Hello fellow Australians,
With about 561 days till the next election who will you be voting for (or would vote for if you were 18!)? Anything could happen from now until the next election but people still are sure Julia will be out. What is your opinion on calling the shots so early? If you intending on voting liberal, what would Tony or someone from the liberal party have to do to make you vote for another political party?

For me the only thing that would make me consider supporting Mr. Abbott is if he gave me anything to support. I find his lack of policy and outrages promises (with no plans to get as there) discouraging. However I would fail to see why he wouldn’t just keep on doing what he is doing. After all it is working!

I must admit I am a bit of a labor faithful. It would take a lot to make me budge!

Discuss, debate!

...firstly the election is not about 561days away as there is no set date as to when it has to be called only that it must be before 3years are up or the GG calls it, Julia could call it tomorrow.

Of course the Liberals have not released their policy yet, and will not until an election has been called no other party has released policies bar Labor who are in power and they kind of have to.

Unless you live in Mr. Abbott's electorate you will not vote for him, you vote for the party and the member in your electorate not the man leading it, the liberals have a lot of very capable members in the shadow cabinet Mr. Abbott not least of them is a very intelligent man and you would be a fool to think otherwise.

Also why have you moved this from the Aussie fag thread?

Note how I never said vote ( i know you vote for your member) for him. I said support. If I refereed to Mr abbots polices, it is because he is the liberals leader. Even though you vote for your MP, unless they are Independent it is safe to say that you vote for them, you vote for the party. The face of that party, the leader is going to be our PM so surely you must take that into consideration when voting. If you wish I can change it to say 'liberal policy'. Quite honestly I think you understand what I meant.

Also, I moved it here because i felt it was better fit in this part of the forum. The Aussie Fags one was hardly the right place to have an political discussion.

I know that an election can be held at any time. However there is a limit and that is in 561 days (plus I said about so it is an estimate). I think Julia will hold of as long as she can, don't you?

Its disappointing that the liberals have chosen to remain with Abbott because he alienates moderates, Turnbull would have been a much better leader and could have won the 2010 election. I'll still vote Liberal of course, not that my vote matters I'm in the Illawarra so Labor stronghold but I'm still disappointed in their choice of leader, Abbott just isn't much of a leader.

I agree Turnbull would have made a better leader, and would have had a good chance of leading the liberal party to a victory. I like how he is a republican. It gives me something to agree with him on.

I sooo want to get involved with this thread, but the thought of sharing the slightest piece of common ground with Deastwood disturbs me more than I have the words to explain...

What are all your thoughts on Penny Wong?

I dislike that about him.

ahahah, well worth a try to find some common ground. Australia becoming a republic isn't really the main thing on the agenda these days! I am curious though, why not? The monarchy practically neglects us. I would rather a minimalist approach to becoming a republic? Nothing to drastic.

The monarchy provides us with a level of government above politics with incredible emergency powers to protect the constitution and country. Our system has worked extraordinarily well for over a hundred years – and whilst this by itself is not a motive for change, it stands to reason that if we are to remove what we have, we must replace it with a better system which is more effective in keeping politicians from abusing their position. No proposal which betters what we have has yet been put forward.
The Republican movement has not even produced a republican model for Australia since the failed referendum well over 10years ago and yet you attack the liberals for no policies.

Correct me if I am wrong but didn't the referendum fail due to divisions in the republican movement? After the referendum the issue of whether Australia should become a republic was weakened and debate basically stopped. However the Greens and Labor have tried to spark debate again. The issue also really defies party's. As we can see the Liberal party is largely split on this issue is it not?

Putting aside the many dramas and controversies that are plaguing this current parliament and looking purely at policy and reforms, the ALP under Gillard have achieved a great deal even given the hostile minority government scenario. Our economy, despite the scare-campaign, is amongst the best in the developed world with Australia largely avoiding and working through the GFC, and the government have a lot of great policies: the NBN, NDIS, Clean Energy Future, etc. In the absence of any proof to the contrary from the opposition, I just assume they have no policies and just say no to everything. I saw nothing credible at the last election, but we'll see what happens this time I guess.

