Now Rudd Pays the Price! (2 Viewers)

[spiny norman]

Let's see, match these to an era. The only man worth mentioning from that party is Keating. After that, YES they have been rubbish and predictable. Predictable, ie to deliver politics.

You see get your head of your ass, look ahead not dwell on great things labour did in the FAR past.

Let's see, John Curtin and Ben Chifley are not worth mentioning? Gough Whitlam, though still spurs great debates, was hardly predictable. You get your head out of your arse. One should always acknowledge and understand what has come before.

I think Rudd's been quite a disappointment. I think he's trying too hard to do nothing contentious, to pander so much to the centre, that he's making no progress and is representing little. Rudd needs to recognise that remaining 70+% approval ratings will not remain by doing nothing to piss off people.

At the end of the day it proved to be his downfall. However, I still think that the judgement of the elector and of the commentator has been clouded over the past 2 years. It seems any positive of the Howard Government has been swept away, forgotten and history has been re-written. Four election victories do not just happen. They result from the combination of inept Opposition, effective Government and an ability to read the electorate.

History will remember Howard poorly, I can not see how it can do otherwise. He did win four elections - 1996 which anyone could have won, 1998 wherein he lost the popular vote (and it's dating back to the Depression era's James Scullin when a Prime Minister was elected into office before being voted out one term later), 2001 which he won off the back of September 11 and Tampa and 2004 which he won off Latham and the splintering of the Labor party.

Constantly winning does not make a great Prime Minister (and given he lost a third of the elections he contested he doesn't really have that), nor does being Prime Minister forever.

To say history has been re-written about a man who was so divisive a Prime Minister is foolhardy. To say that it seems that history seems to be agreeing with those who hated him appears, at least in the short term, to be the way it's being remembered. You're the one with the rose-tinted view of history if you're saying any major animosity to Howard began in 2005.

 

[jb_nc]

you're an idiot. what we are paying for petrol is not a true price. It's already inflated and you want to do it more? Fucking retard, we should be paying under a dollar.

fucking hippie, coal powered stations are worse than motorists using petrol you absolute massive retard.

um do you understand the concept of negative externalities

an internal combustion engine running petrol operates at 30pc efficiency (about the maximum for current technology) not including release of NOx gasses et cetera. A coal fired power plant (built with current technology) runs at about 40-45pc efficiency so, no, petrol is a worse fuel than coal and that doesn't include total energy input in the cracking process (very energy intensive) and extraction from the ground. carbon dioxide gases from coal power plants can also be sequestered minimising their externalities.

so yes, i am a fucking hippie. if you really think the price of petrol per litre should be under one dollar you should probably start writing for today tonight or something equally populist.

both of the efficiencies were sourced from perry's chemical engineering handbook.

 

[The_highwayman]

To say history has been re-written about a man who was so divisive a Prime Minister is foolhardy. To say that it seems that history seems to be agreeing with those who hated him appears, at least in the short term, to be the way it's being remembered. You're the one with the rose-tinted view of history if you're saying any major animosity to Howard began in 2005.

his time in the top job constitutes about 5% of the total time we've even been a nation. that's pretty substantial. a lot happened in those 12 years and we came out of it in pretty decent shape.

 

[incentivation]

Constantly winning does not make a great Prime Minister (and given he lost a third of the elections he contested he doesn't really have that), nor does being Prime Minister forever.

To say history has been re-written about a man who was so divisive a Prime Minister is foolhardy. To say that it seems that history seems to be agreeing with those who hated him appears, at least in the short term, to be the way it's being remembered. You're the one with the rose-tinted view of history if you're saying any major animosity to Howard began in 2005.

The same could be said of Hawke and of course Keating, who was lucky to win at least one election.

The left have always had animosity toward Howard. However, although you may not like to believe it, the left does not represent the broader electorate.

 

[spiny norman]

his time in the top job constitutes about 5% of the total time we've even been a nation. that's pretty substantial. a lot happened in those 12 years and we came out of it in pretty decent shape.

10%, really. But, regardless, someone being Prime Minister for a long period of time doesn't mean they were any good (Joseph Lyons was Prime Minister for seven years, but is today at best ignored). And because our nation's in tatters, he's great? Very few Prime Ministers have left the country in terrible shape.

The argument for Howard will be whether his generally well regarded economic handling can balance out his often highly criticised social engineering. How that is revolved will dictate his legacy, ultimately.

The same could be said of Hawke and of course Keating, who was lucky to win at least one election.

Yes, neither could have their legacies determined six months after their term as Prime Minister ended. Which is what I'm saying?

Though I'm not too sure one can call Hawke divisive - he was probably the nation's most beloved Prime Minister since Chifley, if not ever?

The left have always had animosity toward Howard. However, although you may not like to believe it, the left does not represent the broader electorate.

