Alan Kohler
Michael Janda
Greg Jericho
Here we are in 2015, staring down the barrel of another joke of an LNP budget. The worst aspects of the robbing hood's first budget were thankfully blocked in the Senate by the forces of the far right, of all people, now clothed in the guise of the progressive. In other words we are now progressing in a regressive manner towards a vague right wing phantasm of an ideological utopia defining our reality in terms of a sepia-soaked image of life reminiscent of a time 60-70 years ago.
I began this entry in the usual format butt now I am simply going to VENT, so those of you with an aversion to brown matter everywhere would be best advised to turn off your devices now.
How can anyone be so stupid, say such stupid things, look so stupid on TV, treat everyone with patronizing belittling contempt, and yet actually be elected???????? Does the electorate despise itself this much?????? That it could elect a party that openly believes it is incapable of understanding the concept of anything????
I was stung out of my apathy by the prospect of being forced to live under Work Choices; a policy so unfair unjust and so biased towards the interests of SME's that the prospect of being forced to live by it's rules was anathematically intolerable. So I became as active as I could in the Keven07 campaign. I attended meetings, chanted slogans and publicized the message under the constraint of time devoted to earning a living.
And so was the joyous facade of the Rudd government initiated.
How quickly it all unraveled. No one can know what exactly happened. Everything unravelled at Copenhagen.When PM Rudd realised that although anthropomorphic climate change was the existential, defining, issue of the new millennium, but that, due to the power and influence of vested interest groups, whose very existence depended on the defense of the status quo, it would not be recognised as such and acted upon, he sort of lost interest and backed away to lick his wounds and re-energise for the next battle.
This sence of utter disillusionment with reality has been experienced by most of us on the left of politics. It's like "abandon all hope ye who enter here", except instead of the gates of hell we stand at the gates of the planet. The reality of climate change deniers has no basis in reality. To say, therefore, that it is unreal, is an understatement of the first magnitude. But let us return to Kevin'07.
It is to the infinite degradation of the forces of light that Kevin Rudd was not strong enough, indeed was too weak, to ignore or overcome his disillusionment and disappointment with the Copenhagen result and push through his climate change policy regardless of his feelings. All the unfortunate stupidity which directly produced the present incompetent government of Friar Tuck and the Robbing Hood, with its shirtfronting approach to policy, can be traced back to this time. The Rudd Government's abandonment of its principles on climate change, after all its rhetoric on the subject, forced the electorate to reconsider its position, leading to a slump in the polls, which allowed the centrifugal forces within the federal ALP to expose the long knives.
Leaders live and die by their principles. If a leader is to lead in an efficient manner he or she must ponder the morality and ethics of their stance. Only then can they decide what policies lead in the right direction, as opposed to the wrong direction. Correct or incorrect doesn't really matter. Only the vision of the leader can enlighten the path we all choose.
Most people believed in Rudd's original stance on climate change and the resultant need for his policies. When he turned around and stabbed them in the back by winding these policies back, he set forces in motion which lead him to be dispatched in the same way. Now to return full circle in this piece, let us again contemplate stupidity.
Three links occur at the beginning. These and their content are only a smattering of what is out there, freely available to anyone who may care to look. They refute and contradict in a coldly analytical, rational, evidence-based manner, every policy, argument, direction and principle of this illegitimate farce of a government. Yet the electorate is not boiling with civil disobedience, wrath and unrest, but continues to tacitly and openly legitimise this grave state of affairs.
Now that is stupid.
Friday, 13 March 2015
Saturday, 6 December 2014
Credentialed Argument
Max Corden
It has been blindingly obvious since before the GFC that taxes are too low. The neo-liberal free-market right-wing swill who have professed to have governed most of the planet - although many have experienced this as mis-governed - since the advent of Thatcherism.
I draw your attention to Paul Krugman's "Conscience of a Liberal" and Thomas Picketty's "Capital in the Twenty-First Century".