The ALP's main problem is their inability to communicate with the electorate and get the message out there. I dislike the man immensely but Tony Abbott is a great communicator. His messages may be simple and he may be full of shit, but this is the man who openly said you can't trust a word out of his mouth and yet people still lap it up.

Labor need to stop shooting themselves in the foot, stop the infighting and just go out there and sell their policies and their accomplishments.

Whilst Tony Abbott is at the wheel of the LNP, there's no way I'd support them. Bring on Malcolm Turnbull, announce some policies and then we'd really have something. Until then, I've seen no reason to vote for them.

Couldn't have put it better myself. With Tony the only thing you can trust is what is written on paper. I shall be off to bed now, look forward to more conversation with you all

The only reason our economy is so strong is because of the hard work put in by the Howard government hard work that the Labor party has destroyed and will need to be fought back. Labor deserves no credit for our economy.

Labor deserved plenty of credit. Their stimulus packages saved this economy. Even with your graph Australia is doing much better then any country listed above it. We are going to have a surplus, and even if it is a small one, I think Australia is right on track to using some of the money to pay of debt.

When using graphs please relate it to what you are talking about...

That surplus is a lie, and everyone knows its a lie. It does not account for major public works like the NBN. The surplus is simply the labor party moving money around so that it appears that we surplus, the budget is not worth the paper it is printed on thanks to Swan fudging it. Not to mention that under Labor the countries debt is continuing to grow and the government is not willing to use it "surplus" to pay off the debt...bit dodgy, 12months ago we have a 22billion dollar deficit currently that has grown to over 40billion dollars.

There is no plan for productivity, no plan for economic growth or to create jobs. Unemployment had been tipped to rise further. Remember how the government predicted that they would make 500,000 jobs last year? well that number has dropped to 200,000. At the same time they are cutting back on job services programs lowering the chance further that people will be able to get in to a real job.

They are introducing a terrible carbon tax and upon realisation that it is going to do a lot of damage their way to solve it is to throw money at people for a short term fix.

Their stimulus package did not save the economy either our economy is strong because it is closely linked to the Chinese, that is what saved us not the billions of dollars Rudd handed out. Look at the pink bats insulation scheme, the billions of dollars she wasted on the over priced school halls program, for but a few examples.

When Julia Gillard was in opposition she opposed the private health insurance rebate. She opposed tax reform. She opposed waterfront reform. She opposed superannuation reform. She opposed successive Howard Government budget decisions designed to reduce government debt.

Budget 2012 delivers:

• the world’s biggest carbon tax;
• record net debt of $145 billion;
• a record new debt ceiling of $300 billion;
• a $26 billion deterioration in the Budget over the past year.

Pretty much sums it up

It is late, so forgive me if this sounds even more dyslexic then I already am.
My oh my! Has someone been spoon feed scare tactics. I'm guessing the Bolt report is your favourite news program.

So let me get this straight, the economy is in shambles? However it is in better shape then anyone else and this is due to the Howard government (and china)? Are we living in a parallel universe where Australia can have two economies at the same time?

The surplus is a lie? If they were going to lie they should have made it sound more impressive. However the 15 billion surplus the Tony Abbott proposes is most probably one. If he does achieve one though, I do believe it will come from heavy spending cuts, which will likely see a lot of every day people lose out. I rather a smaller surplus and less cuts, then doing away with important things so you can look good on paper.

Do you believe in climate change? If so you should be behind the carbon tax. What better way to drive money hungry businesses to change their ways then to threaten what they most want, MONEY. My family is getting compensated for any rising costs. If your family isn't then you probably can deal with the burden. I would rather have seen an emissions trading scheme from the get go. Still the carbon tax will transition to a emissions trading scheme so your Worlds highest carbon tax wont be forever.

