Australia will grow to like Tony Abbott as PM

[noddy]

Well thats just a blatant lie and unbecoming of you noddy.

Firstly, the signs stated "Ditch The Witch" and "Juliar, Bob Browns Bitch"
Nothing about killing her.

Secondly, they were held up whilst he was talking and he had his back to them. He doesn't have eyes in the back of his head nor is he a clairvoyant.

Is this what's its come to - people having to make up lies to excuse their hatred of him.....

Well i might have exaggerated the kill bit but if you think his advisers knew nothing of those signs being out there & not informing Tone of them well what does that say?

 

[Daytripper]

Well i might have exaggerated the kill bit but if you think his advisers knew nothing of those signs being out there & not informing Tone of them well what does that say?

How the hell are they meant to know about them if they are held up at the last minute.

Abbotts advisers have been very good so far on the PR front. Without a doubt in the world they would have advised him not to go out or stand somewhere else if they knew those signs were there.

 

[noddy]

How the hell are they meant to know about them if they are held up at the last minute.

Abbotts advisers have been very good so far on the PR front. Without a doubt in the world they would have advised him not to go out or stand somewhere else if they knew those signs were there.

If you are right about that then why did he not immediately walk away instead of continuing on with his slogan speech when those signs came out surely there was enough of his shadow cabinet standing beside on the platform not to mention his own advisers.

 

[Admiral Byng]

By the way, I have no problem if people have antipathy towards Abbott but I'm getting increasingly disgusted by those who who use his Catholicism as an outlet for their hate.

Why? Seems a perfectly reasonable thing to me - I mean there were christian pastors advising against voting for Gillard after she professed her non-belief.

But if that's not enough, he has the backing of the climate change denialist faction, and right-wing free marketeers. I don't like that shit either.

I've voted Liberal for the last 20 years, apart from 2010 with Abbott as leader.

 

[noddy]

Not to worry Daytripper & Dan it's all in the bag & Tone just has to walk the rest of the way into the lodge.

"I will be PM': Tony Abbott"
http://www.theage.com.au/queensland/i-will-be-pm-tony-abbott-20120304-1uap3.html

 

[Daytripper]

Why? Seems a perfectly reasonable thing to me - I mean there were christian pastors advising against voting for Gillard after she professed her non-belief.

Who?
What numbers are we talking about here?

Do you think that church congregations in general blindly go out and act upon their religious leaders instructions?

Because some Muslim clerics advocate terrorism, are all Muslims terrorists?

But if that's not enough, he has the backing of the climate change denialist faction, and right-wing free marketeers. I don't like that shit either.

I've voted Liberal for the last 20 years, apart from 2010 with Abbott as leader.

Fine - that is a legitimate reason.
Not that I agree with it....

 

[dockshark]

Haveyou ever heard the phrase, "It's the economy, stupid." If you have a strong economy, everything else flows on from that. ...................................................

I said beyond the economy, and what have we got....more about the economy. You are putting words in my mouth, and making sweeping assumptions about what labor would have done or what the coalition would have done.

I've tried to hold a rational dialogue with you, but it appears that is impossible. Short of unsubstantiated claims about economic mismanagement, you haven't even rationalised your disdain for this government, instead you are focussed on using juvenile pejorative terms like rabble.

I can't be bothered with this, or you. Please go ahead and mindlessly cast your vote however you see fit.

 

[dockshark]

Who

Fine - that is a legitimate reason.
Not that I agree with it....

Which bit do you disagree with?

 

[Admiral Byng]

Who?
What numbers are we talking about here?

Do you think that church congregations in general blindly go out and act upon their religious leaders instructions?

Not all of them, but some would be influenced. With such a fine margin in election it could have made a difference.

Who - off-hand I recall Arch-bishop of Perth (Hickey?) and the Hillsong/Catch the Fire mobs making public comment about it

 

[Daytripper]

Who - off-hand I recall Arch-bishop of Perth (Hickey?) and the Hillsong/Catch the Fire mobs making public comment about it

What exactly did they say?
Is this just another urban myth?

 

[Admiral Byng]

What exactly did they say?
Is this just another urban myth?