For some unknown reason the conservative side of politics in almost every part of the world have chained themselves to this neoliberal Thatcherite ideology which prohibits raising taxes for any reason and obsesses with driving them down and this causes so called "budget emergencies" which are in fact nothing of the sort
On the macroeconomic side they have their noses stuck to Hayeck and the politics of scarcity and thrift.
In his op-ed in the New York Times Paul Krugman points out that pursuit of such policies leads directly to long term recession and generational unemployment. That this is a historically proven fact, in that all these things have been tried before and this was the result. He has predicted a decade of generational unemployment and underperforming economies in the Eurozone. Its been six years now and his prediction is holding up so far. The question is: "which will come first; the truth of his prediction or the next GFC.
I congratulate Max Corden for supplying some credentialed argument for our neoliberal swill of a government as to the idiocy of their stance on the budget.
It has been blindingly obvious since before the GFC that taxes are too low. The neo-liberal free-market right-wing swill who have professed to have governed most of the planet - although many have experienced this as mis-governed - since the advent of Thatcherism.
I draw your attention to Paul Krugman's "Conscience of a Liberal" and Thomas Picketty's "Capital in the Twenty-First Century".
For some unknown reason the conservative side of politics in almost every part of the world have chained themselves to this neoliberal Thatcherite ideology which prohibits raising taxes for any reason and obsesses with driving them down and this causes so called "budget emergencies" which are in fact nothing of the sort
On the macroeconomic side they have their noses stuck to Hayeck and the politics of scarcity and thrift.
In his op-ed in the New York Times Paul Krugman points out that pursuit of such policies leads directly to long term recession and generational unemployment. That this is a historically proven fact, in that all these things have been tried before and this was the result. He has predicted a decade of generational unemployment and underperforming economies in the Eurozone. Its been six years now and his prediction is holding up so far. The question is: "which will come first; the truth of his prediction or the next GFC.
I congratulate Max Corden for supplying some credentialed argument for our neoliberal swill of a government as to the idiocy of their stance on the budget.
Friday, 31 October 2014
To Regress or Not to Regress
Fuel tax indexation: the pressure is on
Did someone say 'tax reform'?
The term sounds so innocuous, even good, but that depends on whose mouth it comes out of. A reform that comprises the introduction of , or increase in, a regressive tax, is a reform backwards.
A rise in fuel excise is an increase in a regressive tax. Any rise or increase in the base of the GST would also be an increase in a regressive tax. These are both moves this government is contemplating, whether they admit it or not.
Regressive taxation is LNP policy whether they admit it or not. Beware of the term 'tax reform'. It is a vector concept and will therefore be progressive or regressive depending on which side of politics uses it.
Did someone say 'tax reform'?
The term sounds so innocuous, even good, but that depends on whose mouth it comes out of. A reform that comprises the introduction of , or increase in, a regressive tax, is a reform backwards.
A rise in fuel excise is an increase in a regressive tax. Any rise or increase in the base of the GST would also be an increase in a regressive tax. These are both moves this government is contemplating, whether they admit it or not.
Regressive taxation is LNP policy whether they admit it or not. Beware of the term 'tax reform'. It is a vector concept and will therefore be progressive or regressive depending on which side of politics uses it.
Monday, 27 October 2014
There is always an optimum Level
Simon Cowan
"Our projected level of spending is unsustainable with our current tax base."
Contrary to LNP neo-liberal drivel, society does exist, and the electorate knows what sort of society they want to live in. This is not the harsh society of the American socio-economic experiment - the end result and ultimate inevitability of LNP policy - but a society where the government provides services which improve it.
If we accept the truth of this statement then either spending must be cut or the tax base or level must increase. The blind lunatic direction of LNP policy sees only cuts to spending as the only solution, and so protects their vested support.
Taxes need to be raised to provide the services we want our government to provide. These sevices have a price determined by the market.This means taxing those who can afford to pay without dropping into hardship. The level of spending has crossed a threshold above which a structural deficit is enmeshed in the budget.
