Australian Politics Forum - policies, not parties

freediver Gold Member Online www.ozpolitic.com Posts: 49460 At my desk.	Re: policies, not parties Reply #45 - Oct 2^nd, 2011 at 11:35am Quote: freediver in this thread asked for a discussion on policies without party politics Not exactly. I started a discussion on the merits of each approach.
Back to top	People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words. IP Logged

Maqqa

Gold Member

Offline

14% - that low?!

Posts: 16000

Re: policies, not parties
Reply #46 - Oct 2^nd, 2011 at 1:06pm

freediver wrote on Sep 25^th, 2011 at 12:21pm:

This is my main criticism of the 'mindless partisan chearleader' mentality, and my reason for starting a seoparate board for partisan issues. A party can afford a certain level of hypocrisy in it's policies, and to change policies over time in a way that does not necessarily make sense, because they inevitably represent the opinions of many people. For a person to do the same does not makle sense. I find it hard to understand how someone could be so devoted to a political party despite this.

A good example is climate change policy. The Greens were the second party I know of to support a carbon tax. Abbott has spoken out in support of a carbon tax as the cheapest way to reduce emissions. Turnbull gave the idea guarded approval also. The only person flatly rejecting the idea going into the last elecetion is Gillard, yet here we are a short time later with Gillard promoting a carbon tax and Abbott decrying it as the end of the world. How could anyone take a genuine stand on the issue while still backing one of the major parties?

In my opinion, people become party chearleaders to avoid having to think for themselves. They get an idea in their head that one of the parties stands for something, then spend the rest of the time ignoring and excusing all the policies that go against that.

I am glad you are providing a great commentary of your hypocrisy freediver

everyone has seen my challenge to you and you've not acknowledged it

enough said regardless of how you want to squirm out of it

to understand the merits of each approach you need to understand and admit why an approach is needed in the first place

why is Labor adopting the carbon tax is based on the failout from December 2007 and Rudd's CPRS which was implemented to fix the failout from December 2007

why the LIBs adopt it's carbon approach is based on the fall out from December 2007 as well as subsequent disastrous policies from the ALP

if a surgeon cuts off your leg to save your life do you sue him for losing your leg or are you thankful for him for saving your life

you want to focus on losing the leg so you can blame Abbott - that's not a policy discussion but rather the mindless chearleading you referred to your first post

Back to top

« Last Edit: Oct 2^nd, 2011 at 1:11pm by Maqqa »

Bill 14% is not the alcohol content of that wine. It's your poll number

IP Logged

freediver Gold Member Online www.ozpolitic.com Posts: 49460 At my desk.	Re: policies, not parties Reply #47 - Oct 2^nd, 2011 at 1:10pm I acknowledge you like to set up silly rules that people have to follow before they are allowed to debate you. I would hardly call them challenges.
Back to top	People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words. IP Logged

Maqqa

Gold Member

Offline

14% - that low?!

Posts: 16000

Re: policies, not parties
Reply #48 - Oct 2^nd, 2011 at 1:13pm

freediver wrote on Oct 2^nd, 2011 at 1:10pm:

I acknowledge you like to set up silly rules that people have to follow before they are allowed to debate you. I would hardly call them challenges.

likewise you've set up your "policy discussion" and your rule is not to admit why are need the policy in the first place

pot meet kettle

btw

the other so called intellectual left aren't backing you in this one are they?

can't refute my UNFCCC reference over your collection of articles

Back to top

Bill 14% is not the alcohol content of that wine. It's your poll number

IP Logged

freediver Gold Member Online www.ozpolitic.com Posts: 49460 At my desk.	Re: policies, not parties Reply #49 - Oct 2^nd, 2011 at 1:17pm I don't admit it because it is wrong Maqqa.
Back to top	People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words. IP Logged

Dnarever Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 59372 Here Gender:	Re: policies, not parties Reply #50 - Oct 2^nd, 2011 at 1:41pm Maqqa wrote on Oct 2^nd, 2011 at 11:12am: (3) Please show the actual Howard's Policy then we'll discuss it If you would like to discuss the Howard policy then I suggest that you look it up yourself.
Back to top	IP Logged

Dnarever

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 59372
Here
Gender: male

Re: policies, not parties
Reply #51 - Oct 2^nd, 2011 at 1:54pm

Maqqa wrote on Oct 2^nd, 2011 at 11:25am:

Here's an example freediver

Now the ALP is blaming the LIBs for it

"

This is another area where Labor is trying to please the conservatives and as usual and expected it backfires.