If I must point out some good, the mining tax is smart and anyone who objects to it is most likely a millionaire. sharing a bit of the mining boom with the whole of Australia is smart. If you think that it will make Australia less appealing for mining company's then you have got to be kidding yourself! There is still a lot of money left even with a tax. If they cut jobs then they are just trying to cause public uproar.

(more coming soon, I almost fell asleep on my keyboard... never a good sgin)

Found an interesting research paper you guys might be interested. I've picked out some key points. But you can check out the full paper here: http://tinyurl.com/6r5nphf





















Found these as well:





I don't deny that in implementing the stimulus packages that there were rorts in the system, and that the government might have been able to manage some of the packages better. You can't argue with the numbers, though. Sure the surplus inherited from the previous government may have been a contributing factor; but I don't think the ALP get enough credit for how they managed (and are managing) the economy, due mostly to scare campaigns.

Obviously we had to go in to debt with the recession that is a widely accepted fact, no one is denying that. The issue is Labor overspent they went to far, giving out cash payments to the people was not the best option. Kevin Rudd did an average job as PM he was left in a very strong position by the previous government.
When you compare Australia's current position to other countries position you have to take in to account where they were before the GFC, the US, UK and most of Europe were already in debt, countries like Greece were a ticking time bomb because of incredibly generous welfare terms. But if you look at the graph I posted earlier it shows how Australia went to far in trying to avoid recession the negatives of this we are feeling now.

Also one of the major reasons the ALP does not get credit is because the leader that implemented it was removed from power before the election, if Rudd had stayed in power he would obviously have gone to the election claiming to have saved Australia from the GFC, but the Labor party do not want to praise a leader they kicked out.

Meh:3 I am waiting for you to finish your post I will respond to it all in one go

But it worked. We avoided recession, maintained key government services and unveiled a whole host of new initiatives. What would (or could) the LNP have done differently? Why this whole mantra about "reckless spending" and "debt crisis" when the figures unequivocally prove that debt is at historic lows in GDP terms and that the stimulus packages achieved exactly what was intended?

The numbers prove that the LNP's mantra of "reckless spending" is nothing more than a sound-bite to appeal to ignorant bogans.



The Howard Government profited from prosperous times (including a mining boom), collected money by selling off government assets and running services into the ground.

This fixation with surplus budgets (on the both the Labor and Liberal side, mind you) borders on the absurd. The fact is, we need to spend money on services and infrastructure; making an artificial surplus by cutting services is not good policy - regardless of which side is doing it.



I see nothing based on the numbers provided how they went "too far" into their spending. Our economy is strong, unemployment is relatively low, and our debt on GDP levels is sustainable.



On this point, I do agree. It was foolish to remove Rudd in the way and at the time that they did. Had they kept him on, it would have been easier to sell their many accomplishments without the electoral poison that was the "political assassination" of Rudd.

I don't pretend that the ALP are without their faults, because they truly have made a lot of stuff-ups. But it isn't in policy where their main problems lie, but rather with the constant in-fighting and the hostile environment of the minority government. It's arguable whether Rudd would have been able to win a majority in his own right, but he should have been given the opportunity to contest the election (in my opinion, anyway).

All I know is: based on all observable evidence, the claims of "reckless spending", "reckless debt", "poor economic management" etc are absurd and without basis. The argument that the ALP have issues with communication, internal cooperation/team-work and selling their accomplishments are spot on.

The issue I have, though, is that I simply don't trust the opposition. They claim to be economically responsible, yet at the last election they had a gigantic black hole in their proposed policies. They claim that the policies of this government are "irresponsible" and "reckless" yet they have nothing to contribute themselves - saying "we'll wait until the election before announcing our policies." History suggests that, when they do finally announce their policies at the next election (whenever that might be), they'll have the same issues with costing their policies. Though I sure hope I'll be pleasantly surprised.