements?

Yes and now we have barely weeks.
The small business policy you posted didn't set the world on fire and yet again no real detail.
But the excuse has disappeared so I'll expect to see a far bit over the next 2 weeks.
I hope I'm wrong but I reckon I'll be lucky to see any costings before 30/8, but hey I'm sure you agree nows the time and be just as dissappointed if they hold off costings until the last possible moment.



longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 6:17pm:

IN the meantime feel free to tell me Labors plans to cut the waste and return the budget to surplus.  I presume of course that they have a plan, right?  And it will be ahem... a plan that will work - this time?

You know labors plan, you bitch about it everyday, your against every savings measure from means testing the PHR to re-writing the FBT.

Whats Tony's savings measures, who knows?

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 6:27pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:22pm: Actually that's also wrong longie.  First they were meant to be announced before budget.  Then after budget.  Now it's election. But not costed and still don't know when: probably sept 8th.  Come on mr intellect: labor has increased spending by 70% and revenue grew by 50% according to you.  SURELY FOR MR END THE WASTE GIVEN THESE FIGURES IT ISN'T TOO HARD TO ANNOUNCE WHAT THE SPENDING CUTS WILL Be?? Back to your fairyland. You are a disgrace. what nonsense.  for the last 6 months, every other week has shown a massive change in the govts fiscal position meaning that they are either lying or totally lost control of the economy. any how fool... when you can show me a detailed prescription for balancing the budget from that mob of buffoons who in 6 years have given us the 6 largest deficits ever, then come back and try again.  for now, you are just screaming because you know Labor are headed to political execution.  You can smell it just as everyone else can (except skippy of course).

Amazing isnt it.  Your argument is that a party who HAS announced spending cuts can't do it but apparently your wankjob can, by only screaming debt and deficit and end the waste, without announcing one thing and opposing ALL CUTS.  end the hit, Ey?  ;D
And my dismay is not for labor, but more for this country, because we are bound for pure lunacy.
Ridiculous clown.  Go back to your dreamland.

Dsmithy70 wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 6:34pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:17pm: for the last year we have been telling you that coalition policies will be in large measure announced during an actual real not-fake election campaign.  given that it is barely 2 hours old and I am not in th inner circle is it not too much to ask that you actually wait for the policy announcements? Yes and now we have barely weeks. The small business policy you posted didn't set the world on fire and yet again no real detail. But the excuse has disappeared so I'll expect to see a far bit over the next 2 weeks. I hope I'm wrong but I reckon I'll be lucky to see any costings before 30/8, but hey I'm sure you agree nows the time and be just as dissappointed if they hold off costings until the last possible moment. longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:17pm: IN the meantime feel free to tell me Labors plans to cut the waste and return the budget to surplus.  I presume of course that they have a plan, right?  And it will be ahem... a plan that will work - this time? You know labors plan, you bitch about it everyday, your against every savings measure from means testing the PHR to re-writing the FBT. Whats Tony's savings measures, who knows?

the problem is that there is little point in discussing policy with you. It doesn't matter what Abbott proposes, you will reject it for any one of a group of artificial reasons.  And yet, you embrace Rudd with a passion that defies you otherwise obvious intelligence.  The man is a first rate fool.  Everything he touches turns to crap.  Every policy was designed over lunch and costed on a calculator.  You would be hard pressed to point to a single policy that has worked and certainly not one that was cheap and effective.  yet you give him the benefit of the doubt again and again.  There is almost no standard of 'bad PM' that Rudd could not go below.  I don't know if Abbott will be a good or a poor PM.  Nobody does.  But I am damned sure that virtually nobody could be more arrogant, more egotistical and more disaster-prone than Rudd.

In summary, an intelligent person would by default NOT vote labor.  So why are you?

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 6:35pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:27pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:22pm: Actually that's also wrong longie.  First they were meant to be announced before budget.  Then after budget.  Now it's election. But not costed and still don't know when: probably sept 8th.  Come on mr intellect: labor has increased spending by 70% and revenue grew by 50% according to you.  SURELY FOR MR END THE WASTE GIVEN THESE FIGURES IT ISN'T TOO HARD TO ANNOUNCE WHAT THE SPENDING CUTS WILL Be?? Back to your fairyland. You are a disgrace. what nonsense.  for the last 6 months, every other week has shown a massive change in the govts fiscal position meaning that they are either lying or totally lost control of the economy. any how fool... when you can show me a detailed prescription for balancing the budget from that mob of buffoons who in 6 years have given us the 6 largest deficits ever, then come back and try again.  for now, you are just screaming because you know Labor are headed to political execution.  You can smell it just as everyone else can (except skippy of course). Amazing isnt it.  Your argument is that a party who HAS announced spending cuts can't do it but apparently your wankjob can, by only screaming debt and deficit and end the waste, without announcing one thing and opposing ALL CUTS.  end the hit, Ey?  ;D And my dismay is not for labor, but more for this country, because we are bound for pure lunacy. Ridiculous clown.  Go back to your dreamland.

but its labor and this is about the 35th time we've heard 'spending cuts' from them and with the result being MORE spending and MORE debt every time. At what point do you stop simply believing Labors policies?  We were having spending cuts every budget since 2008 and every single one of them has shown significant real INCREASES in spending.  every single one.

The real question is why you could possibly believe a single word or policy that this mob of clowns announces.  You don't have to like Abbott and you are even entitled to feel justificably dubious.  But to continue to believe that labor can deliver a single thing it promises is lunacy.  After all, they have failed on every metric possible in 6 years.

Kevin RUDD is was and always has been a policy maker on the run. This is fly by the seat of your pants Governance.

Now he wants to raid everyones' bank account from 1day to 100 years, at least he doesn't discriminate, everyone gets it between the eyes.

This arsehole is going down for the count on the tax on bank accounts alone.