Off shore solutions is the Liberals approach and it is what they support.

wet here we have Tony Abbott standing in the way of using any off shore solution.

The Liberals are not being asked to support the Malaysia proposition only to support legislation which would make any off shore policy tenable.

I personally do not support this policy at all no matter who wants to impliment it or where but it is impossible to not clearly identify that at the moment it is Tony who is preventing the use of any off shore solution.

Back to top

IP Logged

Andrei.Hicks

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 23818
Carlsbad, CA
Gender: male

Re: policies, not parties
Reply #52 - Oct 2^nd, 2011 at 2:17pm

Dnarever wrote on Oct 2^nd, 2011 at 1:54pm:

Maqqa wrote on Oct 2^nd, 2011 at 11:25am:

Here's an example freediver

Now the ALP is blaming the LIBs for it

"

This is another area where Labor is trying to please the conservatives and as usual and expected it backfires.

Off shore solutions is the Liberals approach and it is what they support.

wet here we have Tony Abbott standing in the way of using any off shore solution.

The Liberals are not being asked to support the Malaysia proposition only to support legislation which would make any off shore policy tenable.

I personally do not support this policy at all no matter who wants to impliment it or where but it is impossible to not clearly identify that at the moment it is Tony who is preventing the use of any off shore solution.

I agree with you.
The correct approach would have been for Abbott to support the Government's bill on changing the law to allow offshore processing.

At the end of the day, whilst we all agree on where they should be processed, we all agree that we want as few asylum seekers as possible coming into Australia and many of us don't want them entering Australia at all for processing.

The Government is gone whenever there is an election. Supporting them on this would not have allowed them to claw back their unrecoverable popular standing.

As someone who sits to the Right on political opinion, Abbott was wrong here.

Back to top

Anyone who lives within their means suffers from a lack of imagination - Oscar Wilde

IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: policies, not parties
Reply #53 - Oct 2^nd, 2011 at 2:34pm

Dnarever wrote on Oct 2^nd, 2011 at 1:54pm:

Maqqa wrote on Oct 2^nd, 2011 at 11:25am:

Here's an example freediver

Now the ALP is blaming the LIBs for it

"

This is another area where Labor is trying to please the conservatives and as usual and expected it backfires.

Off shore solutions is the Liberals approach and it is what they support.

wet here we have Tony Abbott standing in the way of using any off shore solution.

The Liberals are not being asked to support the Malaysia proposition only to support legislation which would make any off shore policy tenable.

I personally do not support this policy at all no matter who wants to impliment it or where but it is impossible to not clearly identify that at the moment it is Tony who is preventing the use of any off shore solution.

how naive can you be? The govt has unequivocably said they intend to use the Malaysian solution. and that solution foundered for all the reason that horrified most of us. Abbott isnt against offshore processing. He is against giving the govt carte-blanche to select ANY country, including those that have not sign the UN refugee protocol. I dont know why you think that is so difficul to understand. Abbott supports off-shore - just not ANY shore.

Back to top

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."

IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: policies, not parties
Reply #54 - Oct 2^nd, 2011 at 2:37pm

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Oct 2^nd, 2011 at 2:17pm:

Dnarever wrote on Oct 2^nd, 2011 at 1:54pm:

Maqqa wrote on Oct 2^nd, 2011 at 11:25am:

Here's an example freediver

Now the ALP is blaming the LIBs for it

"

This is another area where Labor is trying to please the conservatives and as usual and expected it backfires.

Off shore solutions is the Liberals approach and it is what they support.

wet here we have Tony Abbott standing in the way of using any off shore solution.

The Liberals are not being asked to support the Malaysia proposition only to support legislation which would make any off shore policy tenable.

I personally do not support this policy at all no matter who wants to impliment it or where but it is impossible to not clearly identify that at the moment it is Tony who is preventing the use of any off shore solution.

I agree with you.
The correct approach would have been for Abbott to support the Government's bill on changing the law to allow offshore processing.

At the end of the day, whilst we all agree on where they should be processed, we all agree that we want as few asylum seekers as possible coming into Australia and many of us don't want them entering Australia at all for processing.

The Government is gone whenever there is an election. Supporting them on this would not have allowed them to claw back their unrecoverable popular standing.

As someone who sits to the Right on political opinion, Abbott was wrong here.

and your support for off-shore/any-shore is because you have zero regard for the welfare of refugees? Nauru is STILL available to the government. they just dont want to use it for political reasons.

Back to top

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."

IP Logged

Maqqa

Gold Member

Offline

14% - that low?!

