Kebbin 07

[bushbeachboy]

I voted for Labour. I won't defend them, but I voted labour for one reason only: workchoices. Several of my mates work for larger businesses and in the short time workchoices was around their working conditions became much more difficult. Management continually reminded them that things 'were different now'. The bosses had all the power, and the workers could get stuffed. 'The rich getting richer and the poor get the picture' as a famous goose once sang.

I was happy in most ways with the Howard Government. In any case they got out of power in the nick of time to not get blamed for skyrocketing fuel and grocery prices.

But back to my point, rather than being an unthinking moron who can't think past the Sunday BBQ, I voted what I thought would be best for more people, including me and my (few) mates.

Now fire away all you management types.

Oh, I am a small business owner, not an employee. So don't lump me in with the commies/socialists. No time for them. I just think we should look after the workers as well as we can while putting forward our system of life and government.

[PADDLES]

i agree wombat, but you're thinking of what is available right now (bearing in mind that a turnkey nuclear power plant could take 20 years to come on line). the government needs to pour some of our coal money into alternative energy research that may yield an energy source that isn't even considered yet, or at the bare minimum develop current technology to make it more efficient (ie. generate more power easier). we as a nation need to be at the forefront of this, so we can sell this technology to the rest of the world and prosper from it, especially considering the amount of revenue generated by us selling current technology energy (ie. coal.)

bushbeachboy, you're not robinson crusoe with the justification of your vote. i didn't vote for labour personally, but i know quite a few people who did, basing their decision purely on them thinking that they were going to be much worse off under workchoices. i don't know what you friends you are referring to do for a living, and nor do i know where they live but here in qld at the moment, if you're out of work then you either can't work or don't want to work. if they got disgruntled with their current employers up here they'd probably be able to find another job in a jiffy. that being said, i do agree that the workchoices legislation was grossly unfair and could be used to attack those who couldn't defend themselves. ie. unskilled workers that don't have the ability to change jobs easily

[moater]

i agree wombat, but you're thinking of what is available right now (bearing in mind that a turnkey nuclear power plant could take 20 years to come on line).

G'day PADDLES,

A nuclear plant or two would be the answer as they're a helluva lot safer than the media would have us believe.

That knob-head Garret said earlier in the piece that nuclear power couldn't be ruled out,now the government has turned around and stated that there will NOT be nuclear power.

This is like the Bracks/Brumby/Thwaites cartel here in Victoria that sabotaged the Mitchell river dam by making the area into a national park ffs!!..the area had been set aside for a long time but now the city slickers will have to steal water from up north (Murray-Darling system and Lake Eildon-which was purpose-built explicitly for irrigation).I don't like seeing areas that are nice or good fishing spots etc being lost,but people do have to live!!..makes me feel pretty good about being soley on tank water,not having to be at the mercy of d1ckheads that think water supply is a given and therefore they can take long showers etc etc blah blah bloody blah.

[TimiBoy]

Surprisingly enough, I agree. I felt workchoices was bad. I was living in the hope that as a result of the weight of public opinion, and evidence, that changes would be wrought, because it was a workable system, once bugs were ironed out.

I was, and am, scared sh!tless about where to now. I suspect that in a few years all the unemployed will be saying, "Damn, I'd be better off employed under workchoices than not having a sparrow's fart's chance of getting a job at all."

That said, the fundamental issue about workchoices was that we have to change the way things are done. We are faced with a very competitive, increasingly globalised world, and until our labour force gets it's head around that, we are going to continue to see jobs going offshore at a rate of knots. The Libs tackled it in the wrong way, but I don't think Labour are trying to tackle it at all.

If folks out there think Labour will protect their jobs, think again. Check the glum faces in their ranks when the latest WTO free trade talks collapsed. They want free trade too. Kev, Julia, Wayne, Pete, Penny and the rest of the gang don't give two hoots, they just want maybe 6 years at the top, so they can have their fat pensions and jobs for life on the speaking circuit.

No different from the Lib/Nats - but at least the Libs managed the economy with some effect.

Tim

[PADDLES]

agreed timi.

agreed too moater but can you even imagine what a political hot potato a nuclear power station would be? i know we need them and that it's the only viable energy source we can get other than coal fired power. but that being said i still wouldn't want one in my back yard, and anyone who says they do is a liar. you can't whack one in the middle of nowhere cos they need water, and wherever there's water in this country there's people.

[FNQCairns]

What do you suggest as a solution? Just ignore the problem or maybe you feel that global carbon emmissions are not an issue?