Surely he is the biggest dickhead ever to go into a campaign...announcing a tax on bank accounts four weeks out from an election...What a dope!

Quote:

After all, they have failed on every metric possible in 6 years.

Only in the minds of the truly deluded.

Kat wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 6:48pm:

Quote: After all, they have failed on every metric possible in 6 years. Only in the minds of the truly deluded.

actually, in the minds of those who care and take note of more than the level of the dole which is your SOLE interest.  and BTW labor even failed you on that.

please don't vote liberal.  We take almost anyone's vote.  but we really don't want yours.

Rudd failed miserably ... he was a pathetic Prime Minister, and so was his govt.
Labor replaced him with Gillard, she was even worse...so Labor replaced her with Rudd, the pathetic PM they dumped previously. :)

bambu wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 6:51pm:

Rudd failed miserably ... he was a pathetic Prime Minister, and so was his govt. Labor replaced him with Gillard, she was even worse...so Labor replaced her with Rudd, the pathetic PM they dumped previously. :)

and yet the labor drongos want more of the same.

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 6:44pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:35pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:27pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:22pm: Actually that's also wrong longie.  First they were meant to be announced before budget.  Then after budget.  Now it's election. But not costed and still don't know when: probably sept 8th.  Come on mr intellect: labor has increased spending by 70% and revenue grew by 50% according to you.  SURELY FOR MR END THE WASTE GIVEN THESE FIGURES IT ISN'T TOO HARD TO ANNOUNCE WHAT THE SPENDING CUTS WILL Be?? Back to your fairyland. You are a disgrace. what nonsense.  for the last 6 months, every other week has shown a massive change in the govts fiscal position meaning that they are either lying or totally lost control of the economy. any how fool... when you can show me a detailed prescription for balancing the budget from that mob of buffoons who in 6 years have given us the 6 largest deficits ever, then come back and try again.  for now, you are just screaming because you know Labor are headed to political execution.  You can smell it just as everyone else can (except skippy of course). Amazing isnt it.  Your argument is that a party who HAS announced spending cuts can't do it but apparently your wankjob can, by only screaming debt and deficit and end the waste, without announcing one thing and opposing ALL CUTS.  end the hit, Ey?  ;D And my dismay is not for labor, but more for this country, because we are bound for pure lunacy. Ridiculous clown.  Go back to your dreamland. but its labor and this is about the 35th time we've heard 'spending cuts' from them and with the result being MORE spending and MORE debt every time. At what point do you stop simply believing Labors policies?  We were having spending cuts every budget since 2008 and every single one of them has shown significant real INCREASES in spending.  every single one. The real question is why you could possibly believe a single word or policy that this mob of clowns announces.  You don't have to like Abbott and you are even entitled to feel justificably dubious.  But to continue to believe that labor can deliver a single thing it promises is lunacy.  After all, they have failed on every metric possible in 6 years.

Let's break it down for you
1. Government announces spending cuts.  Wankjob opposes them.
2. Government passes spending cuts.  Wankjob promises to repeal them.
3. Government announces spending (ndis/Gonski).  Wankjob agrees with spending.
4. Wankjob keeps yelling debt and deficit. But opposes all cuts and promises to repeal them.

That is why I can't vote for him.  Largely because it's moronic politics and moron policy. 

You claim spending has increased dramatically.  Well surely it should be easy to cut it back to END TE WASTE. Let's hear it.

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 6:54pm:

bambu wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:51pm: Rudd failed miserably ... he was a pathetic Prime Minister, and so was his govt. Labor replaced him with Gillard, she was even worse...so Labor replaced her with Rudd, the pathetic PM they dumped previously. :) and yet the labor drongos want more of the same.

Yes, not the sharpest tools in the shed.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 6:57pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:44pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:35pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:27pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:22pm: Actually that's also wrong longie.  First they were meant to be announced before budget.  Then after budget.  Now it's election. But not costed and still don't know when: probably sept 8th.  Come on mr intellect: labor has increased spending by 70% and revenue grew by 50% according to you.  SURELY FOR MR END THE WASTE GIVEN THESE FIGURES IT ISN'T TOO HARD TO ANNOUNCE WHAT THE SPENDING CUTS WILL Be?? Back to your fairyland. You are a disgrace. what nonsense.  for the last 6 months, every other week has shown a massive change in the govts fiscal position meaning that they are either lying or totally lost control of the economy. any how fool... when you can show me a detailed prescription for balancing the budget from that mob of buffoons who in 6 years have given us the 6 largest deficits ever, then come back and try again.  for now, you are just screaming because you know Labor are headed to political execution.  You can smell it just as everyone else can (except skippy of course). Amazing isnt it.  Your argument is that a party who HAS announced spending cuts can't do it but apparently your wankjob can, by only screaming debt and deficit and end the waste, without announcing one thing and opposing ALL CUTS.  end the hit, Ey?  ;D And my dismay is not for labor, but more for this country, because we are bound for pure lunacy. Ridiculous clown.  Go back to your dreamland. but its labor and this is about the 35th time we've heard 'spending cuts' from them and with the result being MORE spending and MORE debt every time. At what point do you stop simply believing Labors policies?  We were having spending cuts every budget since 2008 and every single one of them has shown significant real INCREASES in spending.  every single one. The real question is why you could possibly believe a single word or policy that this mob of clowns announces.  You don't have to like Abbott and you are even entitled to feel justificably dubious.  But to continue to believe that labor can deliver a single thing it promises is lunacy.  After all, they have failed on every metric possible in 6 years. Let's break it down for you 1. Government announces spending cuts.  Wankjob opposes them. 2. Government passes spending cuts.  Wankjob promises to repeal them. 3. Government announces spending (ndis/Gonski).  Wankjob agrees with spending. 4. Wankjob keeps yelling debt and deficit. But opposes all cuts and promises to repeal them. That is why I can't vote for him.  Largely because it's moronic politics and moron policy.  You claim spending has increased dramatically.  Well surely it should be easy to cut it back to END TE WASTE. Let's hear it.

spending cuts???  only in class-warfare based cuts. never across the board.  Super tax increases - for high earners.  Even the FBT changes were targeted at high earners except the bozo missed and hit mainly middle income earners.  Of course if he'd asked someone - anyone - outside of the lunch room where he devised this, he would have known that.

