Iain Hall's SANDPIT

Home » Australian Politics » “If I’m looking at Abbott and thinking he’s looking good, there must be an awful lot of people who are thinking the same thing. And I think that there are.”

“If I’m looking at Abbott and thinking he’s looking good, there must be an awful lot of people who are thinking the same thing. And I think that there are.”

Another campaign day down and this observer is finding some interest in the process even though Labor true believers  must be all visiting their doctors to ask for a “Happy Pills” script. I am doing my best to feel  with them because I remember how I felt back in 2007 when it seemed so clear that  Rudd had a better than even chance of winning.

The piece in today’s OZ about swinging voter Jeanette Harrison is most interesting because the video from 2007 is such a lovely contrast with the contemporary vision because it shows just why “saving Australia from the GFC meltdown” is just not going to save Labor:

Jennette expresses disappointed with Labor, arguing Julia Gillard has failed to provide a different or compelling vision for the future.

“Labor’s just performing so badly. They’re not offering anything different. I can accept the stuff up on the batts. But I honestly can’t say this election there is anything that’s important which is making me decide which way to vote,” she said.

“Though voting for Tony Abbott, I still don’t know if I can go to the polls and tick for Abbott. I really don’t know if I can do that.”

Jennette owns up to being a swinging voter and says, if she thinks Abbott looks good, others would too.

“If I’m looking at Abbott and thinking he’s looking good, there must be an awful lot of people who are thinking the same thing. And I think that there are.”

To understand what will happen on the 21st I think we need to understand what happened in 2007 and the way that Jeanette Harrison changed her vote then and the way it looks like she will change her vote this time is probably indicative of how a lot of swinging voters are thinking right now so I urge my readers to consider the vision posted at my link and then tell me that they think that Labor will win.
Cheers Comrades


65 Comments

  1. PKD says:

    I still think that Labor will win although the Libs have a decent chance not because of anything they are offering, but because Labor did a spectacular job of shooting itself in the early part of the election.
    As the saying goes, oppositions don’t win elections, governments lose them. Abbott isn’t offering anything compelling other than giving people a protest vote…

  2. PKD says:

    Although if you want to give me a short list about why to vote for Abbott (as I am a swinging voter myself) as opposed to against Abbott I’m happy to consider it.

    Cause ight now I have no idea why I should vote for the guy…what is he really standing for?

  3. PKD says:

    Against Labor I meant lol! 🙂

  4. Iain Hall says:

    You made a spelling mistake??
    what mistake? 😉

  5. PKD says:

    It should read ‘as opposed to against Labor’ above.

    So what are the reasons I should vote for the Libs instead of protest voting against Labor Iain?
    What is Abbott for?

  6. Iain Hall says:

    Top of the list just has to be good governance PKD because if you Unpack all of Labor’s attempts to enact tehir grand visions they have been woeful .
    The question you have to ask yourself is would you choose an accountant who can’t do their sums even if you agree with their fine sounding ideas?
    If you say “no” then why would you chose a political party that is unable to properly administer any of its programs.

  7. PKD says:

    Good governance?
    You mean like good economic management?
    Avoiding the GFC is a fairly good result I would say.

    As for doing sums Joe.Hockey gave figures that were 7bn out from what Abbott gave yesterday.
    What proof is there that the coalitions governance would be any better? Remember interest rates were way higher under the Howard by the end, plus Abbott is ducking Gillards challenge to debate head 2 head on the economy.

    So I don’t think your argument stacks up there Iain.
    Any other reasons to vote for the coalition is that it?

  8. Iain Hall says:

    PKD

    But Opposition finance spokesman Andrew Robb denies there is a mistake in calculations.

    Mr Robb says Mr Hockey has included the revenue from the mining tax, which the Coalition would scrap. He says Mr Abbott was referring to spending promises excluding the mining tax.

    “The claim that Opposition treasury spokesman Joe Hockey has contradicted Tony Abbott to the tune of $7 billion during today’s economic debate at the National Press Club is plainly wrong and deliberately deceptive,” he said.

    “Wayne Swan has failed to check his facts before rushing to incorrectly claim a contradiction by the Coalition on spending measures.”

    Claims that Joe can’t add up don’t add up 🙂

  9. PKD says:

    Of course Robb would say that iain – hardy the voice of neutrality there. Anybody independantly backing that view up?