No, but nor does the right. Time will tell how Howard's remembered. But history has certainly not "rewritten" him yet. If anything, he's just as divisive now as he was in government? He was never a fantastically popular man.

 

[bigboyjames]

i wonder what would happen if saudi arabia stopped all its oil production for just 24 hours. no pumping no exporting.....global recession? oil at $3 L? lol

 

[boris]

hey fags maybe i asked this before, but dont we have a fucktonne of fossil fuels in the ocean below S.A?

i think i read it somewhere, but one of you grease monkeys would know

 

[boris]

oi guys, it cost me $92 yesterday to fill my camry up (58 litre tank i put 56.5 litres in or something, pretty epic)

but u know what. I HAS A JOB TO PAYS FOR THIS FUELS THAT I AM REQUIRING SO IT'S OK.

i kinda wonder though how the retards that lap all day can afford petrol, coz they obviously dont have jobs... and they fuel up like twice a day... it's just retarded

 

[Slidey]

oi guys, it cost me $92 yesterday to fill my camry up (58 litre tank i put 56.5 litres in or something, pretty epic)

but u know what. I HAS A JOB TO PAYS FOR THIS FUELS THAT I AM REQUIRING SO IT'S OK.

i kinda wonder though how the retards that lap all day can afford petrol, coz they obviously dont have jobs... and they fuel up like twice a day... it's just retarded

Yeah exactly. Oh no, petrol has risen in price... so has your income you stupid fuckwits. You earn about 50% more now than you did in 2000.

 

[Captain Gh3y]

The dole has not increased by 50% since 2000 though

 

[Slidey]

Oh really? I'm pretty sure it has increased by a significant amount in line with income increase.

 

[Slidey]

But that's my point: income has grown to keep up with other pressures. Does it mean we are richer? No, but it means that 'massive' price increases for various goods are often decieving. Although in the case of petrol there is much more at work than the price of oil barrels (which has strangely more than doubled in recent years).

Last calculation I did based on 2001 and 2007 Bureau of Statistics data indicated a non-indexed income increase of between 30% to 50% for all levels of employment. I'll try to dig it up again a bit later.

Edit: Yeah, check Average Weekly Earnings on the ABS.

 

[incentivation]

Please allow me to introduce myself
Im a man of wealth and taste
Ive been around for a long, long year
Stole many a mans soul and faith
And I was round when jesus christ
Had his moment of doubt and pain
Made damn sure that pilate
Washed his hands and sealed his fate
Pleased to meet you
Hope you guess my name
But whats puzzling you
Is the nature of my game

.

 

[Riet]

Sympathy for the devil, whoo.,

 

[Apey MatrixElf]

Look - whatever happens, we have to remember that Australia's economy has been going great for awhile; the rest of the world is starting to crumble economically, and it only makes sense that Australia goes with it.

It's something that neither the Rudd not the Howard government could have prevented!

Petrol is awfully expensive, but hey - we could always take public transport. It's not that great and can be expensive, but how are we supposed to get a better one if we don't pay to use it more in the first place??

 

[sam04u]

Well regardless of Rudd's failings which as was stated, everyone expected, certain things have come from this.

If only he continues to promote education, at all other costs I'd be satisfied. That's all that's it important, the education of the people. Whether they be in poverty or not, solutions to all our problems lie in education. And so far as he has promised, Rudd is working towards investing money in education.

The economy which is largely influenced by the rest of the world will always have periods of "boom and bust" in countries which are service based, rather than manufacturing based. If Rudd fulfills just two of his election promises, more spending on infrastructure and education, then he has done more than any of us can ask for.

Slowly we'll all move to socialism. Not out of altruism, not out of security, not out of ideology, or any other such. But out of neccessity. Embrace it.

*whistles the Soviet anthem*

 

[MTP]

When am i getting my free laptop!?! bah

 

[sam04u]

When am i getting my free laptop!?! bah

Slowly buy surely.
Ruddling will not deny you of your earthly pleasures.

All you desire will be yours, when you desire nothing.
All you wish will be yours, when you wish for nothing.
All your needs will be satisfied, when you need nothing.
All your dreams will come true, when you dream of nothing.

Embrace it. Embrace Ruddling.

Embrace and Obey.

 

[MTP]

Slowly buy surely.
Ruddling will not deny you of your earthly pleasures.

All you desire will be yours, when you desire nothing.
All you wish will be yours, when you wish for nothing.
All your needs will be satisfied, when you need nothing.
All your dreams will come true, when you dream of nothing.

Embrace it. Embrace Ruddling.

Embrace and Obey.

I dont want "NOTHING", i want my free laptop!!

 

[jb_nc]

that is seriously one of the dumbest 'serious' posts i've ever seen.