What's what?
Thanks factobum...you patronising ..
I wasn't exactly sure of the process of how to put ALP second to last, just above LNP, but now I am...
These last two preferences could possibly still be interchangable ...depending on the running of the last lag by bill still / still bill....
Gentle reminder about C-Bombs, not 'cos of our precious sensitivities but because they appear on the homepage.
Curly, why did you find that info "patronising"? Jeez, especially when you read some of the ill informed guff on here...
Anyway, try and remember to not bring and use your own crayon, comrade.
A two-parter.
https://independentaustralia.net/politics/politics-display/remember-whe…
https://independentaustralia.net/politics/politics-display/experts-agre…
One critics quote:
"I hear good things about the way Australia is being run and running. You just had your financial genius just got a nice award, he was voted the best [treasurer] in the world at this time."
Donald Trump, 2011
ALP boosterism.
They were just about to start going backwards around then. Once the identity politics kicked in they were over.
Until Labor clearly move away from neoliberalism, no matter if they're left of centre in a social sense, I ain't going near them.
Jakarta is untenable
https://www.smh.com.au/world/asia/joko-widodo-wants-to-move-indonesia-s…
You don't think they have been moving away from it, Andy? Seemingly glacial in this modern age of 'everything now-ism' but signs have been clearly there for years now. The shift is on and has been for awhile. Meanwhile the coalition have even triple downed on the trickle-down.
As I said years back now, the differences between each major party are as stark as they've been for decades.
The times demand it.
No.
No I don't.
Lots of lip service and certainly better than the LNP but still hardcore neolib for mine.
Labor supported the TPP and that was barely six months ago - what more do I need to say?
Where is this change you speak of?
@Blowin
Ive read about that idea before, would be amazing if it happened and they actually planned a city, instead of the complete mess Jakarta is.
But could never see it happening.
Re: the TPP -
"One of the main concerns is that the deal allowed far too many provisions for global corporations to block government policy which went against their own interests."
"Investor-State Dispute Settlements (ISDS), leave [governments] vulnerable to corporate backlash and entrench corporate power in both the global and domestic arenas."
Labor voted for this.
https://www.internationalaffairs.org.au/news-item/to-ratify-or-not-to-r…
Seriously though Facto, I'm genuinely interested in some examples of Labor moving away from the neolib game.
Every once in a while I vacillate between "people are totally clueless about Labor" and "jeez, maybe I'm missing something here".
But I just don't see how Labor aren't strengthening the structures that are giving us so much trouble, contributing to the framework that entrenches more for the elites, less and less for the rest.
As I see any type of real democracy fading into the distance, any type of political accountability to the electorate rapidly vanishing, at every turn Labor seems to be ok with this.
Tell me how I'm wrong.
Or even...
@Andy,
At this point, is there any other game in town? Like, everyone's down on neoliberalism, but what else is there? And much more importantly, what would be the result of a country that pursued another path?
Don't get me wrong, I'm down on it too, but you can't switch between systems like they're filters on an Instagram post. We're 40 years down this path, great structural changes have taken place in the economy (and in our culture too, but that's another issue). Changes that would take another generation to reverse. We just can't wish them away, and Labor sure as fuck can't do it in a four year term.
I've seen Labor's role as that of harm minimisation. To put a brake on the neoliberal dream the Libs are trying to achieve, and which is slowly tearing the country apart. We take our foot off that brake at our peril.
I said about two months ago, that labor has had at least 3 or 4 key opportunities to really define themselves as a real alternative to the LNP, and that they have failed at every opportunity. Blindboy told me to ...'wait and see', I had faith for a moment or two, that maybe his inside knowledge may know of something I don't. Here we are, just weeks from the election, and nothing has eventuated...
"...Labor supported the TPP and that was barely six months ago - what more do I need to say?"
This was one of them, and yes, what more does one have to say...
The irony that burns, with scorching intensity, is that it is still only a clown like trump (from the right of politics no less) that has had anything to say on such matters...ouch...that's hot....
"...But I just don't see how Labor aren't strengthening the structures that are giving us so much trouble, contributing to the framework that entrenches more for the elites, less and less for the rest.
As I see any type of real democracy fading into the distance, any type of political accountability to the electorate rapidly vanishing, at every turn Labor seems to be ok with this."