    So nothing else that Abbott is actually for then?

  10. Iain Hall says:

    Of course there is PKD
    He has a most sensible position on climate change, all Gillard offers is another talkfest.
    On the NBN the coalition are likely to have a more realistic plan rather than the white elephant planned by Labor who offer a Rolls Royce solution (that we can’t afford) instead of the ford one that will meet our needs.
    You have nothing to fear if IR is an issue for you,
    Heck Tony even says that he will change nothing about abortion either
    So honestly what have you got to loses by voting for the coalition?

  11. Craigy says:

    I feel the same as PKD. I’m a swinging voter in as much as I vote Green and give preferences to the best major party candidate in my area, which is a very marginal seat (McEwen).

    Having looked at the two major party candidates over the last few weeks, it is clear the Lib is a not worth the effort. The ALP candidate is the better one and is predicted to win the seat for the ALP, a net gain for them. Had Fran Bailey been running for the Lib’s then my preference vote would have gone to her.

    Tony has been unimpressive with his voice training and new restrained character, but I think most people can see through him and know he will resort to the old extreme Tony once in power. His normal manner is unelectable, so I give credit to the Lib’s image makers and spin doctors for producing a much more moderate looking Tony for the election.

    Julia has problems (her party) but she does come across as genuine, regardless of the smear and fear campaign being run against her. This type of advertising won’t work against Julia but is working against Abbott because his history IS nasty and people just need to be reminded who he is, no matter how much Tony try’s to appear like someone else.

    I guess that’s it when it comes to the leaders, if the fear and smear ads continue to run, who will the mud stick to. I think the nasty history of Tony Abbott and his role in so many of the Howard disasters will haunt him on voting day. He is trying so hard to dodge the fact that he hasn’t learnt the lessons of his election defeat and really has no new ideas other than the failed conservative ones of the previous Coalition Government.

    Still it will be close.

  12. Ray Dixon says:

    “Though voting for Tony Abbott, I still don’t know if I can go to the polls and tick for Abbott. I really don’t know if I can do that.”

    Even your swinging voter can’t see why he would be worth putting in, Iain. The same message came across from the swinging voters interviewed on the 7.30 Report last night. These people (not exactly Einsteins) seemed to be doing pretty well (one was even filmed in his luxury boat!). The fools said they thought Labor hadn’t done much but thought that the stimulus was good but they were “no better off”. As I watched it I thought these people had been too well protected and are so insular that they have no idea of what might have happened if not for Labor’s actions. BUT, at the end, I was heartened by the fact they all expressed doubts about voting for Abbott. They just don’t like/trust/believe him – especially over work choices.

    Btw, Gillard gave a great performance on Q&A last night. Pity Abbott didn’t have the guts to turn up.

    Btw #2, great to hear that Craigy!

  13. Trevor2 says:

    Seriously, Gillard “does come across as genuine” when she had to reinvent herself as the “real Julia” half way through the campaign? I bet Rudd thought she was genuine in her professed support for his leadership as well.

    When you think about the vote, don’t just think about the leader, you’ve seen how quick that can change. Look at the experience of the team as a whole. I would much rather Hockey as Treasurer than ex Train Driver Swan for a start. There are many more experienced ministers on the Lib side.

    Did you see the ‘great debate’ on Sunrise this morning. I particularly liked the devastation on Koch’s face and in his voice when the first of the public vote started coming in showing the Nationals had kicked butt. I guess it is easy to see where his loyalties lay after that, if they weren’t blatantly obvious before that is.

  14. Iain Hall says:

    Ray
    Tony will be on Q&A next week which is tactically better than appearing last night, But with regard What Jeanette was saying at the end of the vid it seemed clear to me that although she is clearly not locked in she certainly is trending towards voting against Labor.

  15. Ray Dixon says:

    No one has “reinvented” themselves and hidden the real person more than Abbott has.

  16. Ray Dixon says:

    Iain, all I can say about that Australian piece is that you are sounding desperate and clutching at straws if you think it’s any kind of real guide to the election result. Interestingly the Australian has its opinion poll at the top of the article showing Labor leading 52-48 and Gillard leading Abbott 49-34 as preferred PM. It might have been more relevant to have talked about that.