I would like you to honestly tell me that you think Labor can bring the budget back to surplus and pay off the debt EVER.  and a second question: do you really think Rudd is going to suddenly change and deliver well-considered, properly costed polices that will work... this time?  They are the questions you should be answering.  You don't have to like Abbott but to believe that Rudd is better than... frankly anyone, in the job of PM doesn't not sit well on you.

bambu wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 6:59pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:54pm: bambu wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:51pm: Rudd failed miserably ... he was a pathetic Prime Minister, and so was his govt. Labor replaced him with Gillard, she was even worse...so Labor replaced her with Rudd, the pathetic PM they dumped previously. :) and yet the labor drongos want more of the same. Yes, not the sharpest tools in the shed.

public school, no degrees and welfare dependant.  that is their heartland.

Kat wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 6:48pm:

Quote: After all, they have failed on every metric possible in 6 years. Only in the minds of the truly deluded.

I disagree.

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 6:49pm:

Kat wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:48pm: Quote: After all, they have failed on every metric possible in 6 years. Only in the minds of the truly deluded. actually, in the minds of those who care and take note of more than the level of the dole which is your SOLE interest.  and BTW labor even failed you on that. please don't vote liberal.  We take almost anyone's vote.  but we really don't want yours.

Just smack off!

As usual, you have no smacking idea, so resort to abuse and slurs.

You haven't got a goddamned clue what my interests are, or are not. Suffice to say that listening to
bullshyt and being slagged for my opinions isn't one of them. So STFU.

As for my vote, you'll never get it while ever there's a single vestige of Howardism remaining in the
party.

If you don't like what I post, don't smacking read it.

...

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 7:03pm:

bambu wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:59pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:54pm: bambu wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:51pm: Rudd failed miserably ... he was a pathetic Prime Minister, and so was his govt. Labor replaced him with Gillard, she was even worse...so Labor replaced her with Rudd, the pathetic PM they dumped previously. :) and yet the labor drongos want more of the same. Yes, not the sharpest tools in the shed. public school, no degrees and welfare dependant.  that is their heartland.

Fair comment.

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 7:03pm:

bambu wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:59pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:54pm: bambu wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:51pm: Rudd failed miserably ... he was a pathetic Prime Minister, and so was his govt. Labor replaced him with Gillard, she was even worse...so Labor replaced her with Rudd, the pathetic PM they dumped previously. :) and yet the labor drongos want more of the same. Yes, not the sharpest tools in the shed. public school, no degrees and welfare dependant.  that is their heartland.

And again...

Know eye, dear.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 7:09pm:

Kat wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:48pm: Quote: After all, they have failed on every metric possible in 6 years. Only in the minds of the truly deluded. I disagree.

Hardly surprising, you always do.

Doesn't make you right, though...

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 7:03pm:

bambu wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:59pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:54pm: bambu wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:51pm: Rudd failed miserably ... he was a pathetic Prime Minister, and so was his govt. Labor replaced him with Gillard, she was even worse...so Labor replaced her with Rudd, the pathetic PM they dumped previously. :) and yet the labor drongos want more of the same. Yes, not the sharpest tools in the shed. public school, no degrees and welfare dependant.  that is their heartland.

Perhaps the option the conservatives are offering up is part of the problem.


The best way to get Malcolm Turnbull as PM, vote against Abbott.

Kat wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 7:12pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 7:03pm: bambu wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:59pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:54pm: bambu wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:51pm: Rudd failed miserably ... he was a pathetic Prime Minister, and so was his govt. Labor replaced him with Gillard, she was even worse...so Labor replaced her with Rudd, the pathetic PM they dumped previously. :) and yet the labor drongos want more of the same. Yes, not the sharpest tools in the shed. public school, no degrees and welfare dependant.  that is their heartland. And again... Know eye, dear.

please tell us that you are a private school educated, university graduate with a professional career and not welfare dependant.

Cant? 

QED

Kat wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 7:13pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 7:09pm: Kat wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:48pm: Quote: After all, they have failed on every metric possible in 6 years. Only in the minds of the truly deluded. I disagree. Hardly surprising, you always do. Doesn't make you right, though...

oh I don't know.  Just as with SOB and hangnail, disagreeing with you is 80% of being right.  The idea of you being right very often is preposterous.

____ wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 7:14pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 7:03pm: bambu wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:59pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:54pm: bambu wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:51pm: Rudd failed miserably ... he was a pathetic Prime Minister, and so was his govt. Labor replaced him with Gillard, she was even worse...so Labor replaced her with Rudd, the pathetic PM they dumped previously. :) and yet the labor drongos want more of the same. Yes, not the sharpest tools in the shed. public school, no degrees and welfare dependant.  that is their heartland. Perhaps the option the conservatives are offering up is part of the problem. The best way to get Malcolm Turnbull as PM, vote against Abbott.

speaking of the welfare-dependant, high school dropout... a green is back.

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 7:17pm:

____ wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 7:14pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 7:03pm: bambu wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:59pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:54pm: bambu wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:51pm: Rudd failed miserably ... he was a pathetic Prime Minister, and so was his govt. Labor replaced him with Gillard, she was even worse...so Labor replaced her with Rudd, the pathetic PM they dumped previously. :) and yet the labor drongos want more of the same. Yes, not the sharpest tools in the shed. public school, no degrees and welfare dependant.  that is their heartland. Perhaps the option the conservatives are offering up is part of the problem. The best way to get Malcolm Turnbull as PM, vote against Abbott. speaking of the welfare-dependant, high school dropout... a green is back.