Let's vote Jonny back in and then we can forget any issues relating to the environment, all have cheaper alco-pops again and maybe we can even take back the apology to the stolen generation.

Global carbon deposits are not a problem and have never been, it's a convenient cover and excuse for the ultra green and alliances to use with a view to decrease the use of fossil fuels (their devil), only the daft fall for it, shamefully the dafter will always follow the daft because it's idealist, and the daftest of all the politicians will follow any daft ideal if there is a block of votes or a payback in it

So those that do the research and are competent enough to balance both sides get shafted -it's an expected pattern in anything environmental these days.

cheers fnq

[Mike Delisser]

Actually from what I read of the election wash up, the difference in the end was only 10,000 votes. That was the sum of the winning margins of the seats that put the K into power.

The polling booth watchers that day said that it was the "tradies" that were the difference. They voted early and with an air of "being on a mission". The Krudd campaign obviously hit a nerve for some. I wonder what they are thinking now about what they were sold as the alternative??

Cheers

Dave

Sorry Dave,

Federal Poll : Finding No. 4309 : Latest Roy Morgan Australian Federal Vote Result. : July 21, 2008
In mid July, ALP support is 48% (down 0.5%) still well ahead of L-NP support 34.5% (down 0.5%). On a two-party preferred basis, support for the ALP is 60% (up 1%), while support for the L-NP is 40% (down 1%). If the Federal Election were held today the ALP would win easily according to the latest face-to-face Morgan Poll conducted on the weekend of July 12/13. Among the minor parties, support for the Greens (up 3.5% to 11.5%) is at a new record high after the release of the Garnaut Report, support for Family First is unchanged at 2.5% and Independent/Others 3.5% (down 2.5%).

[Lucky_Phill]

M62, nothing to be sorry about, it's simply a poll.

Dave is just about on the money.

If you dig around the Australia Electoral Office website you'll find the figures.

On a " first past the post " election, the LP would have " snuck " home. by less than 200,000 votes. ( 12, 400,000 odd, million voted )

Labour actually only recieved 43.38% of the votes( first preference ).... that really means, the MINORITY of Australians wanted them in.

The Coalition polled 41.77 %......


nothing in it really.... !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 1.61%


Having said that, the party to poll the fifth highest amount of votes was ????

anyone ?




.
.
.
.
.
.
. INFORMAL. yes, folks....... true. over 1/2 a million votes did NOT count.



phill

[Mike Delisser]

Hi Phill,
I should have said sorry Dave I don't believe the answer is what you want to hear, but naturally Dave, Me, you, and all on Ausfish are entitled to their own opinion.
Dave said
"the difference in the end was only 10,000 votes."
"it was the "tradies" that were the difference."
"I wonder what they are thinking now about what they were sold as the alternative??"
Well I think that poll answers his question or at least indicates "the difference" have not changed their minds, (not yet anyway)
Note the Morgan Poll revealed "If the Federal Election were held today the ALP would win easily"
Yeh it's only a poll, The Morgan Poll, and yada yada yada the only poll that counts is on election day. However the Morgan Poll is the most highly regarded and proved the most accurate measure of true public opinion in over 67 State & Federal elections since 1941.
BTW Phill, I'm not sure if winning a Fed election with less than 50% of the 1st preference votes is that much of an anomaly in our country for either side politics, but please correct me if I'm wrong.
Cheers
Mike

[supa29]

I voted for Labour. I won't defend them, but I voted labour for one reason only: workchoices. Several of my mates work for larger businesses and in the short time workchoices was around their working conditions became much more difficult. Management continually reminded them that things 'were different now'. The bosses had all the power, and the workers could get stuffed. 'The rich getting richer and the poor get the picture' as a famous goose once sang.

I was happy in most ways with the Howard Government. In any case they got out of power in the nick of time to not get blamed for skyrocketing fuel and grocery prices.

But back to my point, rather than being an unthinking moron who can't think past the Sunday BBQ, I voted what I thought would be best for more people, including me and my (few) mates.

Now fire away all you management types.

Oh, I am a small business owner, not an employee. So don't lump me in with the commies/socialists. No time for them. I just think we should look after the workers as well as we can while putting forward our system of life and government.

Mate easy for you to explain to your mates. have a job where you discuss your own abilities with your boss yourself and state your case for a pay rise and conditions, or you get a guy from brisbane who doesnt know you or your ability to fight for your rights at work. so that everyone is on the same rate . no bonuses or fringe benifits or wait another six months and you will see the result of the labour campaign. as every union starts asking for more money, bussinesses will start closing or moving off shore, it has already started, count how many unions are asking for more money already. i dont disagree with some of it but this country is on the verge of collaspes every one might have hated howard but i could handle him at least he stuck up for australia not give in to the hippy sh.t this weak gutted pr..k is. for all you who voted labour hang on this is your ride we are on. thanks supa.