Posts: 16000

Re: policies, not parties
Reply #55 - Oct 2^nd, 2011 at 4:43pm

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Oct 2^nd, 2011 at 2:17pm:

Dnarever wrote on Oct 2^nd, 2011 at 1:54pm:

Maqqa wrote on Oct 2^nd, 2011 at 11:25am:

Here's an example freediver

Now the ALP is blaming the LIBs for it

"

This is another area where Labor is trying to please the conservatives and as usual and expected it backfires.

Off shore solutions is the Liberals approach and it is what they support.

wet here we have Tony Abbott standing in the way of using any off shore solution.

The Liberals are not being asked to support the Malaysia proposition only to support legislation which would make any off shore policy tenable.

I personally do not support this policy at all no matter who wants to impliment it or where but it is impossible to not clearly identify that at the moment it is Tony who is preventing the use of any off shore solution.

I agree with you.
The correct approach would have been for Abbott to support the Government's bill on changing the law to allow offshore processing.

At the end of the day, whilst we all agree on where they should be processed, we all agree that we want as few asylum seekers as possible coming into Australia and many of us don't want them entering Australia at all for processing.

The Government is gone whenever there is an election. Supporting them on this would not have allowed them to claw back their unrecoverable popular standing.

As someone who sits to the Right on political opinion, Abbott was wrong here.

I disagree

If Abbott allows the amendments to go through then Gillard will say that Abbott supports the Malaysian Solution

Gillard will use her amendments to implement the Malaysian Solution

Of course when in government Abbott will use it to implement the Nauru Solution

So it comes down to which solution can Australians be assured that illegals are treated humanely

Clearly the High Court has rule the Malaysian Solution is unworkable

Back to top

Bill 14% is not the alcohol content of that wine. It's your poll number

IP Logged

Maqqa Gold Member Offline 14% - that low?! Posts: 16000	Re: policies, not parties Reply #56 - Oct 2^nd, 2011 at 4:44pm Dnarever wrote on Oct 2^nd, 2011 at 1:41pm: Maqqa wrote on Oct 2^nd, 2011 at 11:12am: (3) Please show the actual Howard's Policy then we'll discuss it If you would like to discuss the Howard policy then I suggest that you look it up yourself. I didn't make the claim DNA - so I am not required to provide the evidence
Back to top	Bill 14% is not the alcohol content of that wine. It's your poll number IP Logged

Dnarever

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 59372
Here
Gender: male

Re: policies, not parties
Reply #57 - Oct 2^nd, 2011 at 5:46pm

Maqqa wrote on Oct 2^nd, 2011 at 4:44pm:

Dnarever wrote on Oct 2^nd, 2011 at 1:41pm:

Maqqa wrote on Oct 2^nd, 2011 at 11:12am:

(3) Please show the actual Howard's Policy then we'll discuss it

If you would like to discuss the Howard policy then I suggest that you look it up yourself.

I didn't make the claim DNA - so I am not required to provide the evidence

I only stated a known fact and have no interest in discussing it.

Back to top

IP Logged

Dnarever

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 59372
Here
Gender: male

Re: policies, not parties
Reply #58 - Oct 2^nd, 2011 at 5:53pm

OK then - you win - I will do your research for you.

Australia: Strong, Prosperous and Secure
Coalition policies—National progress

Australia’s ChoiceTo reduce domestic emissions at least economic cost, we will establish a world-class domestic emissions trading scheme in Australia (planned to commence in 2011). We are also committed to capturing the opportunities from being among the first movers on carbon trading in the Asia-Pacific region.

We will set a long-term emissions reduction goal for Australia in 2008 after carefully assessing the impact on our economy and on families. This target will be both environmentally credible and economically
achievable, with flexibility built in to reset the emissions trajectory in light of international developments and if new scientific information or technologies become available.

Establishing an emissions trading scheme and setting an emissions target will be among the most important economic decisions Australia will take in the next decade. Only the Coalition can be trusted to make the right decisions on these major economic reforms.

Developing key low emissions technologies is crucial to a comprehensive climate change policy framework. The Coalition has a vision of Australia as an energy superpower in the 21st Century.

Back to top

IP Logged

Dnarever Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 59372 Here Gender:	Re: policies, not parties Reply #59 - Oct 2^nd, 2011 at 6:06pm Maqqa wrote on Oct 2^nd, 2011 at 4:43pm: I disagree If Abbott allows the amendments to go through then Gillard will say that Abbott supports the Malaysian Solution Rubbish she would never get away with that.
Back to top	IP Logged