  17. Iain Hall says:

    Ray
    I am interested in the election
    I desire to see the election of a coalition government
    But I am actually deliberately ambivalent about the result because until the fat lady actually singing I’m not going to call it.

    But this piece is like many things I post to this blog is what caught my attention on my morning circuit of the dailies.
    Despite the opinion polling I don’t feel any desperation at all, perhaps I just have a bit more faith in the Australian voters than you do 😉

  18. Sax says:

    Gotta love your undying devotion, and belief in the impossible Ray.

    You are a shining light, in the darkness of tenacity and no hope.

    One question though, what are you going to do when Labor loses ?
    Go into hiding ?
    😉

  19. Ray Dixon says:

    It’s not about me, Sax. I don’t vote out of personal interest and it won’t make any difference to my life if Abbott wins. I just think he’d be wrong for this country and send us backwards. Furthermore, I’ve said from day one that it will be close. But it’s certainly not “impossible” for Gillard to win, in fact the polls suggest she might.

    Iain, come off it, you are barracking like all hell mate.

  20. Craigy says:

    Trev2, yes she does come across as genuine, especially when you compare her to Tony.

    While Julia did change her tone in the first few weeks, she has been consistent with her policy ideas and commitments. Tony is a flip flopper driven by polls and is clearly hiding his true policy preferences and moderating his well known views for the election. This is the work of his image makers who know the real Tony is unelectable.

    Julia’s problem is not her, it’s the ALP around her.

    And yes, the Lib’s have more experience in Government. Unfortunately people still associate them with the failures of the Howard Government, of which there were many starting back with the MUA dispute and through to the war against terror, children overboard, Tampa and finally Workchoices preceding the embarrassing election defeat with the Prime Minister losing his own seat. The in-fighting in the Coalition ranks has been just as bad as the ALP. People won’t forget their failures (other than Iain and other Conservatives) …….I have faith in Australian voters as well…….

  21. Ray Dixon says:

    One of the best summaries I’ve seen of the Labor v Liberal equation was made here on 20 March 2010 by, er, one of the commenters now saying the exact opposite and criticising Labor’s performance. The author’s name is at the foot of this lengthy and very well observed comment:

    The Labor party’s inherent problems always seem to stem from the fact, that they try to get the economy moving as quickly as possible. That always entails government borrowings, to boost lagging private sector investment. In other words, they try to do too much, too quickly.

    The latest economic foray, by Canberra, into debt, was a direct result of the failure of Johnny and Cost-Cutto, to come to grips with the fact, that to make money, you have to spend money. They didn’t. They were hell bent on reducing government borrowings/debt, to such a degree, that investment, that was vital for growth, vanished. Along with it, future jobs, future markets, future industries et al. Between them, they virtually strangled the economy.

    What the Labor party have tried to do, and history will be the only way to tell if it has been successful or not, is to give the economy a vital boost by trying to replace non existent private investment, by government investment or input.

    Look at pensions. Under Howard, they stagnated to such an extent, that pensioners couldn’t afford to live. They are still way too low, but none the less, Labor’s increases were a start.

    Liberals are all about making money, but hording it.

    By “Len”, aka “Sax”. Very well said mate.

  22. Iain Hall says:

    Ray

    Iain, come off it, you are barracking like all hell mate.

    I don’t subscribe to any of the religions (of the egg shaped ball) that require the sort of observances that you characterise as “barracking” As I have said I do have a desired result but I like to think that what I post here is a good starting point for some interesting discussion irrespective of my own hopes for a particular result.

  23. Sax says:

    Wow Ray, that took some digging ?
    And as usual, in your cryptic way,
    your point is ?

    Well Ray, has it worked ?
    $60 billion in debt, and for what ? Labor let off the leash to fast, and too much, and the massive debt remains. Now we are all going to have to pay for that impatience.

    I didn’t say I was going to enjoy the next three years under a Liberal government, far from it, just, that is the way it is going to be.

    BTW, you still haven’t got the art of sarcasm have you ? aka Ray.
    My first name is Len, and Sax is the shortened version of my surname. Same person. But everyone else knows that, why should I be surprised that you don’t ?

  24. Ray Dixon says:

    Well yes, the issue of the swinging voter is a relevant point in this election, Iain. After all, they’re the ones who ultimately determine the result.