Still nothing to sell from the small thinking conservative side.


Malcolm Turnbull will never be PM if people chose Abbott this time.

Abbott last = Malcolm Turnbull as a option at the next election.

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 6:41pm:

the problem is that there is little point in discussing policy with you. It doesn't matter what Abbott proposes, you will reject it for any one of a group of artificial reasons.

No they are perfectly valid questions and if answered who knows what my response would be.


longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 6:41pm:

And yet, you embrace Rudd with a passion that defies you otherwise obvious intelligence.

Ahh no not rudd but the actual policy.
Means testing the PHR makes sense
Closing tax loopholes is fine by me
BER was a good idea
Pink batts was a good one as well and tied in nicely with the CT adgenda
Single mothers is a bit tough can do with further refinement
CT no problem with that, although I would pefer to see money invested in R&D than the compo
You cant have a problem with Gonski or NDIS, Tony supports them so, well, so must you.




longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 6:41pm:

The man is a first rate fool.  Everything he touches turns to crap.  Every policy was designed over lunch and costed on a calculator. You would be hard pressed to point to a single policy that has worked and certainly not one that was cheap and effective.

You cant have both, either you want Cheap or you want Effective.

BTW the CT has worked quite well, IMO


longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 6:41pm:

yet you give him the benefit of the doubt again and again.

No personally I think the man is a sleazy little prick.
His whitanting over the last 2.5 years has been woeful.


longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 6:41pm:

There is almost no standard of 'bad PM' that Rudd could not go below.  I don't know if Abbott will be a good or a poor PM.  Nobody does.  But I am damned sure that virtually nobody could be more arrogant, more egotistical and more disaster-prone than Rudd.

Other than the the highlighted part you can have that.
As I keep saying I look at policy, not the leader, and so far as Al has so succiently put Abbott's is a fantasy which virtually locks in a more disaster.

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 7:16pm:

Kat wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 7:13pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 7:09pm: Kat wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:48pm: Quote: After all, they have failed on every metric possible in 6 years. Only in the minds of the truly deluded. I disagree. Hardly surprising, you always do. Doesn't make you right, though... oh I don't know.  Just as with SOB and hangnail, disagreeing with you is 80% of being right.  The idea of you being right very often is preposterous.

I'll take that as an endorsement of the fact that I am actually usually correct.

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 7:02pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:57pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:44pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:35pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:27pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:22pm: Actually that's also wrong longie.  First they were meant to be announced before budget.  Then after budget.  Now it's election. But not costed and still don't know when: probably sept 8th.  Come on mr intellect: labor has increased spending by 70% and revenue grew by 50% according to you.  SURELY FOR MR END THE WASTE GIVEN THESE FIGURES IT ISN'T TOO HARD TO ANNOUNCE WHAT THE SPENDING CUTS WILL Be?? Back to your fairyland. You are a disgrace. what nonsense.  for the last 6 months, every other week has shown a massive change in the govts fiscal position meaning that they are either lying or totally lost control of the economy. any how fool... when you can show me a detailed prescription for balancing the budget from that mob of buffoons who in 6 years have given us the 6 largest deficits ever, then come back and try again.  for now, you are just screaming because you know Labor are headed to political execution.  You can smell it just as everyone else can (except skippy of course). Amazing isnt it.  Your argument is that a party who HAS announced spending cuts can't do it but apparently your wankjob can, by only screaming debt and deficit and end the waste, without announcing one thing and opposing ALL CUTS.  end the hit, Ey?  ;D And my dismay is not for labor, but more for this country, because we are bound for pure lunacy. Ridiculous clown.  Go back to your dreamland. but its labor and this is about the 35th time we've heard 'spending cuts' from them and with the result being MORE spending and MORE debt every time. At what point do you stop simply believing Labors policies?  We were having spending cuts every budget since 2008 and every single one of them has shown significant real INCREASES in spending.  every single one. The real question is why you could possibly believe a single word or policy that this mob of clowns announces.  You don't have to like Abbott and you are even entitled to feel justificably dubious.  But to continue to believe that labor can deliver a single thing it promises is lunacy.  After all, they have failed on every metric possible in 6 years. Let's break it down for you 1. Government announces spending cuts.  Wankjob opposes them. 2. Government passes spending cuts.  Wankjob promises to repeal them. 3. Government announces spending (ndis/Gonski).  Wankjob agrees with spending. 4. Wankjob keeps yelling debt and deficit. But opposes all cuts and promises to repeal them. That is why I can't vote for him.  Largely because it's moronic politics and moron policy.  You claim spending has increased dramatically.  Well surely it should be easy to cut it back to END TE WASTE. Let's hear it. spending cuts???  only in class-warfare based cuts. never across the board.  Super tax increases - for high earners.  Even the FBT changes were targeted at high earners except the bozo missed and hit mainly middle income earners.  Of course if he'd asked someone - anyone - outside of the lunch room where he devised this, he would have known that. I would like you to honestly tell me that you think Labor can bring the budget back to surplus and pay off the debt EVER.  and a second question: do you really think Rudd is going to suddenly change and deliver well-considered, properly costed polices that will work... this time?  They are the questions you should be answering.  You don't have to like Abbott but to believe that Rudd is better than... frankly anyone, in the job of PM doesn't not sit well on you.

The difference is longie, rudd has at least laid out plans.  You may not agree with them, but he has put them on the table.

And wankjob?  Wankjob yells and yells and offers nothing. Stop ducking from the question and answer or p/off: what will tony cut? 