I'm just going off memory here. It was the usual sort of stuff, claim firstly that Australian society is based in christian values, then say that a non-believer as PM would either not uphold christian values or even outright undermine them. This would lead to gay marriage, gay adoption, euthanasia, Medicare funded abortions, loss of funding for independent christian education, loss of tax exempt status for churches... the usual concerns. I'm not going to go looking for their exact words.

 

[Eastern Rangers]

Well, it is the most important factor by a long way.

If you have no money, you have no opportunity to create other legislation that is more social in nature.

The Ability to legislate effectively is far more important than fiscal policy, which Labor and the Liberals are in agreement on (I known it takes more than policy to achieve a surplus of 1% over cycle.)

Either way Costello didn't at all rate Abbott's when it came to his fiscal resilience and discipline.

Either way I don't rate Abbott at the moment.

He's clearly a popularist, that in his campaign to become prime minister is appealing to the dregs' of Australian society. For a Rhodes Scholar his attitudes towards intellectualism, academia and science is disappointing.

Abbott like the Tea Party movement is funnelling Andrew Jackson and his people's democracy.

I wasn't a fan of Barnett before he was elected, but he's a different sought of conservative.

 

[King Elvis]

Well the NBN is the most notable, but you may not realise that there were over 40000 construction projects conducted around Australia as part of the stimulus packages. They have also spent upwards of 10 billion dollars on roads and infrstructure projects in regional Australia. They have invested heavily (both stimulus and other spending) in public shcool upgrades, as well as a significant increase to local government funding. Around 800 million has gone into the Regional and Local Community Infrastructure Program, which gave grants to help fund local infrastructure projects such as community centres, town halls, park and playgrounds, pools and sports facilities. There has also been billions injected into upgrading and improving rail infrastructure around the country.

There is heaps more but you get the idea....

Where has the rest of the ~$180B gone then

 

[dockshark]

Where has the rest of the ~$180B gone then

Not sure where you're going here, but if you genuinely want to know where all the money was directed then go and look, it's all available.

 

[King Elvis]

Well i might have exaggerated the kill bit but if you think his advisers knew nothing of those signs being out there & not informing Tone of them well what does that say?

Kim Sattler wasn't holding one, was she?

 

[Paradigm]

you mean this, as lifted from the medicare site ?



looks like you've been pwnd buddy

You idiot.
Try again.
If an apprentice has Private Health apparently he is subsidising someone who earns shitloads who has private health.

The same apprentice has the same deal as the high roller with regards medicare if they both have Private health.

If you bothered to read what people write you would realise that I stated I actually agree with means testing Private Health rebates. So why not the consistency and means test Medicare? Same high roller with Private Health can walk into a public hospital and not pay a cent.

 

[Paradigm]

You're still missing the point. The two things are not related. Just because there are people suffering in Africa does not justify us treating asylum seekers and refugees from Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria etc with contempt. People deserve to be treated humanely, and with dignity regardless of where they have come from.

You're trying to suggest that if people were not attempting to come here via boats, then we would be doing more in Africa. This is a very long bow, and is impossible to substantiate. It's like saying we shouldn't bother doing research into diabetes, because more people die of cancer.

I have not made any personal attacks on you. I'm simply pointing out that you don't know enough about this subject to make the statements you are making. Calling asylum seekers economic country shoppers only serves to illustrate your ignorance, not to mention it is highly offensive. I'd love to know how many boat borne refugees you've met, or had discussions with. Perhaps you should seek some out, and hear there stories......that would certainly snap you out of your comfort zone, and force you to open your mind. I have met hundreds through my work, and many of their stories are horrifying.

Don't simply believe what you read in the media, gets out there and see things for yourself.

PS- I am absolutely certain that you have no idea what the answers are to the questions you have posed.

Jesus ...I would have thought a refugee was a refugee and it shouldn't matter where they come from? I'm disputing their genuine status as a refugee.


But then you say "regardless of where they come from" - how about how they get here?

No - it MATTERS how they get here - it MATTERS that they have no passports etc - it matters that they do not have a UNHCR card. It MATTERS that they are taking the place of someone who has absolutely not a hope in Hell of getting here other than to patiently wait.
How many boat people I have met?

You're kidding me - right - I lived through the 80's when the Vietnamese arrived - now THEY were genuine refugees. They did not have two cents to rub together.