    Unfortunately though, many of them (present company excluded) seem to have a very narrow perspective of the issues. I mean, your “Jeanette” doesn’t exactly go deep, does she? Nor did the fools from West Sydney interviewed on the 7.30 Report last night, especially the dumb prick on his boat. The idiot actually said that boat people were coming in and taking our jobs by working for slave wages. Huh?

    Anyway, even morons are entitled to have a government and, as they say, you get the government you deserve. If Abbott wins he will take us backwards for sure and we will be viewed internationally as unstable and retrograde. And we will deserve that.

  25. Sax says:

    The Labor party’s inherent problems always seem to stem from the fact, that they try to get the economy moving as quickly as possible. That always entails government borrowings, to boost lagging private sector investment. In other words, they try to do too much, too quickly.

    I still stand by this, and again,
    Your point is ?

  26. Sax says:

    Oh man, that has to be one of the greatest paragraphs of scare mongering and propaganda I have ever seen.

    Ka-ching !
    Nice touch.

  27. Ray Dixon says:

    Sax, I remembered the comment because I thought it was very good summary of the economic differences between the parties.

    My point is your March comment that Labor “invests” in the future and the Liberals don’t, is very relevant to this economic debate.

    Btw, there was no “sarcasm” in my comment, just a compliment. And I realise the reason for the name change and its connection (obviously).

  28. Ray Dixon says:

    Calm down, Sax. What are you getting upset over?

  29. Trevor2 says:

    So much for getting the Resource Rent Tax passed by the Greens
    http://au.news.yahoo.com/a/-/latest/7736459/greens-to-push-mining-tax/

    They want the “super profits tax” back (maybe they think it relates to Neitzche views and his superman [Ubermensch] which would fit with Bob Browns view of himself), they want it to be 50% and rake 20 billion out of mining. Labor couldn’t be seen to back down from Julia’s amazing deal with the handful of very large miners and Brown is too arrogant to back down either.

    Looks like if Labor do fall over the line there is going to be one hell of a hole in their budget, but we all knew that, except for maybe one or two that is.

  30. Sax says:

    I’m not upset Ray. I understand your sarcasm, well sort of, as best as anyone can.

    My point in rebuttal to your digging up of my speech from all that time ago, is that it appears you have sort of again, proven my point. Labor normally does invest in infrastructure et al, but, they haven’t this time have they ? They have frittered away $60b and have absolutely nothing to show for it, but a bare a*se and an empty wallet ?

    Your point then/now becomes ?

  31. Sax says:

    Thanks for that Trevor2.
    Greens, (maybe that should just say Brown), in an attempt to appear relevant, is digging himself a hole of such a size, that the entire mining industry will fall about laughing, as he attempts to get himself out of it.

    As I have said, watching down to what has happened in Tassy, the Greens have become irrelevant, and will do so in the Federal campaign as well. No one trusts them down there, due to the deals with the labor party, and me bets me next bottle of scotch, no one trusts them federally either.

  32. Ray Dixon says:

    Sax, I’m not attempting rto be sarcastic. Anyway:

    Well Ray, has it worked ? $60 billion in debt, and for what ?

    Yes it has worked. Australia is the only western country to have avoided the recession and has actually grown economically while the rest of the world shrank. We have low unemployment, low interest rates, low inflation, and … a low debt (6% of GDP is not a problem). The budget is coming back into surplus and the future looks bright. Why change? As you said, it was necessary for Labor to spend Howard’s surplus on investing in the future and in jobs. The fact they also had a global recession to combat made that doubly important.

    Btw, even Hockey admits the Liberals woud be in debt and in deficit now too. The difference being we’d also be in recession due to the other cost cutting. Honestly, Sax, if you put this lot back in and they bring out the toe-cutters we will indeed be at great risk from international events.

    Trevor, the Greens will be on a steep learning curve and are going to have to compromise on a lot of their idealistic rubbish once they get the balance of power and find out that they’re playing in the real world.

  33. Iain Hall says:

    Yes Trevor
    I heard Bob Brown on Radio national Breakfast with Fran Kelly this morning and It confirmed every concern that I ahve that the Greens are too dogmatic and that they will find that holding the balance of power will be a lot harder than they think , in fact they may implode under the stress of actually having to compromise just as the democrats ended up doing

  34. Sax says:

    The budget maybe in surplus, but what about the massive debt that labor has just racked up in less than three years ?