Dsmithy70 wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 7:24pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:41pm: the problem is that there is little point in discussing policy with you. It doesn't matter what Abbott proposes, you will reject it for any one of a group of artificial reasons.  No they are perfectly valid questions and if answered who knows what my response would be. longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:41pm: And yet, you embrace Rudd with a passion that defies you otherwise obvious intelligence. Ahh no not rudd but the actual policy. Means testing the PHR makes sense Closing tax loopholes is fine by me BER was a good idea Pink batts was a good one as well and tied in nicely with the CT adgenda Single mothers is a bit tough can do with further refinement CT no problem with that, although I would pefer to see money invested in R&D than the compo You cant have a problem with Gonski or NDIS, Tony supports them so, well, so must you. longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:41pm: The man is a first rate fool.  Everything he touches turns to crap.  Every policy was designed over lunch and costed on a calculator. You would be hard pressed to point to a single policy that has worked and certainly not one that was cheap and effective. You cant have both, either you want Cheap or you want Effective. BTW the CT has worked quite well, IMO longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:41pm: yet you give him the benefit of the doubt again and again. No personally I think the man is a sleazy little prick. His whitanting over the last 2.5 years has been woeful. longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:41pm: There is almost no standard of 'bad PM' that Rudd could not go below.  I don't know if Abbott will be a good or a poor PM.  Nobody does.  But I am damned sure that virtually nobody could be more arrogant, more egotistical and more disaster-prone than Rudd. Other than the the highlighted part you can have that. As I keep saying I look at policy, not the leader, and so far as Al has so succiently put Abbott's is a fantasy which virtually locks in a more disaster.

pink batts was a good idea??

your credibility gets shredded here.  In the midst of an economic crisis what does the Dudd pick on to save us all???  PINK BATTS!!!  and not only was it hopelessly managed and killed people, it also brought the insulation industry to its knees and destroyed some long-lasting companies.

now if you think pink batts was a 'good one' then I guess that explains why you liked BER, CT etc. 

on a related note, my business turns over about a million a year.  Since there is a downturn in the industry I think I should petition Rudd for some 'stimulus money'.  I promise I will give good value and I should only need $100M.  is that okay?  I promise to employ an extra couple of people - refugees if that will help.

Kat wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 7:26pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 7:16pm: Kat wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 7:13pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 7:09pm: Kat wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:48pm: Quote: After all, they have failed on every metric possible in 6 years. Only in the minds of the truly deluded. I disagree. Hardly surprising, you always do. Doesn't make you right, though... oh I don't know.  Just as with SOB and hangnail, disagreeing with you is 80% of being right.  The idea of you being right very often is preposterous. I'll take that as an endorsement of the fact that I am actually usually correct.

an educated person wouldn't.  a fool, however... would.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 7:28pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 7:02pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:57pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:44pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:35pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:27pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:22pm: Actually that's also wrong longie.  First they were meant to be announced before budget.  Then after budget.  Now it's election. But not costed and still don't know when: probably sept 8th.  Come on mr intellect: labor has increased spending by 70% and revenue grew by 50% according to you.  SURELY FOR MR END THE WASTE GIVEN THESE FIGURES IT ISN'T TOO HARD TO ANNOUNCE WHAT THE SPENDING CUTS WILL Be?? Back to your fairyland. You are a disgrace. what nonsense.  for the last 6 months, every other week has shown a massive change in the govts fiscal position meaning that they are either lying or totally lost control of the economy. any how fool... when you can show me a detailed prescription for balancing the budget from that mob of buffoons who in 6 years have given us the 6 largest deficits ever, then come back and try again.  for now, you are just screaming because you know Labor are headed to political execution.  You can smell it just as everyone else can (except skippy of course). Amazing isnt it.  Your argument is that a party who HAS announced spending cuts can't do it but apparently your wankjob can, by only screaming debt and deficit and end the waste, without announcing one thing and opposing ALL CUTS.  end the hit, Ey?  ;D And my dismay is not for labor, but more for this country, because we are bound for pure lunacy. Ridiculous clown.  Go back to your dreamland. but its labor and this is about the 35th time we've heard 'spending cuts' from them and with the result being MORE spending and MORE debt every time. At what point do you stop simply believing Labors policies?  We were having spending cuts every budget since 2008 and every single one of them has shown significant real INCREASES in spending.  every single one. The real question is why you could possibly believe a single word or policy that this mob of clowns announces.  You don't have to like Abbott and you are even entitled to feel justificably dubious.  But to continue to believe that labor can deliver a single thing it promises is lunacy.  After all, they have failed on every metric possible in 6 years. Let's break it down for you 1. Government announces spending cuts.  Wankjob opposes them. 2. Government passes spending cuts.  Wankjob promises to repeal them. 3. Government announces spending (ndis/Gonski).  Wankjob agrees with spending. 4. Wankjob keeps yelling debt and deficit. But opposes all cuts and promises to repeal them. That is why I can't vote for him.  Largely because it's moronic politics and moron policy.  You claim spending has increased dramatically.  Well surely it should be easy to cut it back to END TE WASTE. Let's hear it. spending cuts???  only in class-warfare based cuts. never across the board.  Super tax increases - for high earners.  Even the FBT changes were targeted at high earners except the bozo missed and hit mainly middle income earners.  Of course if he'd asked someone - anyone - outside of the lunch room where he devised this, he would have known that. I would like you to honestly tell me that you think Labor can bring the budget back to surplus and pay off the debt EVER.  and a second question: do you really think Rudd is going to suddenly change and deliver well-considered, properly costed polices that will work... this time?  They are the questions you should be answering.  You don't have to like Abbott but to believe that Rudd is better than... frankly anyone, in the job of PM doesn't not sit well on you. The difference is longie, rudd has at least laid out plans.  You may not agree with them, but he has put them on the table. And wankjob?  Wankjob yells and yells and offers nothing. Stop ducking from the question and answer or p/off: what will tony cut?

oh for goodness sake... the election is THREE HOURS OLD.  Even an SOB would at least grant Abbott a few days to start announcing policies.  Why cant you.

and wht has Rudd really announced???  more taxes on bank accounts.  more taxes on FBT affecting mainly middle income earners and more taxes on cigarettes.  not really big ticket items, is it?  so where is Rudds REAL POLICIES??