A rebalance of the income-business tax level is required to maintain services at their present level. This will require an increase in progressive taxation rates for those who can best afford it. Only a Greens government has the guts to do this, judging from recent rhetoric.
What a mess.
"Our projected level of spending is unsustainable with our current tax base."
Contrary to LNP neo-liberal drivel, society does exist, and the electorate knows what sort of society they want to live in. This is not the harsh society of the American socio-economic experiment - the end result and ultimate inevitability of LNP policy - but a society where the government provides services which improve it.
If we accept the truth of this statement then either spending must be cut or the tax base or level must increase. The blind lunatic direction of LNP policy sees only cuts to spending as the only solution, and so protects their vested support.
Taxes need to be raised to provide the services we want our government to provide. These sevices have a price determined by the market.This means taxing those who can afford to pay without dropping into hardship. The level of spending has crossed a threshold above which a structural deficit is enmeshed in the budget.
A rebalance of the income-business tax level is required to maintain services at their present level. This will require an increase in progressive taxation rates for those who can best afford it. Only a Greens government has the guts to do this, judging from recent rhetoric.
What a mess.
Politics
Paula Matthewson
"politics (which by definition is the theory and practice of influencing people)."
"There is an alternative to conceding to popular opinion, and that is to change it, but this is akin to doing a u-turn in a cruise ship.
Getting the voting public to change its mind, not on superficial matters, but on those that tap into core values and concerns, is a slow and laborious task that can take longer than one three or four-year parliamentary term to produce results. Doing so is hard enough for a government, even with the authority that comes from being in power and having a phalanx of departments and battalions of advisers at its disposal."
Patience is a virtue.
"politics (which by definition is the theory and practice of influencing people)."
"There is an alternative to conceding to popular opinion, and that is to change it, but this is akin to doing a u-turn in a cruise ship.
Getting the voting public to change its mind, not on superficial matters, but on those that tap into core values and concerns, is a slow and laborious task that can take longer than one three or four-year parliamentary term to produce results. Doing so is hard enough for a government, even with the authority that comes from being in power and having a phalanx of departments and battalions of advisers at its disposal."
Patience is a virtue.
Tuesday, 15 July 2014
What a Neat Statement of the Neo-Liberal Intention
Ian Verrender
"policy aims to take money from polluters and distribute it to taxpayers. Direct Action takes money from taxpayers and hands it out to polluters."
This sentence encapsulates the end result of neo-liberal policy. Admittedly the context is Climate Change Policy, but if you substitute 'vested interests', 'big business' or what Paul Krugman is now calling 'the 0.01 percent' for 'polluters' and 'government', 'the people', or, to maintain consistency, 'the 99.99 percent', you come up with a reasonable approximation of reality.
"policy aims to take money from polluters and distribute it to taxpayers. Direct Action takes money from taxpayers and hands it out to polluters."
This sentence encapsulates the end result of neo-liberal policy. Admittedly the context is Climate Change Policy, but if you substitute 'vested interests', 'big business' or what Paul Krugman is now calling 'the 0.01 percent' for 'polluters' and 'government', 'the people', or, to maintain consistency, 'the 99.99 percent', you come up with a reasonable approximation of reality.
Saturday, 17 May 2014
This Horse Still Has Some Life In It Yet
Emily Millane
Matt Grudnoff
Alan Kohler
David Ritter
At the risk of flogging the proverbial dead horse one too many times, let's start with the fact that all the necessary information required to recognise the lies expressed in this budget was available to the electorate at the 2013 election. Nothing in the above links is new. Getting access to it simply involves looking around on the internet as one should do when choosing a leader. Don't you need to know what you are voting for?
This would appear to be too hard for the majority of people. They are content to swallow what the mainstream media (MSM) chooses to print and this stuff is not printed, you have to question what is presented to you and look beyond it to find the truth and recognise lies for what they are. If you only look at commercial television and (MSM), accepting it as gospel, as most people do, then you can not help but be hoodwinked into voting for things you didn't think you were voting for.