    What did Daniel say $150 billion in the last thread ?

    Where’s this surplus your talking about Ray ?
    The labor party aren’t paying back principal from their borrowings, just interest only, so cut the surplus crap. It’s a myth, and one created by labor that you’re falling for.

    Why do you think we avoided the recession ?
    You believe it was due to Howard/Cost Cutto, or perhaps Rudd/Gillard ?
    Balls !
    It was due to China’s (and the rest of the developed worlds), hunger for our natural resources. These were sold, at rediculously cheap prices to allow the economy to retain a high cash flow, so as we wouldn’t go into a more serious recession.

  35. Iain Hall says:

    Anyway as another boat arrives You can bet that the swinging voters will feel ,once again, that Labor has let them down

  36. Ray Dixon says:

    what about the massive debt that labor has just racked up in less than three years ?

    Asked & answered, Sax. You’re just ranting now and I think I’ll leave our conversation at that for the time being. Just a reminder: the sky is not falling.

  37. Trevor2 says:

    Ray, really, Greens and compromise in the same sentence! Have you seen that idiot Bob Brown on TV telling everyone how they are going to demand the government, whichever one it is, they don’t seem to care which now, put their policies in place. They are going to give new meaning to the term ‘hostile senate’ unless voters wake up in time.

  38. Sax says:

    Rubbish Ray.
    Your babbling on about a surplus’ that don’t exist, and will never exist, until the $150b debt that Labor has racked up is paid for. Who’s ranting now ?

    Better give that mirror mirror on the wall another clean.

  39. Trevor2 says:

    Sax, as a person on the frontline dealing with consumers at the time, I can tell you that large parts of the economy did go into recession and are still there. It was only the mining sector, as you rightly point out, that stopped the “technical” recession of 2 quarters negative growth by the barest of margins.

    I also know that one of the biggest burdens was when the RBA slashed interest rates and our dollar dropped dramatically. While mortgages came down, the price of fuel went through the roof and flowed on to every facet of day to day life. People were constantly hurting having to fork out $80 or $100 a week to put fuel in their car.

    Rather than smashing open the piggy bank and handing out money like a drunken sailor, a simple measure that would have given a huge psychological boost and encouraged consumer confidence would have to simply temporarily removed the fuel excise. It could have been gradually reintroduced as the economy stabilised. Getting fuel down to around 90cents would have been a huge help to so many people and would have flowed through in lower freight prices, etc. But that would have taken foresight and courage, not grand-standing and waste.

  40. Indi Warrior says:

    these debt numbers you keep throwing around Sax keep changing…..why is that?

    settle down and stop getting excited

  41. Ray Dixon says:

    “as a person on the frontline dealing with consumers at the time, I can tell you that large parts of the economy did go into recession and are still there”

    Care to give some examples, Trevor?

    As a person who is also on the frontline dealing with consumers at the time, I can tell you that large parts of the economy did NOT go into recession. When news of the GFC first hit there was widespread fear in my industry (tourism) that we would see people pulling their heads in, tightening their belts and cutting back on taking holidays and weekend breaks. For a month or so it did actually all dry up as the uncertainty prevailed. Bright was like a ghost town. But the impact of the government stimulus package definitely propped up our market.

    Most noticeable has been the increase in the numbers of families with young kids arriving in their expensive cars and splashing money around (bolstered by low interest rates, the handouts & family benefits of course). I have also seen it boost the building sector – you just can’t get a tradesman on short notice around here – they’re all too busy.

    So I’m calling you Trevor – which “large parts of the economy did go into recession and are still there”?

    (Len so it’s now $150 billion? Grows every time you post.

  42. PKD says:

    Iain,
    abbotts climate change policy would do even less than Labors (remember he doesn’t even believe in it),
    NBN is pretty essential in an increasingly digital world – the bandwidth will get used up mark my word,
    and I don’t think anyone trusts Abbott when he says work choices is dead.

