The Greens

[Hawk Dork]

Not a waste of time I recon. Waste of money unfortunately that seems to be getting truer as the years go by

Greens Policy

Tertiary Education


41. Free TAFE and university for Australian citizens and residents in a fee- and charges-free system where income contingent loans are unnecessary and the Commonwealth government increases its contribution to the costs of a high quality accessible system.

Education | The Australian Greens

Principles The Australian Greens believe that: Education is principally a public good. Differences in educational outcomes should not be the result of difference in wealth, income, power, possessions or location. Universal access to high quality education is fundamental to Australia’s economic...

greens.org.au

 

[SSwans2011]

Seriously though, what's the obsession with dole bludgers?

All the biggest bludgers I've ever met have bludged off their parents, not welfare payments that keep you comfortably below the poverty line.

 

[Carringbush2010]

The original

My preferred version
View attachment 1299465

Even if he did all that, he'd still be more competent than nomo.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

Even if he did all that, he'd still be more competent than nomo.

Nomo, is that scomo's Japanese cousin?

 

[Carringbush2010]

Nomo, is that scomo's Japanese cousin?

Yeah Nomo from marketing - cept he's efficient.

 

[Saint]

Seriously though, what's the obsession with dole bludgers?

All the biggest bludgers I've ever met have bludged off their parents, not welfare payments that keep you comfortably below the poverty line.

True, but I'm not paying for the parent bludgers.

That's the media trick. They make people think that they're paying directly for bong-smoking. When welfare for Newstart is probably less than 1% of the personal income tax bill. We pay a lot more to fossil fuel companies (who don't pay their own taxes).

God, I wish the Greens would just stick to that basic stuff and not talk about how they're going to impose their morals on everybody the first chance they get.

 

[Johnny Bananas]

I think this is where the Greens are wrong. Everyone knows that an ALP Govt will require Greens support, just like the Libs rely on the Nats.

Do they? Because the betting markets don't. If this is really so evident to everyone, you can make a few bucks on it.

So when the Greens announce policies which will cost them votes, it costs the whole progressive side votes.

You haven't explained how this conclusion follows from the previous paragraph. There is no explained causal link. I'm sure there are plenty of people who have chosen not to vote Greens and turned to Labor instead. Remember, 82.2% of Greens voters preference Labor above the LNP.

There are 80,000 people who will now NEVER vote Greens or ALP because of this policy.

You haven't shown why they won't vote ALP. And besides, if the ALP really badly want to distance themselves from the Greens, they're free to remain in opposition rather than take Greens support to form a minority government, as happened in Tasmania in 1996. Albo has said the usual guff about ruling out a minority government with the Greens, but nobody believes that because Gillard said the same thing and then went back on it. He has every right to keep his word and sever any link in people's minds between the parties for good.

Are the Greens really so naive that they think it doesn't matter if they announce every little thought bubble which enters their head?

I'm sure the party came to that decision after a process of deliberation. Once again you're ascribing motives to decisions when you know nothing of it. Perhaps it's just a thought bubble to you, but some people actually have ethics and will choose what is right over what is convenient.

The actual outcome of this is that for the sake of announcing a policy (when they didn't need to) they've reduced the likelihood of action on climate change.

People have multiple options to choose from if they want climate change action. The Greens aren't the only ones. Many independents exist who I am sure don't have a position on the racing industry.

At least they can claim moral superiority while embracing political mediocrity.

As opposed to Labor, who have compromised on everything and still remain out of government.

 

[Johnny Bananas]

God, I wish the Greens would just stick to that basic stuff and not talk about how they're going to impose their morals on everybody the first chance they get.

They do. You're just choosing to pay attention to some utterances and not others because you have a confirmation bias towards your prejudiced view of the Greens.

 

[Johnny Bananas]

Yeah, for some time now the Greens have shifted their focus from pressuring/influencing the major parties on climate policy toward maximising the $ received from getting their share of first preference votes.

Probably because pressuring and influencing the major parties on climate policy has rarely worked. In fact, literally the only time it has worked, it was due to the Greens having lower house representation and Labor needing to make a deal to remain in government. All the influencing and pressuring and cajoling means nothing to the major parties, the only thing that matters to them is numbers. So the strategy for the Greens is about getting more lower house numbers and maintaining their existing representation. Why would a party not attempt to get a high number of first preference votes, when that is the path to winning more lower house seats?

It's why their messaging has become more scattered and populist amongst their targeted demographic; rather than following a consistent strategy that supports their core values.