[maztez]

politics and religion always brings out the argumentive side in people . As I'm not argumentive or qualified this will be the last I will say on the matter .
cheers Terry

[Lovey80]

Hi all,

I said when I was a young teenager that I wouldn't vote untill there was someone worth voting for. I didn't mind johny but as with all things in life people always remember the bad things never the good. I'm working in Iraq at the moment and I speak to a LOT of Brits that with any length of conversation I was suprised that so many make the point that they would have loved John Howard as their PM. I voted for the first time at the last election and made sure that my vote counted so none would go to the Greens and Labour! Fishing party then coalition etc. Workchoices certainly put the nail in the coffin for Johnny's team I thought it was a bad move pollitically but my personal take on it was, If your the best man for the job and take steps to ensure your skillsets are the most competitive through your own drive to train and further education then you'll never be out of a job and will be most likely the better paid. Too many in this country want to do as little as possible for the same pay and though it may stink those people are the ones that were scared by work choices!

On the environment side of things. I'm with those that believe we should invest heavily on alternative technologies. When the time finaly arrives and the whole world needs it at once (it will happen sooner or later) Why not for once, let it be Australia that is the one who takes the huge financial windfall.

My 2 Cents

Cheers

Chris

[Lucky_Phill]

No worries Mike, I like the idea that these days we can ' discuss ' politics.

You are mostly correct, but in the previous 3 Fed elections, the Coalition did get over 50% first preference votes to get them into power. But on the whole as a " preference " voting system, you can get into power with much less than 50% first preference votes..... fact.

Chris,

all respect intended here, but I hear a lot of what you say every day. that is in reference to ' I voted for Mr XYZ ". I realise that the vast majority of eligble voters in this country vote the same way, which in my opinion, is unfortunate as Mr XYZ does not run the country and has little influence on policy. He ( or she ) may be party leader, but the party itself produces policy and any member of said party can offer up policy that will be debated internally and an outcome produced. Having said that, a ' strong ' leader is mandatory and for all the decisions that Mr Howard made ( with the backing of the party ), I respect the man for sticking by those decisions, be they right or wrong. I really believe that the coalition, led by Johnnie, had the welfare of Australia and all Australians at heart. Maybe some areas were misguided or idealistic, but none the less genuine in belief.

I vote for policy NOT promises....... I am in the minority here , in that I ask every party for their policy platform and cast my vote according to the policy that best suits my business which in turn will reflect how my life will pan out during their term in office. IN other words, I look for policies that will support and encourage business development, investment, infrastructure, employment. AS my business grows, I make profits.... true, but I also EMPLOY people as the groth takes effect, which in turn puts food on the tables and lets them go fishing. I do not subscribe to the theory that " the rich get richer the poor get the picture ",... for the rich to make money they need to invest or spend....... this does create jobs, simple... it is the simple philosophy of a conservative government.

We could agrue this point in respect to wages etc, but you cannot hide from the facts in relation to Federal Governments financial handling of our country. In my opinion, a job well done and I would have no issues with the people that made it that way being paid due credit for the performance. ( re:- CEO's of multinationals )

These are the fundamentals issues that a Government has to address to keep a country going forward. By going forward, I also mean as far as environment, sustainability, agriculture, primary production and resources.

We need a Federal Government that promotes this platform. We just need to cast our minds back a year or so when we had all States governed by Labour and Federal matters run by the Conservatives. Jeez it worked well... IMO.

Trouble is, not all policies of the party I choose are in my best interests. I have to make that decision. Teaspoon of sugar with teaspoon of salt.

In the end we all have choices.............we need to be informed to make the right ones for ourselves...... experience will provide that information.

Cheers

[PinHead]

I have noticed in the past couple of fed elections how the media or perhaps, the party media machines, have turned them into US style elections.
ie..Mr Howard vs Mr Rudd...yet we as electors only get to vote for the candidates in our electorates. Personally I look at the local candidates in conjunction with the policies of the parties. No good having a party in Govt yet you have a spineless, lazy local member that does not care about the constituents.

[nigelr]

You all may not respect the views of those who voted Labor, but you'de better respect their right to vote for whom they please.
Or your comments on Hitler may arise and bite your collective ar4es.
In my own view, of course!
Cheers.