Yep, yep, yep
As a minimum this election should be a referendum on adani, similar to the labor vs. liberal franklin river case years ago. But it's not even close. Whoever gets in the mine has approval and will no doubt go ahead, from my perspective, there is absolutely nothing significant to lose from another term of the LNP.
"...As I said years back now, the differences between each major party are as stark as they've been for decades.
The times demand it."
ppffffffttttt!!!
Just when you think you’ve seen it all...
https://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2019/04/the-dumbening-schools-next-for…
Hardcore.
So it’ll be free trade agreements with free flow Chinese labour , uncapped elderly Chinese parent visas , Universities with Mandarin as their primary language and primary schools not far behind.
Silent invasion.
Pauline was right !
"one of the worst policies that I have ever seen”
Didn't Leith van Onselen say that last week?
The Steve Dickson filming and revelations 3 weeks out from an election by Al Jazeera certainly puts to bed any doubts about whether they were targeting One Nation.
Political assassination nothing less.
Foreign government influence in domestic politics.
One Nation’s North American On The Sauce Tour - Strippers, Guns and Money.
One of the great constants in Hanson’s political career is that she has surrounded herself with fools.
Let’s see what emerges on Ashby.
They’re all fools, that’s uncontested.
But out of all the political parties with all their litany of fools , shonks , con artists and bribe magnets , it’s One Nation being targeted by a foreign state media outlet from a Muslim majority nation.
It’s the voice of the Muslim Arab world politically compromising an anti Muslim voice in our political system. That’s the story.
"It’s the voice of the Muslim Arab world politically compromising an anti Muslim voice in our political system. That’s the story."
That's bollocks is what it is.
The story is that they were fishing for the NRA and it was One Nation that bit. Could've been anyone. You've got not a shred of proof that says otherwise.
So why stagger the release of a seperate story of a politician at a strip club 3 weeks out from an election ?
It’s got nothing to do with NRA/ One Nation corruption.
No , I hadn’t read that.
Not sure if a bit of plausible deniability changes my opinion either. I don’t know much at all about Al Jazeera or the politics behind it. You could be right.
Stu, regarding your post last night on Labor.
For a start, I feel like you're dealing in absolutes.
We can still have capitalism without the extremes of neoliberalism and of course, backing away from neoliberalism can be done by degrees, it doesn't have to be a "switch of systems" by any stretch of the imagination.
I'm talking about stuff as simple as rejecting crony privitisation and governing for the people and not the corporations.
That's not a big ask, that's not something that we should expect to take decades to happen.
My point yesterday was, until Labor show basic intent in this regard, why should I even consider voting for them?
Labor are still going down the neolib path, not as fast as the LNP but going that direction nonetheless. If that's their version of being a brake, well the joke's on us.
Labor is contributing to tearing this country apart.
The result of pursuing a different path is almost impossible to predict, though I would hope a rejection of corporate influence and consumerism might include a reassessment of the definition of "quality of living" and also involve a serious examination of Indigenous reconciliation as well as the environment.
But now we're probably moving from idealism to naivety.
Dealing in absolutes?
I absolutely wasn't.
My point was: If you reject Labor's brake, then we have no brake on neoliberalism at all.
Consider for a moment if the Liberals were to win. Their mandate would read, "no further action on climate change, more privatisation, further flatten the tax system, keep tax loopholes open, no national corruption watchdog, (meaning more scandals such as Helloworld), inflame the culture wars and get one step closer to breaking up and selling off the ABC."
Is that a win?
At least Labor is acting like the Democrats of old.
What brake? This one?
"Labor won't commit to raising Newstart payments"
https://www.sbs.com.au/news/labor-won-t-commit-to-raising-newstart-paym…
Don't get me wrong Stu, I'd like nothing more than to see the LNP lose, and lose badly.
But for mine, we need other forces holding the balance of power to keep Labor on track as well.
And so, I'll vote accordingly.
Why can’t Labor step into this role ?
The only object between their current position and the role they used to play is themselves.
Stu - you seem to be moving towards a complacency which you believe is pragmatism ? Not saying that I’m making any political effort , but it seems as though you’re accepting the shit sandwich proffered by the ALP as it’s the only item on the political menu.
Any redirecting of our political , demographic , economic and national direction is going to have consequences. You don’t think that positive change is worth risk ?