I invite you to look at their policy manifesto, which I believe is following a strategy and not scattered.

 

[Saint]

They do. You're just choosing to pay attention to some utterances and not others because you have a confirmation bias towards your prejudiced view of the Greens.

How is a policy announced by an Australian Senator an "utterance" ? You're the one down-playing such a stupid policy because of your own prejudiced view.

As I've stated many times, I used to be a member of the Greens and my prejudice is towards them.

But they make it harder and harder to justify putting them ahead of centrist parties (not conservatives, ever).

With this policy, they go behind Justice and a bunch of the other minor idiots. I think it'll be the first election they're not 1st on my ticket.

 

[Gralin]

True, but I'm not paying for the parent bludgers.

That's the media trick. They make people think that they're paying directly for bong-smoking. When welfare for Newstart is probably less than 1% of the personal income tax bill. We pay a lot more to fossil fuel companies (who don't pay their own taxes).

God, I wish the Greens would just stick to that basic stuff and not talk about how they're going to impose their morals on everybody the first chance they get.

you got a like for the bolded

people have this really warped view of welfare
like they think the pension isn't welfare but the dole is

they also have this idea that the money is coming out of their pocket directly for someone else to live and apparently that's offensive, but they will happily use public roads, transport, hospitals, have SES come out in a storm etc

The whole point of a progressive tax system and well run welfare and public services is that those who can afford to pay more do to balance out those who can't so that everyone gets a guaranteed minimum level of living/education/healthcare etc

you say impose their morals on everyone, what morals are you afraid they will impose on you?

 

[Saint]

Do they? Because the betting markets don't. If this is really so evident to everyone, you can make a few bucks on it.

View attachment 1300306


You haven't explained how this conclusion follows from the previous paragraph. There is no explained causal link. I'm sure there are plenty of people who have chosen not to vote Greens and turned to Labor instead. Remember, 82.2% of Greens voters preference Labor above the LNP.


You haven't shown why they won't vote ALP. And besides, if the ALP really badly want to distance themselves from the Greens, they're free to remain in opposition rather than take Greens support to form a minority government, as happened in Tasmania in 1996. Albo has said the usual guff about ruling out a minority government with the Greens, but nobody believes that because Gillard said the same thing and then went back on it. He has every right to keep his word and sever any link in people's minds between the parties for good.


I'm sure the party came to that decision after a process of deliberation. Once again you're ascribing motives to decisions when you know nothing of it. Perhaps it's just a thought bubble to you, but some people actually have ethics and will choose what is right over what is convenient.


People have multiple options to choose from if they want climate change action. The Greens aren't the only ones. Many independents exist who I am sure don't have a position on the racing industry.


As opposed to Labor, who have compromised on everything and still remain out of government.

That's the HoR odds. Getting legislation passed is the important part of governing (I realise the Greens haven't caught onto that yet, they think it's about getting people elected and high moral stances).

The last time the ALP were in Govt, they introduced a carbon tax, it was watered down from the version offered to the Greens, but it's better than the alternative, which is no action.

According to the Greens playbook, compromise on anything is tantamount to treason and they wonder why they're called totalitarians all the time?

There are people who will not vote ALP because they're afraid the ALP will give the Greens too much. If the Greens didn't have such ridiculous policies which deliberately alienate voters just so they can feel better about themselves, they and the ALP would get more votes.

I realise there are other climate action parties. But I also recognise that none of them will ever win, so it's pointless talking about them.

 

[Gralin]

According to the Greens playbook, compromise on anything is tantamount to treason and they wonder why they're called totalitarians all the time?

Got a copy of the Totalitarian Handbook of the Australian Greens handy? Worth a read I reckon

There are people who will not vote ALP because they're afraid the ALP will give the Greens too much. If the Greens didn't have such ridiculous policies which deliberately alienate voters just so they can feel better about themselves, they and the ALP would get more votes.

I realise there are other climate action parties. But I also recognise that none of them will ever win, so it's pointless talking about them.

So you're back to its the Greens fault that the ALP can't get enough votes to win Government, but its not stealing votes its scaring people off the ALP by association?

You keep talking about high moral stances but don't explain them

 

[SSwans2011]

It's pretty pathetic to blame a minor political party for your major political party's failure to govern.

 

[Saint]

Got a copy of the Totalitarian Handbook of the Australian Greens handy? Worth a read I reckon


So you're back to its the Greens fault that the ALP can't get enough votes to win Government, but its not stealing votes its scaring people off the ALP by association?

