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

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

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

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

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


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

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

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

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

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

Now we have to foot the bill.


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

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


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

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

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

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

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



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

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


You are seriously the BIGGEST dipshit in this entire forum.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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