You could probably cherry pick a few more too.
I take it you're happy with the mandate Morrisson will be handed then?
Andy, I might be naive but I think Labor is showing movement away from the neo-liberal lie. Leading in the calling of the banking royal commission, commitment to full recommendations, plans to reform the Fair Work Act, polices on climate, reforms to negative gearing, franking credits & trusts, tax avoidance action, commitment to health care and education, the NDIS off the top of my head .... contrasted with the LNP who wanted to give tax cuts to multinationals.
Is this another example of the false argument of equal equivalence? At this election like none for perhaps decades there is a stark contrast between the two majors.
The LNP are never an option.
That doesn’t give the ALP in their ( supposed ) role in the labour/capital struggle carte Blanche to steer away from their obligations.
while guysmiley makes some reasonable points above. I would argue the NDIS has been an abortion, initially labor's abortion, then a consilidated one by the LNP.
Labor's position on climate change could be best described as weak, woeful and whimsical.
A commentor on that FDOTM cartoon best summed it up for me, if labor gets in it'll be six years of patheticness. If LNP get in it'll be 3 years of pretty much same same. Then, hopefully, Labor will come back after some self reflection and actually have something worthy to offer the electorate...
Morrison won't have much of a mandate, it'll be a minority government at best.
Andy if you are going to vote for a minor party either think about your preferences or check where they are being directed.
Labor IMHO is the only choice at this stage of the policy cycle to start a move at least back to the centre and the only way that will stick is
a clear mandate and incremental politics.
If you care about anything other than yourself, you’ll be voting green
"You could probably cherry pick a few more too.
I take it you're happy with the mandate Morrisson will be handed then?"
Was this directed at me Stu?
I think I've made my position on Morrison and the LNP perfectly clear.
As for accusing me of cherry picking, that's a nice little trick, especially when you offer zero evidence yourself.
Thanks GS, will be very interesting to see if anything of substance can be pushed through, especially if Labor wins government. Clearly they can smell the change, let's see if they're sincere.
@Ifocus - "if you are going to vote for a minor party either think about your preferences or check where they are being directed"
Naturally!
The only problem I foresee with the impending Labor landslide is the fucktards in the Senate.
Labor ought to be able to claim a genuine mandate to its policy agenda, FFS its been out there for between 3-5 years, the electorate are informed what they will do but conservative independents and the lunatic far right - Divided Nation & Palmer combined with a even angrier and further to the reactionary right LNP stinking carcass could play havoc.
We should all hope that there are sufficient Labor and Green senators to allow for Labor's agenda to be implemented without too much dumbing down.
Andy, and yes! even you Sypkan, a lot to unpack there, and to open up. And some stuff that's already been discussed. And I'm a busy man...well, kinda...but the fact is I am at work, BUT...let's address some of this stuff.
Obviously not in detail, but something is better than nothing, I guess. There may even be some connecting and over-arching things that come up. In fact, there will be.
OK, re: the TPP. Actually, the ever changing TPP. Actually, the ever changing nature of trade agreements in this so-called 'free trade' era, post GATT & the WTO, NAFTA, etc.
Yes, Labor's negotiated support through caucus for Turnbull's TPP-II was more than disappointing. An upside was the vociferous criticism from within the caucus and shadow cabinet of the TPP-II in general and the labour testing, ISDS clauses, and transparency issues specifically. The resultant 'pragmatic' negotiation and placation deal (one to avoid a damaging split while Labor is in opposition) did come with the proviso to relitigate the issue if and when in government. Labor sources and unions who objected to the TPP pointed to the example of New Zealand, which has sought to change its trade agreements under Jacinda Ardern. Although I concurred with Sally McManus at the time that Turnbull's TPP-II is "a trade deal that encompasses all the worst elements of our broken trade system"...but also that "the ALP has now committed to serious and much-needed reforms of our trade system to make sure that future deals benefit working people and are subject to real public and parliamentary accountability."
I guess the crux of the believability that Labor will follow through with this is if you believe that Labor is "beholden to the (dun dun daaaaa!) unions" or they're not.
Speaking of which, where does that 'beholden' narrative originate, and why does it get 'traction'?
Definitely back to that in time.
As for neo-liberal economics in general, as Stunet said, "we're 40 years down this path, great structural changes have taken place in the economy (and in our culture too, but that's another issue). Changes that would take another generation to reverse. We just can't wish them away, and Labor sure as fuck can't do it in a four year term."