You keep talking about high moral stances but don't explain them

That's right. It's scaring people off from progressive politics as a whole.

Have you watched Fox News or Sky or read the Tele or Hun? All they do is conflate centrist progressive politics with the "radical left". The reason they do that, is that it works! It scares people (who don't follow a lot of politics) into thinking progressives are coming to steal their horse racing. Then the Greens confirm it, because they'd rather be self-righteous than win and actually instigate change.

 

[SSwans2011]

That's right. It's scaring people off from progressive politics as a whole.

Have you watched Fox News or Sky or read the Tele or Hun? All they do is conflate centrist progressive politics with the "radical left". The reason they do that, is that it works! It scares people (who don't follow a lot of politics) into thinking progressives are coming to steal their horse racing. Then the Greens confirm it, because they'd rather be self-righteous than win and actually instigate change.

If you're gonna have a cry about people being scared off from progressive politics, maybe you should try actually supporting a progressive party.

 

[Gralin]

That's right. It's scaring people off from progressive politics as a whole.

Have you watched Fox News or Sky or read the Tele or Hun? All they do is conflate centrist progressive politics with the "radical left". The reason they do that, is that it works! It scares people (who don't follow a lot of politics) into thinking progressives are coming to steal their horse racing. Then the Greens confirm it, because they'd rather be self-righteous than win and actually instigate change.

Do I watch or read trash Murdoch media? No I get enough dribbling from relatives that do though

Again, if you think the Greens wanting to end horse racing is going to cost the ALP a federal election you're the perfect target for Mudoch's dribbling, appears to have worked, are we related?

Again whats this high moral stuff you take issue with specifically

 

[SSwans2011]

Do I watch or read trash Murdoch media? No I get enough dribbling from relatives that do though

Again, if you think the Greens wanting to end horse racing is going to cost the ALP a federal election you're the perfect target for Mudoch's dribbling, appears to have worked, are we related?

Again whats this high moral stuff you take issue with specifically

The centrist spin that taking a moral stand on issues is a bad thing is pathetic.

 

[Gralin]

as is the conservative urge to call themselves centrist and the centrist urge to call themselves progressive

 

[Gralin]

like its only the completely ****ed nature of Australian Politics that makes the greens look radical

and the fault doesn't lie with the Greens for not moving right of center with the ALP

 

[SSwans2011]

I live in neighbouring suburb to a Greens Councillor and 2 Greens State representatives.

They're always hosting open community forums where residents can discuss their views on policies.

Totalitarian bastards.

 

[Saint]

Do I watch or read trash Murdoch media? No I get enough dribbling from relatives that do though

Again, if you think the Greens wanting to end horse racing is going to cost the ALP a federal election you're the perfect target for Mudoch's dribbling, appears to have worked, are we related?

Again whats this high moral stuff you take issue with specifically

How has it worked. I will still put the Greens ahead of the LNP.

But I also have lots of relatives who will say the ALP are high taxing and want to stop us doing things. They've been hoodwinked. So why make it easier for conservatives to hoodwink people?

 

[SSwans2011]

How has it worked. I will still put the Greens ahead of the LNP.

But I also have lots of relatives who will say the ALP are high taxing and want to stop us doing things. They've been hoodwinked. So why make it easier for conservatives to hoodwink people?

Because in an open democracy you don't and shouldn't have to settle for the shit-lite party.

 

[Gralin]

How has it worked. I will still put the Greens ahead of the LNP.

But I also have lots of relatives who will say the ALP are high taxing and want to stop us doing things. They've been hoodwinked. So why make it easier for conservatives to hoodwink people?

All of your bitching is ALP impact focused

You have more interest in the ALP getting in than in good government, you're arguing against policies that might help push the political spectrum in Australia a bit more toward the center and away from the right. Why?

 

[Saint]

All of your bitching is ALP impact focused

You have more interest in the ALP getting in than in good government, you're arguing against policies that might help push the political spectrum in Australia a bit more toward the center and away from the right. Why?

That's completely the wrong lens. My lens is:

"what's the best way of having the Govt act on climate change?"
"What's the best way of implementing progressive taxation policies"
"How can we reduce corporate capture in Oz politics"

All these three metrics are moving in the wrong direction.

The answer is a gradual one. Telling the electorate which are clustered around the centre that "we're way over here on the left and you all over there are all wrong" is going to push them right rather than bring them left.

The fact the electorate has moved towards climate action but not towards the Greens (who have been banging on about it for decades) should tell the Greens that they're achieving nothing with their current action.