    Does he even have a positive message on health and education?
    If so he needs to do a better job getting it out, and spend less time on negative campaigning like today’s boat people ad.
    That ad comes over as a diversion from Labours attempt to talk economics, which is starting to become Abbotts weak point…

  43. Trevor2 says:

    I really shouldn’t have to do the research for you. Why don’t you just look at the retail trade figures, particularly the areas in discretionary spending. Didn’t you see the latest figures, too busy catering for those rich people in their flash cars perhaps. Why do you think the big retailers are hammering 50-70% off sales and still cannot people in spending. Or don’t you watch any news that is not a Labor party press conference?

    Recession bites the bottom end of the market first, the ones that have those old clunkers Julia wants them to get rid of and go into debt for a new one, not the rich.

    Why don’t you also check the figures for tourism areas in the North of Queensland, the one’s that actually rely on tourist having to travel long distances or come form overseas instead of just driving up to Bright for the weekend.

    Maybe you can’t get a builder because they are all off raking in the dough, building school halls at 5000 a square metre (figures in the govt report in case you didn’t see it). I’m just building a 7.2 x 2.4 metre workshop for my lead lighting hobby. It has cost me about $2500. At the BER rate it would cost me $95,000. They sure are getting value for money.

    It’s all right Ray, the sky isn’t falling, just as you said. Everything is fine with the world, Julia will fix everything and save the rest of the world while she’s at it.

  44. Ray Dixon says:

    “I really shouldn’t have to do the research for you.”

    Look Trevor, you made the claim, not me. So you do the research not me, okay? You have a weird (and, quite frankly, an unnecessarily snarky) way of arguing.

    Anyway, retail sectors have always fluctuated. So has tourism in far north Queensland, due to matters overseas and the exchange rate. Those places up there can get into trouble even while the rest of the economy is booming and often do. Cyclones don’t help them either.

    And the builders around here are busy building homes, not BER projects.

    You really haven’t made a case for there being a recession in any sector – otherwise the unemployment queues would be growing, wouldn’t they?

    Now lighten up and play the ball.

  45. Trevor2 says:

    Well now that’s the pot calling the kettle black if ever I heard it.

  46. Ray Dixon says:

    Okay Trevor, I don’t agree with that but let’s call it even and focus on the ball from now on, okay?

  47. Trevor2 says:

    The unemployment figures are only full time unemployed. They don’t show under employment, i.e., people that have had their hours cut back or small business owners that are struggling to keep their doors open.
    Are you aware that if you work as little as half a day a week you are removed from the figures?
    There is a huge hidden under employed section of the workforce that won’t stay hidden for much longer. I know quite a few businesses that used to be good customers of mine that have now shut their doors or are not even able to pay themselves a decent wage. (I’m sure you’d like me to list them all but out of respect for their privacy I’ll decline.) Jut a shame that the next quarter figures will be out too late for the election.

  48. Ray Dixon says:

    Yes, I’m aware that John Howard changed the rules to reduce the number of people counted as unemployed and that, due largely to a hangover from a decade of Howardism and a culture of forcing people into low paid, part time jobs, we now have an undisclosed pool of underemployed people.

    BUT, you cannot make any case against Labor over that. They’ve done a pretty good job on the employment front – in spite of the GFC – and it’s still a work in progress.

    I really am getting tired of your constant “Libs forever” and “Libs can do no wrong” approach. Even I admit that Labor has stuffed up the stimulus programs and overspent. But your lot can’t just claim that means they’d be any better.

    Your protestations are overkill but you haven’t made a case for the Liberals to be put back in after just 3 years of Labor in trying circumstances.

    We’ve done this to death.

  49. Sax says:

    (Len so it’s now $150 billion? Grows every time you post

    That’s the total of Labor’s debt Ray, the other 6 odd billion is just the last budget alone.

  50. Sax says:

    don’t forget the 100m a day in charges, interest, and other expenses.
    Ka ching, come in spinner

  51. Ray Dixon says:

    Sax, you amaze me. Truly amazing stuff mate.

  52. Sax says:

    Thanks, I appreciate the wrap.

    Your failure to acknowledge referenced material, that shoots down your argument is renown.
    Keep on trucking Ray, one day you might get it right.

  53. Ray Dixon says:

    How about you reference the $150 billion debt?

  54. Sax says:

    already have, numerous times.
    get over it.

  55. Ray Dixon says:

    No you haven’t. The $150 billion is a figure you plucked out of the air – even Joe is only referring to $90 billion.