I could rattle on for ever about the MSM being the mouthpiece of the LNP and its political hue being somewhere to the right of Ghengis Khan, but this has already been said. The ABC and SBS remain the last bastion of independent information and their defunding in this fraudulent budget amounts to censorship.
We really need a double disolusion. The problem is and always has been the electability of the ALP.
Let's get this strait. There is no budget emergency. this was always a lie to hoodwink the electorate into electing this swill. There is a medium term problem caused by structural issues leading back to Howard Era tax cuts. These are easily rectified by reinstating the taxes. Instead all we hear about is raising the GST, a regressive impost on those who can least afford it, and will mean hardship for many, while the well off barely notice it. We have a progressive income tax system which is always cut but for ideological reasons is never raised.
Paul Krugman, Economics Nobel Laureate and New York Times columnist, documents the unavoidable result of these ideologically driven austerity measures in Europe. The evidence is plain to the naked eye: generational unemployment representing double-digit proportions. If you want a recession this is the way to get one.
I've said on this blog we will have double-digit unemployment within a year of this government's policies, and could well be at war with Indonesia. This prophesy is well on the way to fulfillment.
I work at the coal face of the market and interact with people every day. I am getting continuous feedback from people who have lost their jobs or had their hours cut back. Almost every week their is a new story of a factory or business shutting down or shedding jobs. The breathtaking dishonesty of Friar Tuck saying new jobs will magically appear the minute he releases Business from the chains of his mythical 'carbon tax' is noteworthy.
Bring on a double disolution.
Matt Grudnoff
Alan Kohler
David Ritter
At the risk of flogging the proverbial dead horse one too many times, let's start with the fact that all the necessary information required to recognise the lies expressed in this budget was available to the electorate at the 2013 election. Nothing in the above links is new. Getting access to it simply involves looking around on the internet as one should do when choosing a leader. Don't you need to know what you are voting for?
This would appear to be too hard for the majority of people. They are content to swallow what the mainstream media (MSM) chooses to print and this stuff is not printed, you have to question what is presented to you and look beyond it to find the truth and recognise lies for what they are. If you only look at commercial television and (MSM), accepting it as gospel, as most people do, then you can not help but be hoodwinked into voting for things you didn't think you were voting for.
I could rattle on for ever about the MSM being the mouthpiece of the LNP and its political hue being somewhere to the right of Ghengis Khan, but this has already been said. The ABC and SBS remain the last bastion of independent information and their defunding in this fraudulent budget amounts to censorship.
We really need a double disolusion. The problem is and always has been the electability of the ALP.
Let's get this strait. There is no budget emergency. this was always a lie to hoodwink the electorate into electing this swill. There is a medium term problem caused by structural issues leading back to Howard Era tax cuts. These are easily rectified by reinstating the taxes. Instead all we hear about is raising the GST, a regressive impost on those who can least afford it, and will mean hardship for many, while the well off barely notice it. We have a progressive income tax system which is always cut but for ideological reasons is never raised.
Paul Krugman, Economics Nobel Laureate and New York Times columnist, documents the unavoidable result of these ideologically driven austerity measures in Europe. The evidence is plain to the naked eye: generational unemployment representing double-digit proportions. If you want a recession this is the way to get one.
I've said on this blog we will have double-digit unemployment within a year of this government's policies, and could well be at war with Indonesia. This prophesy is well on the way to fulfillment.
I work at the coal face of the market and interact with people every day. I am getting continuous feedback from people who have lost their jobs or had their hours cut back. Almost every week their is a new story of a factory or business shutting down or shedding jobs. The breathtaking dishonesty of Friar Tuck saying new jobs will magically appear the minute he releases Business from the chains of his mythical 'carbon tax' is noteworthy.
Bring on a double disolution.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)