...

...

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 7:47pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 7:28pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 7:02pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:57pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:44pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:35pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:27pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:22pm: Actually that's also wrong longie.  First they were meant to be announced before budget.  Then after budget.  Now it's election. But not costed and still don't know when: probably sept 8th.  Come on mr intellect: labor has increased spending by 70% and revenue grew by 50% according to you.  SURELY FOR MR END THE WASTE GIVEN THESE FIGURES IT ISN'T TOO HARD TO ANNOUNCE WHAT THE SPENDING CUTS WILL Be?? Back to your fairyland. You are a disgrace. what nonsense.  for the last 6 months, every other week has shown a massive change in the govts fiscal position meaning that they are either lying or totally lost control of the economy. any how fool... when you can show me a detailed prescription for balancing the budget from that mob of buffoons who in 6 years have given us the 6 largest deficits ever, then come back and try again.  for now, you are just screaming because you know Labor are headed to political execution.  You can smell it just as everyone else can (except skippy of course). Amazing isnt it.  Your argument is that a party who HAS announced spending cuts can't do it but apparently your wankjob can, by only screaming debt and deficit and end the waste, without announcing one thing and opposing ALL CUTS.  end the hit, Ey?  ;D And my dismay is not for labor, but more for this country, because we are bound for pure lunacy. Ridiculous clown.  Go back to your dreamland. but its labor and this is about the 35th time we've heard 'spending cuts' from them and with the result being MORE spending and MORE debt every time. At what point do you stop simply believing Labors policies?  We were having spending cuts every budget since 2008 and every single one of them has shown significant real INCREASES in spending.  every single one. The real question is why you could possibly believe a single word or policy that this mob of clowns announces.  You don't have to like Abbott and you are even entitled to feel justificably dubious.  But to continue to believe that labor can deliver a single thing it promises is lunacy.  After all, they have failed on every metric possible in 6 years. Let's break it down for you 1. Government announces spending cuts.  Wankjob opposes them. 2. Government passes spending cuts.  Wankjob promises to repeal them. 3. Government announces spending (ndis/Gonski).  Wankjob agrees with spending. 4. Wankjob keeps yelling debt and deficit. But opposes all cuts and promises to repeal them. That is why I can't vote for him.  Largely because it's moronic politics and moron policy.  You claim spending has increased dramatically.  Well surely it should be easy to cut it back to END TE WASTE. Let's hear it. spending cuts???  only in class-warfare based cuts. never across the board.  Super tax increases - for high earners.  Even the FBT changes were targeted at high earners except the bozo missed and hit mainly middle income earners.  Of course if he'd asked someone - anyone - outside of the lunch room where he devised this, he would have known that. I would like you to honestly tell me that you think Labor can bring the budget back to surplus and pay off the debt EVER.  and a second question: do you really think Rudd is going to suddenly change and deliver well-considered, properly costed polices that will work... this time?  They are the questions you should be answering.  You don't have to like Abbott but to believe that Rudd is better than... frankly anyone, in the job of PM doesn't not sit well on you. The difference is longie, rudd has at least laid out plans.  You may not agree with them, but he has put them on the table. And wankjob?  Wankjob yells and yells and offers nothing. Stop ducking from the question and answer or p/off: what will tony cut?  oh for goodness sake... the election is THREE HOURS OLD.  Even an SOB would at least grant Abbott a few days to start announcing policies.  Why cant you. and wht has Rudd really announced???  more taxes on bank accounts.  more taxes on FBT affecting mainly middle income earners and more taxes on cigarettes.  not really big ticket items, is it?  so where is Rudds REAL POLICIES??

I'm not talking about election.  3 years of yelling "DEBT AND DEFICIT"and pledging to END THE WASTE, and yet when it comes down to it he accepts all labors big ticket spending and refuses to support ANY CUTS. 

You claim its very easy to find spending cuts.  Stop the circular arguing and avoiding. How will tony bring us back yo budget?  Enough living in fairy land.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 8:06pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 7:47pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 7:28pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 7:02pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:57pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:44pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:35pm: [quote author=longweekend58 link=1375596290/73#73 date=1375604822][quote author=alevine link=1375596290/70#70 date=1375604543]Actually that's also wrong longie.  First they were meant to be announced before budget.  Then after budget.  Now it's election. But not costed and still don't know when: probably sept 8th.  Come on mr intellect: labor has increased spending by 70% and revenue grew by 50% according to you.  SURELY FOR MR END THE WASTE GIVEN THESE FIGURES IT ISN'T TOO HARD TO ANNOUNCE WHAT THE SPENDING CUTS WILL Be?? Back to your fairyland. You are a disgrace. but its labor and this is about the 35th time we've heard 'spending cuts' from them and with the result being MORE spending and MORE debt every time. At what point do you stop simply believing Labors policies?  We were having spending cuts every budget since 2008 and every single one of them has shown significant real INCREASES in spending.  every single one. The real question is why you could possibly believe a single word or policy that this mob of clowns announces.  You don't have to like Abbott and you are even entitled to feel justificably dubious.  But to continue to believe that labor can deliver a single thing it promises is lunacy.  After all, they have failed on every metric possible in 6 years. Let's break it down for you 1. Government announces spending cuts.  Wankjob opposes them. 2. Government passes spending cuts.  Wankjob promises to repeal them. 3. Government announces spending (ndis/Gonski).  Wankjob agrees with spending. 4. Wankjob keeps yelling debt and deficit. But opposes all cuts and promises to repeal them. That is why I can't vote for him.  Largely because it's moronic politics and moron policy.  You claim spending has increased dramatically.  Well surely it should be easy to cut it back to END TE WASTE. Let's hear it. spending cuts???  only in class-warfare based cuts. never across the board.  Super tax increases - for high earners.  Even the FBT changes were targeted at high earners except the bozo missed and hit mainly middle income earners.  Of course if he'd asked someone - anyone - outside of the lunch room where he devised this, he would have known that. I would like you to honestly tell me that you think Labor can bring the budget back to surplus and pay off the debt EVER.  and a second question: do you really think Rudd is going to suddenly change and deliver well-considered, properly costed polices that will work... this time?  They are the questions you should be answering.  You don't have to like Abbott but to believe that Rudd is better than... frankly anyone, in the job of PM doesn't not sit well on you. The difference is longie, rudd has at least laid out plans.  You may not agree with them, but he has put them on the table. And wankjob?  Wankjob yells and yells and offers nothing. Stop ducking from the question and answer or p/off: what will tony cut?  oh for goodness sake... the election is THREE HOURS OLD.  Even an SOB would at least grant Abbott a few days to start announcing policies.  Why cant you. and wht has Rudd really announced???  more taxes on bank accounts.  more taxes on FBT affecting mainly middle income earners and more taxes on cigarettes.  not really big ticket items, is it?  so where is Rudds REAL POLICIES?? I'm not talking about election.  3 years of yelling "DEBT AND DEFICIT"and pledging to END THE WASTE, and yet when it comes down to it he accepts all labors big ticket spending and refuses to support ANY CUTS.  You claim its very easy to find spending cuts.  Stop the circular arguing and avoiding. How will tony bring us back yo budget?  Enough living in fairy land.

I can give you the longweekend58 policy on spending cuts. And I am sure you can give me the alevine policy on spending cuts. But until such time as Rudd and Abbott both announce their detailed policies we cannot discuss them.  I presume that is understood.  If this were skippy or SOB I would not assume that. 

Actually Abbott hasn't supported Labors big ticket items. That is just your desperate take on things.  CT, NBN anyone??  and the problem with labors spending cuts - such as they are - is that they ALWAYS target the upper end, not across the board.  While it might suit you politically and personally to do so, the money saved is trivial in the context of a massive deficit.  the money saved by the proposed high income super changes will net a total of $400m pa - enough to cover government borrowings for 4 days!  NDIS is worthwhile but in true labor fashion, totally unfunded.  GONSKI is just another delusional policy that is typical labor. throw more money at aproblema nd pretend that that is a solution.

...

Quote:

Opposition Leader Tony Abbott responds to news the election has been called for September 7. ''Australia is too open and positive a nation to retreat into a tight little ball of negativity,'' he said.

FMR....

But a ball the size of the moon, like he has been batting around for the past 3+ years, is OK.....

Wanker!!!!

:D

anyone Voting for Wikileaks?

You will notice longie that I'm not asking for longweekends spending cuts, but asking what proposals have come from wankjob?  It really isn't that hard.

He supports ndis
He supports Gonski
He supports compensation for CT but wants to rid of CT and spend government money to deweed the nation
He is against FBT
He is against health rebate means tests
He is against bank levy
He wants to rid of mining tax
He is against tobacco excise increase

So... What is mr end the waste for and how will he return to surplus?  Why is it so hard for you to answer?

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 7:45pm:

Kat wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 7:26pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 7:16pm: Kat wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 7:13pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 7:09pm: Kat wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:48pm: Quote: After all, they have failed on every metric possible in 6 years. Only in the minds of the truly deluded. I disagree. Hardly surprising, you always do. Doesn't make you right, though... oh I don't know.  Just as with SOB and hangnail, disagreeing with you is 80% of being right.  The idea of you being right very often is preposterous. I'll take that as an endorsement of the fact that I am actually usually correct. an educated person wouldn't.  a fool, however... would.

as if you'd have any idea what an educated person would do !!!!  ;D ;D ;D

Ok, so when will Abbott release his raft of policies ... he has no more excuses now to provide costing's either. Time to cough up.

Bring on the debate....

;)

John Smith wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 9:13pm:

Ok, so when will Abbott release his raft of policies ... he has no more excuses now to provide costing's either. Time to cough up.

expect them on Sept 8th.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 9:18pm:

John Smith wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 9:13pm: Ok, so when will Abbott release his raft of policies ... he has no more excuses now to provide costing's either. Time to cough up. expect them on Sept 8th.

yeah right .... by then he'll be whinging that we should go to another election again.

John Smith wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 9:12pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 7:45pm: Kat wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 7:26pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 7:16pm: Kat wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 7:13pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 7:09pm: Kat wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:48pm: Quote: After all, they have failed on every metric possible in 6 years. Only in the minds of the truly deluded. I disagree. Hardly surprising, you always do. Doesn't make you right, though... oh I don't know.  Just as with SOB and hangnail, disagreeing with you is 80% of being right.  The idea of you being right very often is preposterous. I'll take that as an endorsement of the fact that I am actually usually correct. an educated person wouldn't.  a fool, however... would. as if you'd have any idea what an educated person would do !!!!  ;D ;D ;D

A tad ironic given your background.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 9:34pm:

A tad ironic given your background.

I've told you countless times Andrei, you've no idea about me ... everything you've ever guessed is wrong, and yet you still keep putting your foot in it.

You've admitted you didn't go to university and you went to a state school.

It's not guess work, it's your education from your own admission.

So calling out others on education with your background is a bit unwise.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 9:42pm:

You've admitted you didn't go to university and you went to a state school. It's not guess work, it's your education from your own admission. So calling out others on education with your background is a bit unwise.

you are an idiot ... a highly educated idiot, but nethertheless an idiot.


Is University the only form of education available? Does one need a university degree to be educated?

You must get back ache carrying that chip around.

Still explains your support of the common mans party.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 9:49pm:

You must get back ache carrying that chip around. Still explains your support of the common mans party.