    Look, don’t bother. I’m over your two-faced rantings, Sax. In March of this year (just over 4 months ago) you were saying that the Liberals are the cause of Labor’s spending because the Liberals don’t spend while in govt and “horde” money. Now you’re deriding Labor for doing what YOU said they should do. Unbelievable!

  56. Sax says:

    The $150b is the final projected total, as I have said previously.
    What I said was, that Liberal save money. Labor spend money. That is the way of both parties. Again, you selectively read/quote.

    Would you sooner have to suffer a tax increase, due to labor’s 100m a day interest bill Ray ? I see you haven’t acknowledged or responded to that. In your defence though, pretty tough ask. Hard to explain off a government, that when they took power, not even three years ago, had $60b in the bank, and in that less than three years have blown the bloody lot ?

    Chime in Ray, oh boo hoo, it was the GFC. That was the cause of it all, sob !
    The Labor party accountants couldn’t correctly add up, if their lives depended on it. Funny thing is, their secret is out, and no one is falling for it anymore.

  57. PKD says:

    had $60b in the bank, and in that less than three years have blown the bloody lot ?

    I suspect $60b is a bit of an over estimate, but even the Libs admitted they would have been forced to spend into a deficit with the GFC. So why complain that Labour did this as if the Libs would somehow have stopped a recession why keeping all their pennies saved up?

    Just about every economic expert has supported the govts fiscal policy, yet you seem to pretend to some level of economic expertise that no-one else seems to be aware of…

  58. PKD says:

    And if the Libs are such geniuses on economic management, why is Abbott ducking a head 2 head debate specifically on the economy, preferring to dredge up more negative campaiging on boat people?

  59. Ray Dixon says:

    “you seem to pretend to some level of economic expertise that no-one else seems to be aware of…”

    Exactly, PKD. Sax/Len is a self-appointed economic guru. The only problem is, his figures don’t add up or stand up to scrutiny. Much like his beloved Libs, I suspect.

    Tomorrow’s ‘Rooty Hill showdown’ might (hopefully) see Gillard & Mr Rabbott go head to head on the economy though. The pressure is on Abbott now – he has to put up or shut up.

  60. PKD says:

    Abbott’s previous reply was he was ‘too busy’ to debate Gillard on the economy.

    Too busy trying to come up with figures that balance presumably. Just heard that the Libs believe an NBN can be delivered for 6bn – thats ~7 times cheaper than the Labor NBN plan.

    I give it till cob tomorrow for Telstra and/or other major Telcos like Optus to dismiss the feasibility of that idea…

  61. PKD says:

    Key aspects of the plan include:

    – $750 million for fixed broadband optimisation to increase the number of households that can receive a DSL service or high-speed equivalent.

    – Up to $1 billion in grants for a new fixed wireless networks in rural and remote Australia.

    – Up to $1 billion in investment funding for new fixed wireless networks in metropolitan areas, with an emphasis on outer metropolitan areas.

    I am impressed that almost half the 6bn is to be spend on DSL and wireless – precisely the dead-end techs the NBN is meant to be replacing as they are both too slow!!!

    I thought you said the Libs had a decent NBN plan Iain???

  62. Ray Dixon says:

    They have bought into an area where they have no expertise whatsover, all for the sake of scoring a few cheap shots by saying “we’ll save money”. Well, the truth is the coalition’s broadband plan is a total waste of money. A waste of $6 billion.

    The facade around Abbott is crumbling faster than frost on a sunny morning.

  63. Sax says:

    “you seem to pretend to some level of economic expertise that no-one else seems to be aware of…”

    I don’t pretend to be anything, but I can read.
    What is Labor’s projected debt supposed to be this year gents, $96b ?
    Don’t see this rosy future your talking about, at least under your darling Labor party.
    One plus one still equals two, no matter how your pals try to spin it.

  64. Sax says:

    PKD
    Howard left Labor with a $20b surplus as well as a future infrastructure fund, that had $40b in it.
    that makes up the $60b. Labor has blown that, as well as the current debt of $96b. Want to continue with “where is the $150b” Ray ?

Comments are closed.

Welcome to the Sandpit

I love a good argument so please leave a comment

Please support the Sandpit

Please support the Sandpit

Do you feel lucky?

Do you feel lucky?

%d bloggers like this: