Election

[Studley 2436]

ok you union bashing bums,
what about keeping a balanced discussion,
do some picking on the bum employers as well

Sheeze mate I don't think I have engaged in any mud slinging at all. I did say that the unions had a priveledged position under the law and this is true. The former Liberal government should have kept it's reform of AWA's to saying that employees had the right to negotiate with their employer without any third party having any say so over the agreement. There should also have been the right for an employee to seek independent advice from a Union or other group or individual and the right to have that third party assist the negotiation should they be invited. I would have kept the Award System as a type of fallback or low level mark if you like. You've heard about not scaring the horses? Awards have been part of the industrial landscape for how long? So make changes (and they are needed) one by one and give people time to adjust to them. Smart policy in my mind.

I don't think the Unions could complain about that, well they would but really it is just saying they have to operate under market rules like the rest of us.

Studley

[Waldo]

I don't think the Unions could complain about that,

Except they'd cry foul with less fees coming in. That in my mind is about the only reason they fight to exist.

[astrid]

as i said before,
I think we need a new thread for this topic.
this one is about the election generally which believe it or not has more to it than Unions.
See you there
Astrid
:)

[astrid]

So back on the election
so who is going to be leader of the opposition
Where are ruddock and andrews?
will julia crash in flames as so many other women on both sides have?
will peter garratts self promotion turn and bite (see Im not totally biased)
lets hear it
Astrid

[Lignum]

So back on the election
so who is going to be leader of the opposition



Think you should have turned the radio on 5 hours ago Astrid:D

[astrid]

yes liggy,
sowho is it?
beena bit busy redirecting the angst and i only listen to abc Fm in the morning on the way to work.
Mel:q

[Wood Butcher]

Brendan Nelson got the oppostition leadership with Julie Bishop as deputy

[Brickie]

Brendan Nelson got the oppostition leadership with Julie Bishop as deputy

More follow the leader, looks like we are due for a female PM one way or the other...:2tsup:

[Groggy]

There is more to Nelson than most realise. I heard him speak at an industry conference and he did not appear to get a single detail wrong. Given the topics involved he went up in my estimation a few hundred percent. Very impressive performance, without notes, for well over an hour. He didn't only have the facts, he knew how they related to each other.

Another one I have been impressed with is Bill Shorten. I listened to him on the ABC (http://www.abc.net.au/sundayprofile/stories/s1637536.htm) while on a long drive one evening. Sensible fellow, and one sorely needed by the ALP.

EDIT: The Shorten interview is about 10 minutes into the segment but well worth listening to.

[Rossluck]

There is more to Nelson than most realise. I heard him speak at an industry conference and he did not appear to get a single detail wrong. Given the topics involved he went up in my estimation a few hundred percent. Very impressive performance, without notes, for well over an hour. He didn't only have the facts, he knew how they related to each other.

Another one I have been impressed with is Bill Shorten. I listened to him on the ABC (http://www.abc.net.au/sundayprofile/stories/s1637536.htm) while on a long drive one evening. Sensible fellow, and one sorely needed by the ALP.


I agree. I just listened to Nelson on the 7:30 Report. He's no idiot. It's funny, I always watch Question Time and I haven't taken much notice of him.

[Rossluck]

There is more to Nelson than most realise. I heard him speak at an industry conference and he did not appear to get a single detail wrong. Given the topics involved he went up in my estimation a few hundred percent. Very impressive performance, without notes, for well over an hour. He didn't only have the facts, he knew how they related to each other.

Another one I have been impressed with is Bill Shorten. I listened to him on the ABC (http://www.abc.net.au/sundayprofile/stories/s1637536.htm) while on a long drive one evening. Sensible fellow, and one sorely needed by the ALP.

I agree. I just watched Nelson on the Seven Thirty Report, and he's no idiot. It's strange that I've never taken much notice of him when watching Question Time.

[mic-d]

There is more to Nelson than most realise. I heard him speak at an industry conference and he did not appear to get a single detail wrong. Given the topics involved he went up in my estimation a few hundred percent. Very impressive performance, without notes, for well over an hour. He didn't only have the facts, he knew how they related to each other.

Another one I have been impressed with is Bill Shorten. I listened to him on the ABC (http://www.abc.net.au/sundayprofile/stories/s1637536.htm) while on a long drive one evening. Sensible fellow, and one sorely needed by the ALP.

that may be, but there was something very, very dodgy about the way he and Johnny completed the defence deal for the Joint strike fighter. I don't know if you saw the story on 4corners, but it was very scary the way things were done. Now we're stuck with the rubbish super hornet as a gap stop til the JSF arrives (late, overpriced and questionable effectiveness) - what a mess.

Cheers
Michael

[rod@plasterbrok]

so at home, lets look at bully employers

Telstra for example,
who despite the overwhelming community dissaisfaction with WPA's are forcing them through before they are overhauled in the interests of fair play

Bob everyone hates bully employers as bully Unions.

I cant stand employers who are not fair to employees.

I have had a few builders who fit in that catagory. I just don't work for them.

[boban]

that may be, but there was something very, very dodgy about the way he and Johnny completed the defence deal for the Joint strike fighter. I don't know if you saw the story on 4corners, but it was very scary the way things were done. Now we're stuck with the rubbish super hornet as a gap stop til the JSF arrives (late, overpriced and questionable effectiveness) - what a mess.

Cheers
Michael

I saw that story and interview with Nelson.

Yep it sounds dodgy but its not always about the product you are buying. We are involved in a relationship with the US. We fully expect them to come to our assistance in the event of a war on our soil.

You can't get this without a relationship. The Hornet and even the JSF may be of questionable value but the relationship with the US is not. We don't know everything nor do we need to.

So as to be clear, I am no fan of the present US foreign policy.

I am a doubter when it comes to Nelson, but tonight was a good start. We'll see what happens. Can you believe his grandfather was a communist.

Looks to me like this man is a pragmatist.

[Groggy]

that may be, but there was something very, very dodgy about the way he and Johnny completed the defence deal for the Joint strike fighter. I don't know if you saw the story on 4corners, but it was very scary the way things were done. Now we're stuck with the rubbish super hornet as a gap stop til the JSF arrives (late, overpriced and questionable effectiveness) - what a mess.

Cheers
MichaelI can only say that Defence is a package. All the discussions I have seen on this topic in the media are ridiculously simplistic. To have this discussion ALL the issues need to be tabled, including logistics support, secrecy agreements, treaties, threat analyses and a bunch of other things. This is all done behind closed doors, and for good reason.

One of the most expensive blunders in decades was the acceptance of a White Paper that said "no foreseeable threat for ten years". Where were the so called experts then, and where are they now? Why have the media not been crying out for an investigation of how we could have got it so fundamentally wrong. This is perhaps the most important question in Australia's Defence and I hope they address it when the next White Paper is drafted.

[mic-d]

Did you see the report Groggy? Some of the senior insiders in the defence force were interviewed and were very suprised to see the super hornet was chosen (since it was not even in the modeling) From memory, ...nope, here's the transcript. very interesting reading.

http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/content/2007/s2073943.htm

I believe we should stick with the f111 until the jsf arrives.

Cheers
Michael

[Clinton1]

I can only say that Defence is a package. All the discussions I have seen on this topic in the media are ridiculously simplistic. To have this discussion ALL the issues need to be tabled, including logistics support, secrecy agreements, treaties, threat analyses and a bunch of other things. This is all done behind closed doors, and for good reason.

What Groggy said.

The media agency must be well aware of this fact, but went off 1/2 cocked anyway.
I thought it was a very amateur effort... ridiculously amateurish.

Sticking with the F-111 till the JSF comes into service.... hmmm... the best analogy would be the old car story... expensive to keep running, things keep breaking and you get left behind at the lights.

[mic-d]

Sticking with the F-111 till the JSF comes into service.... hmmm... the best analogy would be the old car story... expensive to keep running, things keep breaking and you get left behind at the lights.

bad analogy. paste from transcript "Spares for the F-111 are plentiful and in good condition. In the cool, dry desert air the F-111 parts stored here at Davis-Montham Air base in Arizona don’t deteriorate. Those spare parts in the US make the plane an ongoing bargain."

The F111 is still the fastest aircraft in the world at sea level, perfect for the role of deep penetration strike aircraft, and is probably still in the top ten fastest at altitude.

Cheers
Michael

[Groggy]

Michael, as I said earlier, Defence is a package. There are agreements and deals made that improve our Defence overall, even if ONE system may appear to be sub-optimal.

Interesting discussions to have over a beer but there are too many restrictions to have an informed debate here, much as I'd like to.

[Waldo]

Now we're stuck with the rubbish super hornet as a gap stop til the JSF arrives (late, overpriced and questionable effectiveness) - what a mess.

Cheers
Michael

G'day For all the stuff-up of the buying of our new fighter jets, the Super Hornet is avery impressive bit of machinery. I saw it at the 2001 Air Show, except for the Migs it left everything for dead. What a :whoot: the day was when it took off and being able to do square loops. :2tsup:

(Yes, I saw the 4 Corners story and others before it)

[Waldo]

The F111 is still the fastest aircraft in the world at sea level, perfect for the role of deep penetration strike aircraft, and is probably still in the top ten fastest at altitude.

Cheers
Michael

And it's payload of bombs is :2tsup: too. But I'm arguing with blokes already in the kakhi.

[mic-d]

except for the Migs it left everything for dead.

And guess what the countries north of us are getting?

[Waldo]

:think:







Migs? :U

[Andy Mac]

Hasn't this thread covered some ground! :wink: We'll have to wait and see what Kev can do with Unions and other competing pressures, but I have faith in him. There is steel behind that innocuous visage!!:D


One of the most expensive blunders in decades was the acceptance of a White Paper that said "no foreseeable threat for ten years". Where were the so called experts then, and where are they now? Why have the media not been crying out for an investigation of how we could have got it so fundamentally wrong.