What chip are you on about now? Are you incapable of answering a simple question?

The chip on your shoulder about higher education is a waste of time and how private schools should get nothing because its them damn rich kids making life so bad for everyone else.

That chip.

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 7:45pm:

Kat wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 7:26pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 7:16pm: Kat wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 7:13pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 7:09pm: Kat wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 6:48pm: Quote: After all, they have failed on every metric possible in 6 years. Only in the minds of the truly deluded. I disagree. Hardly surprising, you always do. Doesn't make you right, though... oh I don't know.  Just as with SOB and hangnail, disagreeing with you is 80% of being right.  The idea of you being right very often is preposterous. I'll take that as an endorsement of the fact that I am actually usually correct. an educated person wouldn't.  a fool, however... would.

I wouldn't know, you'd have to ask a fool.

John Smith wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 9:44pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 9:42pm: You've admitted you didn't go to university and you went to a state school. It's not guess work, it's your education from your own admission. So calling out others on education with your background is a bit unwise. you are an idiot ... a highly educated idiot, but nethertheless an idiot. Is University the only form of education available? Does one need a university degree to be educated?

Only if one is a self-centred elitist pr1ck.

John Smith wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 9:13pm:

Ok, so when will Abbott release his raft of policies ... he has no more excuses now to provide costing's either. Time to cough up.

7 hours into an election...

even a fool would grant a little more time than that.

BTW where is Rudds tax policy?

Where is Rudds Health Policy

Where is Rudds Education Policy?

John Smith wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 9:44pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 9:42pm: You've admitted you didn't go to university and you went to a state school. It's not guess work, it's your education from your own admission. So calling out others on education with your background is a bit unwise. you are an idiot ... a highly educated idiot, but nethertheless an idiot. Is University the only form of education available? Does one need a university degree to be educated?

well actually.... yeah

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 4:11pm:

In other news, share market up 10000 points.  Ey, longie? ;D

????????

SOB

http://spotofborg.com/files/persecution5.jpg

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 9:49pm:

You must get back ache carrying that chip around. Still explains your support of the common mans party.

The common mans party? You mean the workers? That was a long time ago - they are just like the others now.

SOB
http://spotofborg.com/files/persecution5.jpg

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 10:12pm:

The chip on your shoulder about higher education is a waste of time and how private schools should get nothing because its them damn rich kids making life so bad for everyone else. That chip.

Private schools shouldn't get money because they are private.

SOB

http://spotofborg.com/files/persecution5.jpg

Mr Rudd claimed underdog status

oh dear lord... does anyone fall for that anymore...  :-[

http://blogs.news.com.au/images/uploads/frontpage_thumb.png

Editorial here:

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/opinion/consign-rudd-to-the-bin-of-history/story-fni0cwl5-1226691046953

8-)

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 10:12pm:

The chip on your shoulder about higher education is a waste of time and how private schools should get nothing because its them damn rich kids making life so bad for everyone else. That chip.

you keep going on about it, not me. It appears you cannot accept that even with your higher education, you are made to look a fool by the lowly uneducated working class on this forum.

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 11:27pm:

John Smith wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 9:13pm: Ok, so when will Abbott release his raft of policies ... he has no more excuses now to provide costing's either. Time to cough up. 7 hours into an election... even a fool would grant a little more time than that. BTW where is Rudds tax policy? Where is Rudds Health Policy Where is Rudds Education Policy?

He's had 3 yrs to prepare. He said he would release them, I expect them to be released after the election is called.  Do you want him to wait until the 6/09/13 before he releases them longy?

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 11:28pm:

John Smith wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 9:44pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 9:42pm: You've admitted you didn't go to university and you went to a state school. It's not guess work, it's your education from your own admission. So calling out others on education with your background is a bit unwise. you are an idiot ... a highly educated idiot, but nethertheless an idiot. Is University the only form of education available? Does one need a university degree to be educated? well actually.... yeah

than you are a bigger idiot than Andrei

Rudd won’t even hold his own seat.

Bye Bye Kevin

John Smith wrote on Aug 5^th, 2013 at 8:35am:

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 11:28pm: John Smith wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 9:44pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 9:42pm: You've admitted you didn't go to university and you went to a state school. It's not guess work, it's your education from your own admission. So calling out others on education with your background is a bit unwise. you are an idiot ... a highly educated idiot, but nethertheless an idiot. Is University the only form of education available? Does one need a university degree to be educated? well actually.... yeah than you are a bigger idiot than Andrei

'It's too close to call...'    ;)

Kat wrote on Aug 5^th, 2013 at 8:40am:

John Smith wrote on Aug 5th, 2013 at 8:35am: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 11:28pm: John Smith wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 9:44pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 9:42pm: You've admitted you didn't go to university and you went to a state school. It's not guess work, it's your education from your own admission. So calling out others on education with your background is a bit unwise. you are an idiot ... a highly educated idiot, but nethertheless an idiot. Is University the only form of education available? Does one need a university degree to be educated? well actually.... yeah than you are a bigger idiot than Andrei 'It's too close to call...'    ;)

true, just when you think you've got it figured out, the other one pops out with something even dumber than the last

Gentlemen! There are many levels of education that are valued. I for one value a university education but I also believe you don't need one to be successful.

I also believe a university degree does not give anyone the right to belittle others that have not acquired a uni degree.

De-registered User wrote on Aug 5^th, 2013 at 9:11am:

Gentlemen! There are many levels of education that are valued. I for one value a university education but I also believe you don't need one to be successful.

How do you define "successful"?

De-registered User wrote on Aug 5^th, 2013 at 9:11am:

I also believe a university degree does not give anyone the right to belittle others that have not acquired a uni degree.

Pay attention Andrei ......

Which party best suits your vision for Australia?

I came close to the middle - a bit closer to Labor than Liberal according to their compass

http://www.abc.net.au/votecompass/