I find your position of allowing someone that has crossed probably 4 countries to get here and pay to get in illegally, offensive to all the people that have stuck it out in refo camps for decades. Why don't these economic country shoppers use their valid passport and their $10000 to fly to a country and then claim refugee status? I've always wondered that.


And FWIW I have just had to get a passport . I swear - the bullshit I had to get - it's harder to get OUT the country than IN !
Anyway this is off topic.

 

[Pessimistic]

You idiot.
Try again.
If an apprentice has Private Health apparently he is subsidising someone who earns shitloads who has private health.

The same apprentice has the same deal as the high roller with regards medicare if they both have Private health.

If you bothered to read what people write you would realise that I stated I actually agree with means testing Private Health rebates. So why not the consistency and means test Medicare? Same high roller with Private Health can walk into a public hospital and not pay a cent.

I ahe never heard so many people wank on about a throwawAY line than this.

Howabout Helen Krogers claim in the sam program that health insurance was INVESYMENT ? total crap.

Of course it needs to be means tested

 

[Old Skool]

Is anyone else hearing murmurs of a challenge against Abbott?

 

[Admiral Byng]

Is anyone else hearing murmurs of a challenge against Abbott?

Not me. I'm at home in Perth watching the cricket.

 

[stuart27]

Is anyone else hearing murmurs of a challenge against Abbott?

No, but regardless, I don't think the LNP will have Abbott contest the next election.

He'll get the tap sometime in the next 12 months, and be replaced by a leader who can take the middle (Turnbull et al), leaving the LNP to romp it in.

 

[Paradigm]

I ahe never heard so many people wank on about a throwawAY line than this.

Howabout Helen Krogers claim in the sam program that health insurance was INVESYMENT ? total crap.

Of course it needs to be means tested

And I agree - FFS ...this is now the 4th time I've said it,

I'm talking about consistency.
You want people OUT of the Public system - you either discourage them from using it or you make it more attractive to use the Private system. At the moment there is absolutely nothing to discourage millionaires using the Public system.

I don't call $80000 a year a super rich person though. And I think you will find (if they are going to claw back something like $2.4billion ) they will be looking at a fairly large percentage of people probably betweeen $80000pa and $150000pa - the latter which I do call rich.

All I suggested was that this is a policy aimed at , what they perceive , as rich people. In which case - how about some consistency with Medicare.

Private Health is an investment. Anything that works to take the load off the public system is a benefit and I believe - could be wrong, that participation in Private Health went from roughly 33% to over 40% when the rebate was introduced. Then you have the Dental issue. By allowing Dental in Medicare , the govt will have to find shitloads more dentists. The will be increasing the demand on dentists and yet I have heard nothing about who is going to fix all these people's teeth.

It's another good idea that is being badly implemented and not thought through.

 

[Paradigm]

Is anyone else hearing murmurs of a challenge against Abbott?

Oh...seriously ....

from who?

 

[Pessimistic]

And I agree - FFS ...this is now the 4th time I've said it,

I'm talking about consistency.
You want people OUT of the Public system - you either discourage them from using it or you make it more attractive to use the Private system. At the moment there is absolutely nothing to discourage millionaires using the Public system.

I don't call $80000 a year a super rich person though. And I think you will find (if they are going to claw back something like $2.4billion ) they will be looking at a fairly large percentage of people probably betweeen $80000pa and $150000pa - the latter which I do call rich.

All I suggested was that this is a policy aimed at , what they perceive , as rich people. In which case - how about some consistency with Medicare.

Private Health is an investment. Anything that works to take the load off the public system is a benefit and I believe - could be wrong, that participation in Private Health went from roughly 33% to over 40% when the rebate was introduced. Then you have the Dental issue. By allowing Dental in Medicare , the govt will have to find shitloads more dentists. The will be increasing the demand on dentists and yet I have heard nothing about who is going to fix all these people's teeth.

It's another good idea that is being badly implemented and not thought through.

The private system has a snowballs chance in hell of being the place to have serious health issues dealt with.

They are good at knees ans teeth etc. if I were a billionaire I'd be going to the people who get plenty of experience in serioaus health issues - public health - dont give shit about economic arguments - you go to the best

And its not an investment - its insurance we are talking about insurees here, not the government

 

[Daytripper]

Oh...seriously ....

from who?

Poor Old Skool and his vivid imagination again.