Maybe they were under the impression we wouldn't be under any threat if we stayed at home and minded our own business! As I read it, (yes, simplistically) we have popped our collective heads up to follow GB into his squabble over oil, and now made targets of ourselves.
But I will concede the point that defence is a package, and the choice of aircraft is an unfortunate part of it...this from an old F111 sumpie.

Cheers,

[Waldo]

this from an old F111 sumpie.

Cheers,

So does that make you one of the blokes who used to paint inside of the fuel tanks?



(planes are more interesting than politics :shrug:)

[Andy Mac]

So does that make you one of the blokes who used to paint inside of the fuel tanks?


(planes are more interesting than politics :shrug:)

After I left the RAAF, yes I did do a stint in reseal/deseal. Spent long hours laying inside them picking silastic from every single rivet head... 300mm would be a good shift:oo:.

Cheers,

[astrid]

So Nelson and the Bish wont allow the senate to repeal Workchoices.
I think I feel a double delusion coming on.
Astrid

[Groggy]

oh no, one's enough!




:p

[Brickie]

I think I feel a double delusion coming on.
Astrid

:rolleyes: Wouldnt be you would it? :rolleyes:

[Gra]

:rolleyes: Wouldnt be you would it? :rolleyes:

cant keep away from a good argument can you :q:q

[astrid]

yep quite possibly,
Its Friday
Astrid:U
diliberatly ambiguous and yes i know i cant spell

[Waldo]

So Nelson and the Bish wont allow the senate to repeal Workchoices

:2tsup:

[Wood Butcher]

So Nelson and the Bish wont allow the senate to repeal Workchoices.

That's not what he said. When asked about blocking any new workplace legislation his words were:
"Our key responsibility is to make sure that we do not do anything that makes it harder for an Australian to get a job and that makes it harder for an employer - who's borrowed money to create and establish a business - to actually give someone a job."

and

“I would be exceptionally disappointed if the Liberals and the Nationals were still so out of touch with families across Australia that they ignored what those families said at the ballot box on Saturday.”

[Ashore]

And if you look at the primary vote the people didn't vote labor in the Green preferences did had the preferences gone to the libs we would have Howard, :oo:

[astrid]

I think i's called the co altion
astrid

[rhancock]

Here's an interesting opinion piece from a guy I don't normally agree with.

Look here (http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/news/opinion/the-partys-over-and-liberals-will-soon-be-history/2007/11/28/1196036982629.html?page=2)

Steve Biddulph is best known for condemning early childcare as bad for children, but this is a critical piece on the future of the political parties in Australia. I particularly like the last paragraph, which sums up why I would not have voted for the Liberals, if I'd got my citizenship in time http://forums.permaculture.org.au/images/smiles/sad.gif

"The big lie of Liberal supremacy was economic management. In fact, they knew how to generate income, but not how to spend it. We could have been building what Europe built in this past decade - superb hospitals, bullet trains, schools and training centres, low cost public transport of luxurious quality, magnificent public housing. We it all away on tax giveaways and consumer goods. On bloated homes that we will not be able to cool or heat, or sell, and cars we won't be able to afford to drive. A party based on self interest may evaporate along with our rivers and lakes, and have no role to play in a world where we co-operate or die."

This neatly sums up my own feelings on the last 20 years. We've just lived through the most affluent time in our history, and what do we have to pass on to our children? World class hospitals? Innovative education systems? Future focused cities? Shock proof agriculture? No, we have the highest level of debt ever, built up not paying for stuff which will be broken, obselote or useless before its paid for.

[boban]

Just what part of Europe are we talking about?

His theories sound a bit far fetched. The Greens will become sidelined once the two major parties adopt their acceptable policies. I remember a party called One Nation ............

[astrid]

richard,
you deserve more than:2tsup:

Thanks
Astrid

[rhancock]

Yes, I wondered that too, generalising about "Europe" as one entity is a long bow. And of course, his picture of the future is only one of many. Another is the one where civilization collapses when the oil runs out. Another again is a continued repeat of the left / right cycle of the last century, etc, etc... Although I do like the one where the American 'empire' collapses.

However, first of all, the chances are that the 21st century will not be the same as the 20th. Political parties are not immortal and new ones do arise, some die, some succeed.

Secondly, I still don't think the last government spent tax revenues wisely, particularly in investing for the future. I see that GST, and other reforms were important and valid, but I do not believe that they worked to create a strong and sustainable society or economy.

I believe the opportunities of the last 20 years have been wasted.

[Studley 2436]

Talking planes I remember seeing the Mirage IIIC fly rings around the FA18 at a demo here in Adelaide. BUT so far as ordinance goes the FA18 could do much more. The Mirage was a jet engine bolted to a pair of wings a real hot rod for a time when flying mattered much more. Today it really gets back to ordinance delivery. Air combat might happen from 100km away get to position and fire missiles.

Of interest might be this page (http://www.henrythornton.com/article.asp?article_id=3964) which details the case for various aircraft and finds for the JSF. It mentioned also the likely need to update our FA18 A's with E or F variants.

Studley