Another interesting comment from Stu in regards to the neo-liberal economic experiment was that, "I've seen Labor's role as that of harm minimisation. To put a brake on the neo-liberal dream the Libs are trying to achieve, and which is slowly tearing the country apart."
Now let's cast our minds back...a (very) potted history of neo-liberal economics as applied in so-called realpolitik.
Thatcher and Reagan. The UK and the USA. Countries with similarities, cultural and political, as they are with us, and also real differences (the main one regarding us: compulsory voting. Thank fuck!).
Anyway, forgive the simplicity now. Neo-liberalism manifested itself primarily as privatisation in the UK (more State entities to sell off) and de-regulation in the USA. Of course these 'tenets' overlapped, but run with me here.
These countries were at the time (and still are to a great extent) our combined major cultural and economic partners. How to react to this 'revolution?'
The Hawke/Keating 'harm minimisation' strategy. I became of voting age during this period. Did I agree with the direction? No. Did I think they should've gone all Scandinavian? Yes. Did I vote for Labor in this period? No. Did I have the luxury (or not!) of living in a stronghold Labor electorate, so that I could vote for the SP and other real left manifestations? Yes.
This 'harm minimisation' - neo-liberalism with government regulation (an oxymoron!) - worked so well here, ie Labor was in power! especially compared to the Right devastation in our partner countries, that it explicitly led to the so-called '3rd Way' via Giddens for one, and subsequently taken up by the Clinton Democrats and Blair's Labour in the realpolitik world.
Fuck!
But, as I've stated elsewhere many moons back, once the neo-liberal genie is out of the bottle, it's real fucking hard to control it, let alone put it back in. Especially when the previously worst treasurer in living memory (the triple double digit man - unemployment, interest rates and inflation) John Winston Howard is the PM and with his treasurer Costello smashes the bottle into little pieces. As that bastion of leftism the IMF stated, the Howard-Costello government was the "most fiscally profligate" iteration EVER down under. Oi!
Sold the furniture (mate's rates) and de-regulated the fuck out of everything.
Which brings me to the Labor government now. As Guy Smiley said, for starters, they are trying to wind back ever so slightly (well, for me), such Howard-Costello legacy items like the 'rorting' of negative gearing and franked dividend credits. Oh, all legal of course, but broken genie bottle, unregulated, used and abused via the Libs.
Banking? Remember the royal commission. Hmmm, we need some re-regulation it seems.
NSS!
Here's an idea, let's build a cheap and nasty NBN and then flog it off, hopefully. Just not to China. Maybe.
Heads up: there will be a royal commission into the NBN debacle.
Wait, maybe a federal ICAC is needed? Yeah, nah. YEAH.
Let the markets decide wages? Yeah, NAH.
Actually, with the Libs today calling Labor's child-care worker wage policy socialism at best, communism at worst, how does that even slightly fit into your "hardcore neolib for mine" summation of Labor, Andy?
Only one party is coming to the party right now and inviting all of us along. What kind of affair? Smart casual? Fancy dress? Keys in the fruit bowl? House destruction? Tea and scones? Beers and bangers? Hey, at least we're ALL invited.
Sad but true.
I might break up the 'pabulum' - hah! - for now. Lunch break. But there's more! Be careful what you wish for!
Fuck me, the Sustainable Australia candidate for Tweed is Ronald McDonald.
Ronald McDonald!
Jesus wept...
https://www.tweeddailynews.com.au/news/sustainable-australia-wants-to-g…
factotum has a job?! if a society is judged by looking after its most useless this is a big tick for oz!
It's a wild guess, Lizard, but comedy isn't your day, night, even PaTH 'job', is it champ?
Community service?
Hey Al Jazeera, please tell us there isn't any footage of Ashby's drunken overseas night movements!
AN ALL-ENCOMPASSING KALEIDOSCOPIC JOIN-THE-DOTS/ADULT COLOURING BOOK EXPERIMENTAL PROJECT IN NARCISSISTIC/ONANISTIC BIG PICTURE PARASITIC FORUM BLEEDING.
LIKE POLITICAL LIFE, PARTICIPATION IS WELCOME, ENCOURAGED EVEN, BUT NOT NECESSARY.